News Sections
Feds won't force veiled women to uncover to vote
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(40)
The Canadian Press
Date: Friday Jun. 26, 2009 7:17 AM ET
OTTAWA The federal government has quietly dropped the idea of forcing veiled women to show their faces if they want to vote in Canadian elections.
The loss of interest comes just as the issue of face coverings is heating up overseas, with President Nicolas Sarkozy declaring that the Islamic burka is "not welcome" in France.
Steven Fletcher, Canada's minister of state for democratic reform, confirmed Thursday that the government has no plan to proceed with legislation requiring voters to uncover their faces.
"We have other priorities as far as increasing voter participation and with the expanded voting opportunities legislation," he said in an interview.
"And that is our focus. That obviously will effect a lot more people."
A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper maintained the minority government still supports the idea of forcing voters to reveal their faces.
But Dimitri Soudas said it would be pointless to proceed with legislation since all three opposition parties have signalled they wouldn't support it.
"I'm telling you that we haven't dropped that idea," said Soudas. "The bottom line is even if we were to proceed with legislation, it would be voted down immediately."
The issue came to a boil in Canada in 2007, during three hotly contested federal byelections in Quebec where debate was already raging over how far the province should go to accommodate cultural differences.
Harper blasted Elections Canada after the independent electoral watchdog refused to require veiled byelection voters to show their faces at polling stations.
Harper accused the agency of subverting the will of Parliament, which several months earlier had unanimously adopted legislation beefing up voter identification requirements.
"I profoundly disagree with the decision," Harper said at the time.
"The role of Elections Canada is not to make its own laws, it's to put into place the laws that Parliament has passed."
Opposition Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois joined the chorus of condemnation.
Stephane Dion, then Liberal leader, urged Elections Canada to "revisit their decision."
"It's important to identify the person. It may be done in a very respectful way but it must be done."
However, opposition ardour cooled once the byelections were over and the issue was examined more closely.
Chief electoral officer Marc Mayrand noted that the recently adopted changes to the Canada Elections Act did not, in fact, authorize the agency to compel visual identification of voters.
Moreover, it was pointed out that thousands of Canadians have no photo ID. Requiring them to show their faces would be meaningless without photo identification against which to verify their identities.
By the time the government introduced a law to compel visual identification, Liberal and NDP support had pretty much dried up. The bill died when last fall's election was called.
Lack of opposition support has not stopped Fletcher from systematically reintroducing a host of other democratic reform measures that were interrupted by the election, including Senate reform legislation and a bill to increase the number of advance polls and expand voting hours.
He suggested Thursday that the problem of visual identification of voters -- if there ever was one -- seems to have resolved itself.
"We have had a federal election and several provincial elections since that time and it hasn't really been on the radar screen. Really, I can't even recall any issues coming up either federally or provincially in that regard."
Still, he said the government may reconsider once it receives a report from Mayrand this fall in which the chief electoral officer will recommend improvements to the electoral system.
Elections Canada spokesman John Enright said it's premature to say whether Mayrand will address the visual identification of voters.
But it seems doubtful Mayrand would recommend fixing a problem that Elections Canada maintains doesn't exist.
"The important thing to remember is that there were really no issues raised in the last general election in that regard. Zero. Zilch. Nothing across the board," said Enright.
"There were no reported incidents of electors attempting to vote with their face covered at the last election. There was nothing, not even a blip."
Just prior to last October's election, Mayrand reminded returning officers that they have long had the power to ask voters whose faces are obscured to remove their face coverings and, if the voters refuse, to insist they swear an oath that they are eligible to vote.
Indeed, anyone whose identity is in doubt, whether or not their face is covered, can be asked to swear an oath.
"The process has always been in place," said Enright, calling the veiled voter issue "a storm in a tea cup."
Canada's collective shrug on the issue is in stark contrast to the situation in France, where Sarkozy this week endorsed the idea of an inquiry into whether Muslim women who cover themselves head to toe with burkas or niqabs are undermining French secularism and women's rights.
