A legal expert is challenging a 2022 Quebec law that eliminated the compulsory Oath of Allegiance to the King for members of the province’s National Assembly, contending that the provincial government exceeded its constitutional authority. The case was presented in Quebec Superior Court in Montreal by the Public Interest Litigation Institute and its founder, Lawrence David, a faculty member at the University of Ottawa’s law school. The lawsuit targets Quebec’s Bill 4, which was unanimously passed in December 2022, amending the Constitution Act of 1867 to remove the requirement for Quebec legislators to pledge allegiance to the monarch.
The legislation was introduced by the Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ) government in response to pressure from the separatist Parti Quebecois (PQ) after some PQ members declined to swear allegiance to King Charles III and were consequently prevented from taking their seats in the assembly. The lawsuit asserts that Quebec needed the unanimous agreement of the House of Commons, the Senate, and all provincial legislatures to eliminate the mandatory oath.
Furthermore, it alleges that the law contravenes Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the right to effective representation, as individuals who do not take the oath are deemed ineligible to serve as MNAs. The legal challenge highlights concerns that laws enacted by an assembly comprising members who have not sworn allegiance may be invalidated. Lawrence David, in an interview with CBC, emphasized the importance of upholding constitutional principles within democratic institutions.
Quebec’s Justice Minister, Simon Jolin-Barrette, has stated the province’s intention to defend the law, emphasizing that the change reflects the sentiments of the majority of Quebecers who oppose the monarchy. The Ministry of Justice and Attorney General of Canada declined to comment on the matter due to its legal nature. In a separate development, the Supreme Court of Canada announced its decision to review a case regarding the constitutionality of requiring aspiring lawyers to pledge allegiance to the reigning monarch, following a ruling in Alberta that deemed the practice unconstitutional and a violation of religious freedoms.