Are muslims discriminated against in Canada since September 2001?
Helly, Denise
ABSTRACT/RESUME
Following the terrorist acts in the United States in September
2001, hostility toward Muslims increased in North America and Europe.
This article describes the different forms of discrimination experienced
by Muslims in Canada inasmuch as the data gathered during and before the
last two years allow it. (1) It also attempts to describe the main
factors underlying the hostility toward Muslims and how these factors
could be peculiar to Canadian society, where the government proclaims
itself the only multicultural state in the West and one that is very
respectful of immigrants' and cultural minorities' rights.
A la suite des attentats terroristes aux Etats-Unis en septembre
2001, les actes hostiles se sont multiplies a l'egard des personnes
de confession musulmane dans les societes occidentales. Cet article
retrace les diverses formes de discrimination subies par les musulmans
au Canada autant que le permettent les donnees compilees avant et apres
les evenements de septembre 2001. Il tente aussi de reperer les
fondements de cette discrimination qui s'avereraient propres au
Canada, un pays dont l'Etat se proclame le seul Etat multiculturel
au monde et parmi les plus respectueux des droits des immigres et de
leurs descendants.
INTRODUCTION
According to the Multiculturalism Act (1988), "The Government
of Canada recognizes the diversity of Canadians as regards race,
national or ethnic origin, colour and religion as a fundamental
characteristic of Canadian society and is committed to a policy of
multiculturalism." Discrimination against Muslims is, therefore, a
subject of national interest, particularly since the September 11
terrorist attacks in the United States.
Islam is a new phenomenon in Canada. It first became part of the
public debates during the 1990s. In 1994, students wearing the hijab (a
traditional headscarf) were expelled from some schools in Quebec. Since
1996, data have been published showing the growth of the Muslim
population. According to 2001 census data, the Muslim population
numbered 579,000 persons, growing from 253,000 in 1991. The majority are
of Pakistani origin and live in the Toronto area, and Montreal is home
to the second largest concentration of Muslims, with a population of
120,000 of mostly Arab origin.
This article has three objectives: to describe the discrimination
suffered by Muslims in Canada, to assess any increase in the level of
discrimination since September 2001, and to determine the forms it takes
and the reasons for this discrimination in Canada. The fulfillment of
these objectives requires that definitions of discrimination, including
those provided by the Canadian government, be specified.
DISCRIMINATION AND THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982), along with
other provincial Charters of Rights and Freedoms, protect fundamental
freedoms (of conscience, religion, thought, opinion, expression,
peaceful assembly, association, and defense) and basic human rights (to
life, security, privacy, dignity, non-harassment, and presumption of
innocence). They prohibit discrimination based on race, national or
ethnic origin, color, religion, sex, age, or mental/physical disability.
The right to equality protected by these documents is fourfold: equality
before the law, equality in the application of the law, equality of
protection afforded by the law, and equal benefit of the law.
The concept of equal benefit of the law counters a formal
conception of equality as identical treatment that can, paradoxically,
cause serious inequality. It is a Canadian principle that, in order to
treat all equally, distinctions may occasionally have to be made
(Crepeau 1994). In an unprecedented 1989 judgment, (2) the Supreme Court
defined discrimination as a "distinction, whether intentional or
not, based on motives related to the personal characteristics of an
individual or a group of individuals, which impose on this individual or
group burdens, obligations or disadvantages not imposed on others, or
prevent or restrict access to the possibilities, benefits and advantages
offered to other members of society." Discrimination is thus
defined as the denial of equality based on an unlawful criterion of
distinction, and it can be either direct or indirect.
Direct discrimination occurs when one or more personal
characteristics based on unlawful criterion are explicitly applied to
deny a right or a freedom. Indirect discrimination occurs when an action
produces an uneven effect on a group or a person identified by a similar
unlawful criterion (i.e., physical characteristics, cultural origin,
age, gender, religion, handicap), without the discriminationary action
having to be the aim (Bosset 1989; Ledoyen 1992). The example that is
cited most often is the weight or size requirement to become a police
officer or a fireman. In practice, these requirements exclude members of
groups generally lacking the required characteristics.
One can also speak of systemic discrimination when inequalities
between groups of people are not ascribable to an identifiable factor
but seem to be linked to a number of present and/or past factors. An
important example is the under-representation of minority groups in
certain occupations compared to the number of members of charter groups
(Canadians of British or French ancestry). This inequity requires us to
question whether the basis is attributable to discriminatory practices
(whether voluntary or involuntary) or to characteristics recognized as
sources of economic differentiation (level of schooling, work
experience, knowledge of the official languages). In Canada, the
under-representation of members of "visible minorities" in
public office was recognized as part of past and present discriminatory
practices. As a result, the Employment Equity Act was passed in 1986.
