News Sections
Alta. Hutterites lose court fight over photos
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(125)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Fri. Jul. 24 2009 1:56 PM ET
Alberta Hutterites have lost their fight to be exempted from a law making digital photos mandatory for drivers to get new licences in the province.
The Hutterites, a Christian sect that believes being photographed violates their faith and way of life, have been allowed to carry special driving permits since 1974 - the year the government introduced photo licences.
But the Supreme Court of Canada ruled 4-3 on Friday to uphold provincial rules that went into effect in 2003 that make a digital photo universally mandatory for all new licences.
"The goal of setting up a system that minimizes the risk of identity theft associated with drivers' licences is a pressing and important public goal," Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote.
"The universal photo requirement is connected to this goal and does not limit freedom (of) religion more than required to achieve it."
When Alberta offered the Hutterites a comprise in 2003 allowing permits without photos - with the proviso that photos must still be taken for a database - the Hutterites refused.
The Hutterites believe being photographed violates the second of the Ten Commandments forbidding idolatry.
McLachlin said those who won't comply with the rules could always hire drivers.
"Many businesses and individuals rely on hired persons and commercial transport for their needs, either because they cannot or choose not to drive," she wrote
McLachlin was joined in the majority by Justices Ian Binnie, Marie Deschamps and Marshall Rothstein.
Lawyers for the colony argued there was a lack of evidence to show that the special permits granted to Hutterites somehow constituted a security threat.
And Justice Rosalie Abella agreed, in a passionately-written dissent which was backed by Justices Louis LeBel and Morris Fish. She even suggested the majority ruling lets the Alberta government off the hook without proving religious rights were justifiably infringed.
"There is no evidence that in the context of several hundred thousand unphotographed Albertans, the photos of approximately 250 Hutterites will have any discernable impact on the province's ability to reduce identity theft," Abella wrote.
Abella said the security benefit of mandatory photos is slight, compared to the impact on a traditional community that was exempted for almost 30 years.
The result "imperils and contradicts human rights jurisprudence," Abella said.
The judgment on Friday overturns past victories by the Hutterites before the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, which struck down the photo rules as unconstitutional -- and a majority of the Alberta Court of Appeal which agreed.
The Hutterites believe that having their photo taken violates this biblical commandment: "You shall not make for yourself a carved image -- any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."
The Hutterites are one of three major sectarian groups -- the others being Mennonites and the Amish -- in Canada. They live a communal form of existence, the main tenets which were established under the initial leadership of Jacob Hutter.
Hutterites fled Russia, as well as parts of the U.S., for Canada in the early 20th Century to escape harassment and persecution.
User Tools
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(125)-
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
I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.


Comments are now closed for this story
annie, ontario
0
said
0
Mark Toronto
0
said
0
Conservative Mike
0
said
0
This would have set a stupid precedent had the Court singled out Hutterite Bretheren as a group that could be permitted to NOT have their photo taken.
This would have been a provision that clearly would have been absued. A picture of a person on a driver's license allows a police officer to determine if the person driving the vehicle is really that person, and is of legal age.
Not putting a picture on a license allows people (Hutterites included) to take advantage of the law, and would just facilitate underage and reckless driving. The last thing we would want would be for other groups (i.e. gangs, cults, etc) to start using freedom of religion to not get theri pictures put on important government documentation like a driver's license.
Zaphod
0
said
0
Janet
0
said
0
Shawn
0
said
0
To allow them to continue without this leaves a door open for others to fight again having photos on identification.
Even though I believe the Hutterite have valid reasons for not wanting to comply, this is not an area, or a time to skimp on a practice put in place ultimately for our protect.
We can't even cross the boarder now without a passport... this is a time where security is getting tighter. We can't get start granting exceptions to one group, that could eventually come back to harm the country as a home.
Photo ID is a huge part of today's world!
