By William Crooks
Local Journalism Initiative
The Ligue des droits et libertés (LDL) is calling for the complete withdrawal of Quebec’s proposed Bill 94, denouncing it as a setback for human rights and the province’s long-standing secular tradition.
Officially titled An Act mainly to strengthen the secular nature of the school network and to amend various legislative provisions, Bill 94 was introduced by the Quebec government to broaden restrictions on the display of religious symbols in the education system. If adopted, it would extend existing bans—first implemented under Bill 21 in 2019—beyond teachers to include other school staff and students, and would impose limitations on the use of languages other than French in educational settings. The legislation also pre-emptively invokes the notwithstanding clause of both the Quebec and Canadian Charters, shielding it from constitutional challenges.
In its presentation at public hearings before the National Assembly’s Commission on Culture and Education on April 22, the LDL argued that the bill is fundamentally incompatible with a respectful and inclusive approach to secularism. “We believe Bill 94 should be withdrawn,” said Laurence Guénette, Coordinator for the LDL, in an interview with The Record. “We are very in favour of the secularism of the state, but this bill does not embody true secularism—it undermines fundamental rights and discriminates against specific groups.”
According to the LDL, secularism should ensure the separation of religion and state while protecting the freedom of belief and expression for everyone. “There is a fundamental confusion between proselytism and the wearing of religious symbols,” Guénette explained. “Wearing a symbol is not an attempt to convert or influence others—it is a personal expression, protected by freedom of religion.”
Guénette noted that state neutrality is not about erasing personal identity, but rather about treating all citizens equally, regardless of belief. “The neutrality of the state must be reflected in its actions, not in the appearance of its employees,” she said. “Whatever they wear does not make them guilty of being non-neutral.”
The LDL’s written submission emphasized that Bill 94 infringes on multiple rights protected by both the Quebec and Canadian Charters—freedom of religion, expression, and association, as well as the right to equality. “The repeated use of these override clauses by the Legault government should worry everyone,” Guénette said. “It sets a dangerous precedent for rights protections in Quebec.”
LDL board member Diane Lamoureux stated in the release that “it is entirely possible to reconcile secularism and human rights, which Bill 94 fails to do,” while Paul-Étienne Rainville, the group’s political spokesperson, said the legislation “represents a rollback of the historic process of secularizing the Quebec state”.
The LDL is especially concerned about the bill’s disproportionate impact on Muslim women. “It expands the discrimination already faced by educators—particularly Muslim women—to other public service roles,” the organization stated. Guénette added that qualified professionals could be driven out of the public education system, worsening an already severe labour shortage. “This bill risks worsening the shortage by driving professionals—many of them women—into the private sector or out of the field entirely,” she said.
The organization also condemned the bill’s limitations on students’ religious expression, particularly around the ability to seek reasonable accommodations. “We are concerned that Bill 94 makes it almost impossible to grant accommodations for religious reasons,” Guénette said. “There are very few cases—perhaps just one or two students wearing full facial coverings—and each should be handled individually, weighing the student’s right to education against institutional concerns.”
The LDL also opposes the bill’s proposed restrictions on the use of languages other than French in the school system. “We want every student to be able to access their right to education,” Guénette said, emphasizing that linguistic restrictions could further marginalize some communities.
Instead of introducing more legislation, the LDL urges the government to enforce existing laws against harassment and proselytism and to conduct a thorough, independent evaluation of the impact of Bill 21, which has been in force for nearly six years. “There’s independent research showing concerning impacts on Muslim women and a rise in Islamophobic incidents, but the government hasn’t done its part,” Guénette said.
She also called for a broader recognition of systemic racism and Islamophobia in Quebec society and concrete actions to address it. “That’s a big shift that we would wish—to change the social climate that’s trending toward more racism.”
In its conclusion, the LDL warns that a government willing to frequently use the notwithstanding clause may erode fundamental democratic protections. “Yes, Muslim women and other minorities are most affected, but when a government uses the notwithstanding clause so frequently and easily, it should concern all of society,” Guénette said.
The LDL maintains that secularism and human rights are not mutually exclusive—but only if secularism is approached in a way that respects diversity and inclusion. As Guénette put it, “Human rights and freedoms should be at the heart of secularism—not sacrificed in its name.”