Citation:
McAteer v. Canada (Attorney General), 2014 ONCA 578.
Summary:
The Supreme Court of Canada rejected the Leave to Appeal from the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in McAteer v Canada (Attorney General), 2014 ONCA 578. The case challenged the requisite, under the Citizenship Act, RSC 1985, c C-29, of swearing an oath to Queen Elizabeth during Canadian citizenship ceremonies.
The appellants, Michael McAteer, Simone Topey and Dror Bar-Natan, each had unique reasons for uniting in opposition of the section of the Canadian citizenship ceremony where an individual must verbally state:
“I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth …show more content…
2(a) (freedom of conscience and religion), 2(b) (freedom of expression), and 15(1) (equality) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They claimed that the government could not justify any such violation as a reasonable limit in a free and democratic society under s. 1., and sought a declaration that made the impugned portion of the citizenship oath …show more content…
Therefore, there was no violation of the appellants’ right to freedom of religion and of conscience because the oath is secular and is not an oath to the Queen in her personal capacity, but the contemporary Canadian form of government and unwritten constitutional principle of democracy, of which the Queen is a symbol. Nor is the oath a violation of the appellants’ equality rights when the correct approach to legislative interpretation is applied.
Any other issues raised by the appellants, but not dealt with in Justice Weiler, Lauwers and Pardus’ decisions, were not sought on appeal; no costs were sought or