Jacqueline
0
said
0
Jackie Barrett
0
said
0
Time for a major reforms to the Supreme Court of Canada. These reports include the requirement to hear all cases since litigants have to pay at least a $50,000 fee to get a case heard before the Supreme Court, no discrimination towards disadvantaged persons such as disabled persons and perceived minorities except in extreme circumstances, have circuit supreme courts across the country similar to USA, requiring Supreme Court Judges to undergo sensitivity training and sign "no discrimination" clauses, and 2/3's majority for a defendant to win a case so that the loser will not be punished for losing by one vote.
With the string of discrimination against minorities from the Supreme Court of Canada, its time for this court to have major reforms.
Bill in BC
0
said
0
P Tarzwell
0
said
0
And if you ride a bike,wear a helmet, it's the law also.Unless your religion dictates you are exempt from that one.
John
0
said
0
Ken - Calgary
0
said
0
There shouldn't even be a debate. You want to keep your customs and traditions, fine. Nobody said you had to be part of society. If you want to be part of society, you obey the laws of that society. END OF STORY.
Ron J.
0
said
0
The ruling was 4-3. Therefore, 3 justices of the Supreme Court still don't understand the basic principle of equality.
John
0
said
0
Oam
0
said
0
Religious sects began before the age of cars, motorcycles, voting, etc. but not terrorism or war. Updates are necessary with the current living conditions and improvements that all persons in this country and the rest of the world enjoy for personal freedom, safety, etc.
Even some religions need to be updated.
Brian fr Langley
0
said
0
Lindsay - Pigeon Lake, Ab
0
said
0
CrackerJackLee
0
said
0
Thanks for the info. I never knew that it cost money ($50,000) to go to the Supreme Court. That leaves me out.
Also, it seems that Canadian law is applied willy-nilly. I guess Hutterites don't have voting or commercial importance.
Did you ever think that maybe a secret fraternity runs Canada? The government seems to have little in common with the rest of us.
M
0
said
0
Amanda
0
said
0
JR
0
said
0
Our country makes consessions for most religions.
wally from Montreal
0
said
0
Daniel Murdock
0
said
0
While this may seem a stupid rule, they believe that photography is a sin. As a result, if they want to drive, which is almost a necessity now days, they must commit an action that they believe deems them to hell.
I think this is a sad ruling, forcing a minority group to commit what they see as reprehensible actions.
glenda, ontario
0
said
0
Jacquie
0
said
0
A while back Muslim women were demanding that they be allowed to have their license picture taken with their faces covered. They should not be allowed to drive that way because it would impede their vision.
Religion should be practised in the home. Leave the state out of it.
Debb
0
said
0
This is why every country in the world requires a photo for passports.
Rick in NB, Ste Marie
0
said
0
I wonder how the supreme court decides witch religions are valid. Has there been a Hutterite terrorist movement?
Michael, Cambridge On
0
said
0
So in end they had to ruled in stupid cases which people would imply that SCC has been too damn liberal which is not true.
SCC is not liberal or conservative puppet.
Okay. I've always supported SCC since day #1 they were created so people need to stop complain about SCC.
SCC always did their job in the best term they could do...
If people think common sense doesn't exist in somewhere in government level... Set your eye toward to House of Commons. Not SCC.
This is response to Mark Toronto's comment regarding common sense amongs SCC.
It does exist however it does not exist in House of Commons (all parties).
Sandie
0
said
0
Jerry G Hart
0
said
0
AC
0
said
0
Margaret
0
said
0
sad but true
0
said
0
Bev
0
said
0
Rod
0
said
0
Cathy
0
said
0
Ryan
0
said
0
There should not be one set of rules for one religious group and another for the rest of society. That is not equality.
I don't say this often, but I am proud of the Supreme Courts decission. Perhaps common sense has finally reached that hallow hall.
HT
0
said
0
I'm not sure what you mean by "disadvantaged persons". especially in this case. If the Hutterite community feels it necessary to have drivers licenses to operate vehicles that they own, they must not be at a huge disadvantage. And where do you draw the line for what constitutes disadvantage?