Discrimination can also be distinguished according to its source.
Institutionalized discrimination occurs when public laws and measures
intentionally exclude some people from enjoying rights available to
others. A denial of these rights existed, for example, from 1908 until
the 1960s when quotas for immigrants from Middle-Eastern and
"Asian" countries were applied.
In addition to systemic and institutionalized discrimination, we
can also speak of veiled (Kunz, Milan, and Schetagne 2001), usual
(Ledoyen 1992), or voluntary discrimination (Mc Andrew and Potvin 1996)
to refer to attitudes or actions which, based on an unlawful criterion,
lead to the exclusion of people from spheres of daily social life. This
form of discrimination is difficult to prove, difficult to quantify,
poorly documented, and seldom results in formal complaints.
Nevertheless, the effects are manifested in different ways, such as the
under representation of members of some ethno-cultural groups in
particular neighborhoods, associations, clubs, and social networks
(i.e., of colleagues, neighbors, friends; intermarriages). In the case
of people of Muslim heritage, these various forms of discrimination can
be demonstrated in some fields but are difficult to prove in others.
DIRECT DISCRIMINATION: DENIAL OF BASIC RGHTS AND FREEDOMS
Perpetrated by Individuals
Hate Crimes
Hostile acts against an individual or a group based on a personal
attribute (such as public insults, incitement of hatred, physical
violence, and/or attacks against property) are infringements of the
right to dignity, safety, integrity, and the peaceful enjoyment of
property. (3) This form of discrimination was rarely documented during
the 1991 Gulf War and thereafter (Abu-Laban and Abu-Laban 1991:124-126).
Post-September 11, however, ethnic and human rights organizations
started to monitor discrimination more systematically as hate crimes
multiplied. Fear and dejection led to a number of emergency calls to
these organizations from people anxious to learn how to ensure their
personal security. Muslims feared attack owing to religious and cultural
practices (clothing, beard, head coverings), attending Muslim places of
worship or schools, and taking leaves of absence during religious
holidays.
Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) figures indicate a 1,600 percent
increase in hate crimes against Muslim individuals or places between
September 2001 and September 2002 (Media release, March 10 2003). The
Congress received 11 complaints related to such crimes the year
preceding the September 2001 attacks, but this figure increased to 173
the following year. In the United States, a 2001 Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) report indicates the same 1,600 percent increase in
hate crimes against people perceived as Muslims: 28 in 2000, and 481 in
2001, including 3 murders and 35 cases of arson (Abdelkarim 2003:51).
The Toronto Police Service Hate Crime Unit (2001:8,11,13,22) noted a 66
percent increase in hostile acts in 2001. Ninety percent of that
increase was related to the terrorist attacks against the United States,
as they occured between September and October 2001 (i.e., 121 of the
total 338 hate crimes committed during the year). Of these 121 acts, 57
specifically targeted Muslims. (4) In comparison, in 2001, 58 hate
crimes were counted against people of Jewish origin, 53 against
"Blacks," and 24 against homosexuals. Only one hate crime
toward a person identified as Muslim was recorded in 2000. The police
departments of three other Canadian cities also reported an outbreak of
hate crimes from September through the end of December 2001, all
connected to the terrorist attacks: 44 in Ottawa, 40 in Montreal, and 24
in Calgary (Hussain 2002:23). Similar complaints were also made to
nongovernmental organizations. Between September 11 and November 15
2001, the Canadian chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CAN) was advised of 110 incidents, including 10 death threats, 10
hate messages, 33 verbal aggressions, and 13 assault and battery
incidents (CAIR-CAN press release, November 20 2001). Unfortunately,
statistics related to verbal harassment, death threats, physical
attacks, and other hate crimes remain vague for several reasons.
First, victims of hate crimes seldom make an official complaint,
and witnesses rarely come forward, as was recently documented by a
French study carried out in 2002. In that study, only 48 percent of the
French who were polled declared themselves willing to report racist
incidents to police (Zappi 2003). This reluctance to report has also
been documented in the United States. The FBI recorded only 481 hate
crimes against Muslims in 2001, though 1,700 were reported to the
CAIR-U.S. chapter from September 2001 through February 2002 (Abdelkarim
2003). Forty instances of threatening or insulting phone calls, insults
on the street, vandalism, and assault and battery were reported by 181
women involved in discussion groups organized by the Canadian Council of
Muslim Women; of these forty cases, participants only reported two to
police (Hussain 2002:23). In Montreal, police recorded a dozen
complaints of verbal harassment and 83 "hate events" between
September 11 and 20 2001 (Taillefer 2002), whereas, according to
testimonies gathered by community organizations, Muslims and
Middle-Eastern immigrants suffered many more insults in public venues
(e.g., the street, the work place, or when using public transit).
