Edmonton, AB/ (Treaty 6) – The BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) celebrates today’s decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal in . The Court Wirring v Law Society of Alberta. The Court declared the requirement to take the Oath of Allegiance is unconstitutional and  and that the infringement was not justified under section 1 of the Charter.

Prior to this decision, prospective lawyers in Alberta had to swear or affirm an Oath of Allegiance to the sovereign of Canada, i.e., the King, to be called to the bar. This requirement confronts prospective lawyers whose beliefs and rights are incompatible with taking the Oath with a barrier and moral conundrum. The Court’s decision is a win not just for prospective lawyers of different religious faiths, but also an important win for prospective Indigenous lawyers.

BCCLA intervened in this case to argue that when analyzing section 2(a) of the Charter, courts should consider individual and collective beliefs when state action jeopardizes or otherwise interferes with an individual’s ability to participate in religious practices. We also argued that where a section 2(a) claim raises issues of multiculturalism, section 27 of the Charter applies and should guide the court’s assessment of the claim with the goal of promoting multiculturalism and removing barriers to participation in society, including the practice of law.  

“As an Indigenous lawyer, it pleases me that the Court recognized the Oath of Allegiance for what it is, a barrier to welcoming diverse representation in the practice of law. With the Court’s assistance, the Alberta Legislature is now well equipped to remedy the “constitutional defect” for prospective lawyers.”  – Veronica Martisius, Staff Litigation Counsel, BCCLA