It comes down to this, if the Hutterite community would like to have the privilege of operating a vehicle, and using the provinces roads, then the must abide by the same laws that the rest of us are required to abide by. I am sure that if I went to the courts as a white female with no obvious attachment to a religious group and asked that I be the exception to the law that requires us to be photographed for our licenses due to the fact that I am camera shy, I would be laughed right out of court.
We are equals here in Canada, or so we are told. Isn't it time we started treating everyone as such?
GM
0
said
0
Johanna Sommer
0
said
0
Ted
0
said
0
Operator
0
said
0
Until you posted, I wasn't aware that owners of Pit Bulls, Hutterites and Jehovah's Witnesses were "disadvantaged people"
Although I do not always agree with some of the decisions, the Pit Bull ban for example, I do see the Supreme Court as part of our democratic society and therefore as a Canadian, I abide.
If I desired to make a serious change, I would run for office.
Ryan
0
said
0
We are not talking about discrimination, we are talking about a small religious group asking for special privlidges not available to the rest of the citizens of this country.
The special privlidge they ask for creates a loop hole for criminals to use. I don't know if you have been a victim of identity theft but I hope you never are.
Further, at a time when we are having troubles with boarder crossings, how long do you think it would be before one such group said it should not have to do a picture for a passport, and referes to this case had it gone the other way.
There is a HUGE difference between discrimination and equal application of the law. We have taken political correctness in this country WAY to far because of bleeding hearts who can't look past the story itself to the larger picture.
Peter
0
said
0
Tom Lewis LLB
0
said
0
A couple of points for you, speaking as a person with a disability and a lawyer.
You are completely wrong. There is NO $50,000 fee to get a case heard.
How do you possible get that the SCC is anti-disabled? Have you never heard of the principle of reasonableness?
You are truly not understanding the role of the law in our society or of the Supreme Court of Canada. I would point out to you that the Constitution Act and the Charter specifically allow limitations on "freedoms" that are "reasonable" in a just society.
I would rather have some reasonable limits on me than the anarchy of special interests.
Mike W in London
0
said
0
Would I be able to ask for exemption for pictures if I said I believed in pink unicorns?
Would I get tax exempt status if I got a room full of people to believe in pink unicorns and give me their money?
If you want to believe in nonsense, that's your prerogative. But if your nonsense doesn't mesh with science, technology, common sense, and decency - leave it at home.
It still bothers me that even in Canada we have religion infiltrating our public schools. My elementary school principal handed out bibles at a "special" assembly, and preached to us - children who are hardwired to accept the words of adults as a survival mechanism.
One of my high school teachers threw me out of class for not taking part in the Lord's Prayer at Trenton High School in the early 90s. Another secular public school forcing religion on people. Though I don't seem to remember them giving equal religious opportunity for non-Christian religions.
If someone is going to be mandating religion be forced on me in school, at least make it Buddhism. I've never heard of Buddhist writings advocating genocide, slavery, or the sexual victimization of children.
Mel from Calgary
0
said
0
ravinder dhillon
0
said
0
It is the Hutterite religion that should come first, not the law! The next think you know my people will not be able to wear our turbans and daggers to serve in the RCMP.
That's it, I'm going back to Punjab!!
Ravinder Singh Mohammed Dhillon
Dave
0
said
0
Your words are nothing more than a collection of politically correct nonsense concentrated into two paragraphs. Utterly riduculous.
According to your logic, just about anything can be twisted into an act of discrimination. Pit bulls... Are you serious? Human being, human life and safely come before pets for pet's sake.
Sensitivity training for supreme court judges?!? Surely you must be joking. Sensitivity training is, by far, the purest form of political correctness brainwashing. The fact that you support it speaks volumes.
Utterly riduculous.
Chris
0
said
0
When in Rome, you know the rest.
Too many people misinterpret the Bible or certain verses in order to use religious beliefs as an excuse to not to do something. For those people, I shake my head and wonder what is really motivating them.