Sarkozy told a special session of parliament that the burka is "a sign of subservience" that cuts women off from society and deprives them of their identity.
"It will not be welcome on the territory of the French republic," he declared.
User Tools
Related Stories
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(40)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
It is important for Canada to put our interests first when doing business affairs with another country, let alone an Asian superpower. We should not sell ourselves short as we have a lot of what the world is wanting.

Comments are now closed for this story
voter
0
said
0
Greg in Cambridge
0
said
0
CYL
0
said
0
Why does my passport, driver licence, IDs etc show my face. This is so ridiculous, it makes me sick.
Ali El Hussein
0
said
0
Its really important to identify who's voting!
Brad
0
said
0
Chris J
0
said
0
Rick in Niagara
0
said
0
Anyone I have spoken to on the issue agrees that anyone who wants to vote must be identified. If that means showing their face, then so be it. It can be done respectfully, but it should be done.
If someone is trying to cheat on a vote, do you really think falsely 'swearing an oath' would present a problem for them.
This issue is not dead and should not be shelved.
THE Fatman
0
said
0
Kinsell
0
said
0
Fahad in MTL
0
said
0
Also as a Muslim, i think they should be identified, the Hijab (scarf) should be enough. Niqab is NOT forced by Islam in anyway.
Unacceptable
0
said
0
reporting from ottawa
0
said
0
Moe
0
said
0
Come on, Canada is NOT Iran, or other "veiled Muslim" country - this is Canada period. Follow what Canada founders set the rules for elections!
No Surprise!
0
said
0
Lorne
0
said
0
No Canadian should be permitted out in public with their face completely covered. How freakin' dumb (not to mention paranoid) would our society be if we each walked around all day in public wearing veils and garments that cover our entire bodies and faces.
If Canadians are smart they would all show up for the next election wearing a mask or a veil.
David Winter Peachland BC
0
said
0
Not everyone in Canada has to carry ID and they are not required by law to have one. Good thing. This is not a police state.
Good Grief in Moncton
0
said
0
This ruling just makes me sick. How can anyone identify this person ??????
This means that anyone can vote for someone else. It is that simple.
Canada Elections Marc Mayrand must accept the fact that he is there to manage the laws put in place by our government, as Harper puts it, and not make his own little empire.
This type of decision is DISGUSTING
Brian in TO
0
said
0
That should get a point across as to how absurd this is!
Good Grief in Moncton
0
said
0
Take some info from these comments and their thumbs up or down.
Thanks to Ali El Hussein for your view from a Muslim. It is appreaciated and comforting to know that he thinks with the same common sense.
Marie
0
said
0
Jack R
0
said
0
Brad Robinson
0
said
0
I will also be wearing my sword on my back and sign the ballot in my blood.
For religious reasons of course!
Dan
0
said
0
If I am a minority I can cover my face, carry daggers to school, ignore laws (such as not having to wear a helmet if you wear a turban, disregard requirments for jobs such as wearing the proper dress as a police officer etc. The list goes on. The parties will not stand up against these outrageous demands of these people who feel they are above the rest of us for fear of lost votes. No wonder Canada had become such a lousy country.
ncwise@xplornet.com
0
said
0
Jason
0
said
0
Tim from Calgary
0
said
0
Shawn in Montréal
0
said
0
And leave it to the politicians to flip flop again and again. Really who is at all surprised by that?!
Here’s my suggestion for a new Elections Canada ad campaign…
One Face, One Vote.
Jody in Edmonton
0
said
0
Sherry Katrina
0
said
0
Graeme
0
said
0
I don't agree with banning the burka, as the government has no right to say what you can and cant wear. But fair elections are at the heart of democracy, and verifying that people are who they say they are seems reasonable.
Raj
0
said
0
Fiona Green
0
said
0
meerkat
0
said
0
When I am playing at a friends house, I have to play by my friends rules. If I want to play by my rules, then I have to play at home.