This reluctance to report incidents to police is one important
factor undermining the collection of statistical information. Another is
that the consolidation of the Muslim community is still weak, despite a
multitude of religious and secular associations. The two pan-Canadian
organizations documenting the infringement of Muslims' rights and
freedoms, CAIR-CAN and the Canadian Islamic Congress, have few
resources.
A third factor explaining the inadequacy of these statistics is
that some Canadian police services either do not record hate crimes at
all (e.g., Halifax), the ethno-cultural origin of the victims (e.g.,
Windsor), or their religion (e.g., Hamilton, Calgary, Waterloo,
Edmonton). In addition to this lack of uniformity in reporting, the
categories used to identify the victims or to classify the hate crimes
also vary. For example, the Toronto Police Hate Crime Unit, formed in
1993, groups together the following categories: Muslim, Pakistani,
Middle Easterner, Somali, Arab, and East Indian. This makes it difficult
to know if religion, national or cultural origin, or physical
characteristics are the bases of the hate crimes. The same unit does not
include insults in the street as hate crimes, whereas Muslim
organizations and the Jewish B'nai Brith do (The Gazette 2003).
Attacks against Muslim places of worship increased sharply after
September 11. According to CAIR-CAN, twelve such attacks occurred across
Canada between September 11 and November 15 2001 (Hussain 2002:14).
According to the testimonies of 181 women living in various Canadian
cities, at least one attack took place against a place of worship in
each Canadian city between September 2001 and June 2002 (Hussain
2002:15); sixteen of these were bomb threats. Police presence at Muslim
places of worship during Friday prayers and at Muslim schools throughout
Canada was offered for only a few days or weeks after the attacks.
In Canada, as in Western European countries, hate crimes toward
people of Muslim heritage appear to have decreased in 2002 and
thereafter (Diene 2003:3). The Toronto Police Hate Crime Unit (2002:10,
13) recorded only ten such crimes in 2002 against "Muslims,"
though fifteen crimes against "Pakistani," "Afghan,"
"Palestinian," "Middle-Easterners," and
"Arabs" could be added. However, attacks against Muslim places
of worship continued.
According to Canadian social workers in the field of immigration,
the decrease in hostile acts in 2002 and after is explained by the way
these conflicts were handled. Examples of how networks between Canadian
municipalities, schools, police authorities, public organizations, and
NGOs were used to defuse these potentially harmful situations are often
cited. In major Canadian cities, police authorities have
well-established crisis management units composed of representatives
from different ethnic backgrounds. These community bonds proved useful
when violent incidents occurred. For example, when a Muslim adolescent
was physically assaulted by youth in September of 2001 in Ottawa,
municipal bodies and community organizations worked together to condemn
the attack, rally public support, and stop any possible replication. In
a similar situation, when a Sikh temple in Hamilton, Ontario was
apparently mistaken for a mosque and totally burned, relations between
ethnic groups and the authorities deteriorated, not only because of the
lack of experience in inter-ethnic conflicts in the community, but also
of a lack of contact between the police and ethnic communities. A hate
crimes unit was established after that incident.
In Canada, hostile acts targeting Muslims are more likely to take
the form of insults, threats, and attacks against places of worship than
acts of assault and battery or physical aggression, though violent acts
of aggression do sometimes occur. A Pakistani immigrant family was
beaten in a Montreal park in the spring of 2002, and a teenager was
severely wounded in Ottawa in September 2001. In both cases, youths of
European origin were accused.
According to a United Nations special report (Diene 2003:2, 4),
hostility against Arabs and Muslims has taken different forms in
different countries. That report demonstrated that in the United Kingdom
and Germany, Arab and Muslim women wearing a hijab were more likely to
be attacked; in the Netherlands and in Australia, the most likely form
was attacks against places of worship (ninety such acts were recorded
from September 11 until October 2, 2001 according to the Australian
Association of Anti-discrimination Centers); France experienced an
increase in malevolent acts (169 were declared in 2002, of which a third
were in the north and in Ile-de-France [Zappi, 2003]); in the United
States, verbal harassment and physical attacks against Muslim
individuals were the incidents most recorded.