Pastor Chris
The Other Lowell in BC
0
said
0
So good for the supreme court.
ed
0
said
0
Dave T
0
said
0
I don't want to be hearing anything about Muslims getting a exception on showing their faces while we are forcing the Hutterites to do so.
Hutterites pose no threat to Canada at all. None. Never heard of a Hutterite extremist screaming "death to western civilization". So if we are going to be this careful with our friends we had better be at least this careful with everybody.
Hippocrites
0
said
0
my take on this
0
said
0
Yvonne
0
said
0
So, if they don't belive if photographs because its a "carved image", does this mean they don't have any pictures in their house - landscapes, etc?
Please, and people worship idols, are you telling me they're going to worship their drivers licence?
I'm all for practicing your religion - but what kind of a christian are you if you want to bend or flaunt the law in your favour?
If you don't want to abide by the rules - don't drive!!
ML in Trenton
0
said
0
I agree, that's what I've been told the first day in driving school : "Driving is not a right, it's a PRIVILEGE."
If you don't agree then start walking.
Only Pay Taxes to God
0
said
0
Now you know I'm joking and it sounds rediculous, but really what religion doesn't sound a little crazy when you look deeper into it.
Do you think I'd be taken more seriously if my pretend cult had been around for 100 years or so, I bet I would.
SANDIE_b
0
said
0
Darlene, NS
0
said
0
Nothing in this ruling prohibits people from following their beliefs or expressing their differences. No one is stopping or discouraging them from doing so. However, regardless of your beliefs or differences, you still have to follow CANADIAN laws and regulations which should apply indiscriminately to everyone.
James
0
said
0
forrest
0
said
0
ryder
0
said
0
Driving is a priviledge. PERIOD!! Driving a vehicle has nothing to do with religious beliefs or political beliefs. If you wish to enjoy that freedom and priviledge of driving, then you follow the law; plain and simple. If your religion deters you from having your picture taken, then to easy, ride a horse. Last I checked, you don't need a license to ride a horse.
Laws are in place for a reason people.
hold the phone !!!!!!!!!!!!!
0
said
0
Lance
0
said
0
Baker, Ottawa
0
said
0
The point of not creating false idols was specifically aimed at those who would worship them. Unless hutterites were finding that they had people in their sect spending their time worshipping their image in celluloid, they dont really have a case.
david sawkiw[saskatchewan farmer]
0
said
0
If this is religion VS state like some of you think it is, we are all in a heap of trouble!
It seems the courts are picking on Christians.
Case in point,, if you search your memory banks, it is not that many years ago 'THEY' allowed turbans to be worn in the rcmp, and royal canadian legions.. Was this not based on religion??? Oh but wait ,, I guess 'WE' don't want to offend "CERTAIN" religions....
Yes canada is the tolerant secular state society.. Yeah right.......
DM in NB
0
said
0
"...But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns...."
Is it saying that we can have a male or female slave? I choose female.
And now we have aliens running about? :-P
(yes, I get the meaning of "alien", but it's funny worded this way)
ron in victoria
0
said
0
Alex
0
said
0
Mere Edmonton
0
said
0
Bev Mc T
0
said
0
Pete M in Toronto
0
said
0
If the Hutterites integrate in to the rest of Albertan and Canadian society, their images are captured many times a day, one poster stated they visit Casino's, they are video taped constantly and it's not like they aren't aware of it.
Therefore the whole things sounds like a scam.
Now, on the other hand if the issue is that they don't want to "carry" their likeness around, which would side step the captured images from surveillance cameras, etc, then how about a compromise? Take the photo, store it on Ministry computers for access by those that need it. If a Hutterite is pulled over and/or needs to produce "photo" id, the requesting party, police officer, etc, can simply look it up and compare it to the person. I think all police forces in Canada have that type of access in their vehicles. Even if they don't then the Hutterite would have to bear the inconvenience of "going downtown" to a facility where their ID could be verified.