It's that simple and there is NOTHING intolerant or untoward about that!
J.G.
0
said
0
Concerned about Womens Rights and Freedom
0
said
0
The Burqa (a loose garment usually with veiled holes for the eyes) has nothing to do with the Muslim faith. This garment is installed by radical men who want nothing more than to control "their" women. Remember Afghanistan, the Taliban? The Burqa is an instrument that suppresses womens rights and freedoms.
We need people in this country who are going to stand up for each and every Canadian citizen. Women who are suppressed by the Burqas need help from people like Ali El Hussein. There is no excuse for the ignorance being portrayed here by the minister of state for democratic reform of the Conservative party.
In conclusion, the Conservatives have folded like lawn chairs. In the next election, I will not expect the Conservatives to win over their grass roots like they've done in the past two elections.
Masks - oh my!
0
said
0
It's against the law to wear disguises. Did you know that? I understand your frustration. I, too, am very frustrated with the way the government has been dealing with womens rights. You know what, all the parties suck. They have no back-bone.
We need to form a new party in this country. One, that isn't so bent over that they need to be morally impotent.
MuskyBuck
0
said
0
Just like he's done all Canadians' a 'favor' by releasing attack ads on other parties to avoid a summer election.
Just like he's done all Iranians a 'favor' by not letting Iranian government offials be invited to Canada Day so that Iran can hear that Canada isn't happy about them.
Or left Canadians in foriegn countries, he did that as a 'favor' so we could holiday longer without having to pay.
Or just like he did all of Canada's softwood lumber workers a 'favor' by dropping the ruling of the WTO that declared after a decade of being screwed over by the US, that the states was wrong and owed Canada....
Or was that the US he did that 'favor' for?
Or how he's secretly used dozens of natural beautiful serene lakes throughout Canada as toxic waste dump grounds for mining tailing, as a 'favor' to our mining industry buddies.
Or how about how his government has completely ignored the aboriginals that are coming down with extreme rates of health and cancer diseases throughout the athabasca area since the oil sands have been in high production, he's done this as a 'favor' to Alberta's conservatives.
You see Harper is not interested in Canadians or Canada. He never has been. He'll make his mark by doing things that bring no work or effort here at home.
Even his attack ads aren't made in Canada.
But he does have a lot of support from the undereducated white male, the christian values group, and the racist skin heads based in Calgary.....
Hey anyone see a similarity in that group at all?
zwinky
0
said
0
I am a fully uncovered Canadian born caucasian woman and I have NEVER been asked to formally identify myself at a polling station for any election of any level of government.
There has never been an ID check, no citizenship check, nothing that could be construed as verifying my identity.
I give my name and address and if I am found to be on the voters list for that polling station then I am allowed to vote.
I really get the feeling that this is more about the government taking the same exeception with face and body coverings for Muslim women without wanting to say it outright as Mr Sarkozy has done.
It doens't seem to make sense that proper confirmation of identity is an issue with these women if it has never been an issue with me.
andré in NB
0
said
0
I don't think it is acceptable to have a rule requiring people who will not show their faces to simply swear an oath... Do you think these veiled women would be allowed to vote in their country of origin? I think that newcomers who refuse to accomodate to our culture should not be welcomed into this country.
Pip
0
said
0
I imagine that some of the same posters would be up in arms if some other aspect of the law or charter - that affected THEIR rights - were made or amended. Please remember, there is NO law in Canada that requires a person to show their face, except for the mandatory photo for passports and drivers licence.
Come to that, there is no law requiring that a person be fully dressed - witness the case a few years back that affirmed a woman's right to walk the beaches of Toronto topless. If, on the other hand a woman, or man for that matter, wishes to be modest by covering their body completely, they have the right to do so. It matters not that the person concerned is of any particular religion, the law applies to all, regardless. You want a passport, you must have a photo taken and reveal your face at a passport or other identification check - boarding a plane, for example.
But at all other times, the right to be covered is theirs.