South Asian >> Web Stories
Ontario Human Rights Commission Seeks Intervenor Status on ‘Niqab’ Case
Thursday, March 5, 2009
By Meetu Khosla
Lawyers were in court on Monday to hear an appeal on behalf of a Muslim woman. Last year, an Ontario Court judge ruled that she cannot wear her niqab, a veil that covers everything except the eyes, while testifying for a sexual assault case.
And now the province’s Human Rights Commission says this is a very important issue, and is seeking leave to intervene on an application for judicial review brought forth by the woman, who cannot be identified due to a publication ban.
“I think it’s important from our perspective that the court has our position, and understands what the human rights implications are in order to require somebody to remove their veil, or at least the need for her to maintain her veil,” said Prabhu Rajan, the Commission’s lawyer.
The complainant’s lawyer, David Butt, says not allowing his client to testify while wearing her niqab, which she says she wears for religious purposes, is also causing her further stress.
“A complainant in a sexual assault case is a very difficult thing. Having to talk about very intimate details of personal violation is difficult at the best f times. To couple that with very real concerns about the freedom to practice his or her religious faith is a significant additional stressor,” Butt said.
And going beyond that, Butt says this could also raise a number of important public policy questions that go in many different directions.
“The whole notion of the tension between competing rights – full answer in defense, which is a very important right – and the right of people from all religious backgrounds to practice their faith, and this is very important, in the context of a sexual assault prosecution and the special care we for complainants,” Butt said.
Rajan says the Human Right’s Commission is here as a friend to the court. And he hopes it will give the opportunity to intervene so that arguments made on the merits of the matter will be considered, and provide some assistance in the court’s decision.
Adam Weisberg is the defense lawyer for one of the two accused men in the sexual assault case. He said Monday’s preliminary hearing was hijacked by the Commission’s application, which he says infringes on his client’s right to a speedy trial.
A preliminary trial is now scheduled for March 9, during which the judge has prohibited the continuation of the direct examination and the cross-examination of the complainant. The matter will then reconvene in court to be fully argued on March 13.
OMNI Web Stories: South Asian
SOME TAKE THE ARRANGED MARRIAGE PATH
Click here to read the article >>
Canada’s ‘Bailout’ Plan
Click here to read the article >>
Hate Crimes Decline In Canada, But ...
Click here to read the article >>
Swat Relief for Pakistan Refugees
Click here to read the article >>
Summer Tourism in Toronto
Click here to read the article >>
OMNI Commentaries
Bhopal Verdict
What a disgraceful sham -- the so-called resolution of a ...