Simple, if you think about it.
--Pete
JDP
0
said
0
Trevor in AB
0
said
0
According to their interpretation of the second commandment they cannot have a carven image (photo, painting etc.) of anything in the heavens above, earth below, or underwater. If this is the case, why do they have family photographs and portraits in their homes? Why is it that one of these Hutterites agreed to have hism picture taken and shown on the front page of our local paper holding up his photoless driver license? I'm sure a lot more people saw the front page of the paper than would have seen his DL photo.
Is the real reason more related to a local police officer in the period of 2 weeks pulling over 3 different people all of which were using the same photoless driver license?
anonymous
0
said
0
Hal in Halifax
0
said
0
Wonder if the same rules and logic will apply to burkhas and drivers licenses.
Lorne from Brampton
0
said
0
Julie
0
said
0
It has to stop
0
said
0
eric in the hat
0
said
0
George
0
said
0
Having a picture on the driver's license is important because it serves for identification. The Hutterites have a strange religious belief. At the same time, God does not exist, so therefore the bible has no power.
I don't agree with former prime minister Pierre Trudeau Charter of Rights and Freedoms - created in 1982. The Charter made the laws powerless, and very weak. Pierre Trudeau should not of created the Charter of Rights, and Freedoms.
I'm glad the Supreme Court enforced the Alberta Government's law. But it is unfortunate there is no super natural being to control the earth.
karen in wlake, bc
0
said
0
i believe in religious freedom however question a system that would allow mine and everyone else's to be jeopardized in the name of it (the ceremonial swords still being worn). this freedom should be enjoyed by all, not just the religious minority. case in point, my kids attend a public school that will not host any christmas or easter celebrations on account of THREE kids (with a school population of 150) that do not celebrate this holiday.
if you want the privilege of driving, i think everyone needs to follow the same rules.
Taryn
0
said
0
Kim
0
said
0
Linda Ridgewell
0
said
0
Blake
0
said
0
BadP, Edmonton
0
said
0
It seems very self-flattering for the Hutterites to assume that their pictures will be idolized by police officers.
Linda
0
said
0
Patricia
0
said
0
Jess
0
said
0
BadP, Edmonton
0
said
0
I think you got off easily.
BD, Red Deer
0
said
0
Tom, Winnipeg
0
said
0
In the 1990s the Taliban in Afghanistan destroyed thousands of ancient statues and artworks because of this belief, and in Medieval times there was branch of Christianity that destroyed thousands of ancient and medieval artworks because of this. In more recent times some very traditional Muslim and Christian sects also believed this. Usually, this is a sign of an extremely repressive religion that disrespects human rights and the discards history
George
0
said
0
And I don't agree with former prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau Charter of Rights, and Freedoms - created in 1982. The Charter made the laws powerless.
In this era, the Government has to be strong. If the Government is powerless some people might take advantage of that, and that is not right.
Westerner
0
said
0
JB
0
said
0
The Hutterites are harmless people, and if they want to expose themeselves to identity theft, that is their own choice. They should at least have the freedom to choose.
Lynn
0
said
0
Katherine
0
said
0
if you want to wear a turban and dagger than please do go back to Punjab.
I am not racist and am all for multiculturalism but if people cannot follow simple rules and laws put in place for EVERYONE'S safety then leave. My husband being a Muslim was completely disgusted that I may not have been able to vote because I did not have appropriate photo ID , but a woman with her face completely covered was! I believe everyone should have to follow the same rules as the majority of the country.
And if you own a pitbull you are better off than me, because I can't afford a dog!
Tim
0
said
0
Alex (Toronto)
0
said
0
Where a religious practice does not cause harm or difficulty for others, society should be tolerant. But if a practice is potentially harmful, being based on religious belief does not justify it.
Dennis L. Krahn
0
said
0
Hutterites usually use the 'religon' card whenever it benefits them financially; this time however, I don't see any financial gain.
I also know a little bit about the Bible but cannot recall where getting your picture placed on a document for identification only is forbidden.
al
0
said
0
Anyone choosing to live in Canada should lives by our laws!!
Why should our laws be changed/bent to suit a minority?
cindyptolemy
0
said
0
The rest of us who were born here have to do as the law says so should everyone else.
abdula
0
said
0
Thanks for voting for tolerance in Canada.
What a Joke!
0
said
0
also- I agree with the comment that this is not a religious issue, but a control issue, and good for the SCC.
George
0
said
0
The Government needs to be strong. Canadians are tired of having a weak government that is scared to do anything. In this day, and era, it is time for the Government to be strong, and to control the country.
A picture is needed on the driver's licence.
David, Mississauga
0
said
0
Religion gets a free pass in this country too often, especially when it comes to gender discrimination. I'm glad to see that, at least in this case, they have to follow the law of the land.
Thomas C
0
said
0
That said, I'd hate to be their lawyer. The Crown didn't meet the requirements of the test, and yet the Hutterites still lost.
Michael from Cambridge: You supported the SCC since day #1? That would make you over 130 years old and number one in the Guinness Book of World Records for Oldest Person Alive.
reece
0
said
0
It would be intersting to see if these people will now have their photographs taken at risk of offending the Great One in the Sky. Either offend or take the bus...let's test your faith.
Wurtz
0
said
0
This issue is ridiculous and I'm shocked that it reached the SCC. They should now turn around and fine the colonies involved for wasting the court's time.
People have to realize that it is only a very small minority of Hutterites who are against the photo ID. Growing up, I never heard of such an issue in my life!
LOL @ Trevor: Yup, that sounds about right! LOL
Thanks for the chuckle!
Nate, Ontario
0
said
0
But the law is the law, and driving is a privilege, not a right. So you have to follow the rules for that privilege.
Good call.
Bill, Mississauga
0
said
0
Justin
0
said
0
Amanda, Ontario
0
said
0
We live in Canada people, not Russia, Germany, India or any other country.
Either accept the rules of our country or get out!
Im sorry I don't agree with the RCMP uniform being changed to accomidate the few. I don't agree with being allowed to carry weapons in our schools or anywhere else, or not having to have a picture taken to obtain ID or to vote.
Im not a racist person, in fact my husband is black and i'm white. We have too bi-racial children who are being raised to love our country and respect it and it's rules.
Mike W in London
0
said
0
Actually, even if we don't agree with someone and they don't agree with us telling someone they should leave the country because of it doesn't solve the issue.
Since we're a democracy and we have the ability to change laws, sometimes people standing up to them is a good thing, even if we believe they are in the wrong.
Can you imagine, in a country where a lot of people smoke marijuana, if we had the same draconian drug laws as the US?
The general opposition to the existing laws has lead to less enthusiastic prosecution of people for what is essentially a morality law, and this can be applied elsewhere.
Whether they win or lose, as long as a reasonable argument is presented and we are able to filter out the laws which are unjust or archaic we'll be a strong nation.
jack
0
said
0
If your religion forbids you from participating or conforming. Then dont conform and dont participate. Dont drive.
Tom Hanna
0
said
0
Get off the fence!
Patrick
0
said
0
lisa kreitzer
0
said
0
Dano in the city that rhymes with fun
0
said
0
Steven
0
said
0
Cara B
0
said
0
If there is no regulation to show a photo ID for identification purposes when casting a ballot, then what is the correlation between this issue and that of Muslim women wearing veils to vote?
aaron
0
said
0
Jackie Barrett
0
said
0
In the case of the Schmeideleut Hutterites, some households are permitted to have computers with filtered internet access, children often complete their education and some go on to university or college instead of dropping out at Grade 8, embrace advanced technology, allowed to drive cars, and have their own phones.
However, more conservative and traditional Hutterite factions, like the Lehrerleut and Dariusleut, still impose heavy restrictions on their people such as leaving school at Grade 8, ban on computers and radios, bans on personal photos, etc.