Labor Market and Workplaces
Since September 2001, no extensive Canadian studies have been done
regarding any rise in discrimination suffered in the workplace by people
of Muslim heritage. The available data do not distinguish between Middle
Eastern and South Asian groups (notably the Pakistani group). According
to the Ethnic Diversity Survey, 64 percent of the members of visible
minorities report discrimination or unfair treatment at work, but data
sorted according to ethnic origin or religious classification are not
yet available.
Nevertheless, investigations in Quebec described the obstacles and
disadvantages suffered by people of Muslim heritage in that province. In
the spring of 2001, questionnaires asking about hiring practices with
regard to visible minorities were sent to 197 employers in Quebec City.
Only 19 responded, (5) of which a third (35 percent) declared that they
refused to employ an "Arab" or a person from the Maghreb
(Lubuto Mutoo 2001). After September 2001, some Quebec NGOs, committed
to the integration of minorities in the labor market, received calls
from employers asking them not to refer "Arabs" (Bouchard et
al. 2002:10), and, significantly perhaps, the Directeur de l'Etat
civil in Quebec mentioned a "phenomenal" increase in
"requests by Muslims" to change their names since September
2001 (idem). According to another recent study, three categories of
people experience particular difficulties finding jobs: "Blacks,
people of Arabic origins and 'visible' Muslims" (Tadlaoui
2002:20). In such cases, discrimination often takes the form of refusing
to consider the resumes of people from Arab origin or of the Islamic
faith under the pretext that, if hired, they will not take part in
"the life of the company," and that their habits are too
distant from those considered Quebecois ones. It was also found that
some job applicants were excluded because of their French accent,
"bad attitudes" during the interview, a "poorly
written" curriculum vitae or, in the case of sales departments, a
concern that customers would perceive these cultural/racial groups
negatively.
Another obstacle to gaining employment for Muslims and members of
other visible minorities is more difficult to grasp. Simply put, Muslims
often do not belong to employment networks, a significant factor given
that approximately 80 percent of available jobs are not publicized. This
recruiting practice is described as "cloning" (Luboto Mutoo
2001), and the process, believed to save time and money, is accentuated
by ethnocentrism, racism, and/or xenophobia. In addition, discrimination
in the workplace is often manifested in the form of threats and
offensive comments against signs related to Islam (hijab, clothing,
beard); dismissals for expressing a political opinion (generally on a
question relating to the Middle-East); refusing to remove an item of
clothing (hijab), and/or of unfounded allegations on the part of
colleagues (Lubuto Mutoo 2001). These forms of discrimination are
substantiated by the testimonies of Muslim immigrants in other Canadian
cities (Bel Hassen 2002:12; City of Ottawa 2002). (6)
Although the data presented illustrate discrimination in the
workplace, they do not allow conclusions to be drawn about a rise in
direct discrimination against Canadian Muslims in the labor market.
Little documentation exists regarding similar cases of discrimination,
for complaints are rare, and the reasons given for the refusal to hire
or for dismissing members of cultural or facial minority groups are
generally covered with pretexts so that one can only guess the true
reasons.
Another denial of an economic right has been noted since September
2001. People named Osama had their bank accounts unjustly frozen. Others
experienced attempts by colleagues to have them dismissed. A documentary
entitled "Being Osama" details these experiences. It was
financed in part by a Quebec public organization (SODEC), and the main
Canadian television networks (CBC, CTV, Global) and Al Jazeera plan to
broadcast it (Montgomery 2003).
School
Prior to September 2001, numerous incidents concerning the status
of Islam within public schools occurred in Quebec. In 1988, a Montreal
parents' committee rejected an Arabic language class, despite its
recognition by the Quebec Ministry of Education (not to mention the
fifty-two hundred pupils already enrolled in such classes provincially).
The arguments used by opponents revealed the prevalence of an Arabic
stereotype, which was fast becoming a Muslim one: "The teaching of
Arabic is only the first step of a broader strategy, then it will be the
Koran"; "The boys are already macho as it is, what will one
teach in this course?"; "Arabs should remain in their
homeland, we must defend our quality of life and our values." The
fact that the Arabic-speaking mothers who requested the course were
generally well-educated and Christian was either ignored by the
parents' committee or seen as a strategy used to hide
"real" intentions: "They hide behind Christians and
women, but one should not be misled" (Mc Andrew 2002:137). Despite
the protests, the school administration decided to offer the course.
A similar incident occurred in another Montreal school in March of
1991, when Muslim parents requested that Muslim morals be taught in
school, as allowed by Article 5 of the 1988 Law on Public Education and
article 41 of the Quebec Charter of Rights. In this instance, the
opposition of parents from other faiths was strong enough to deter the
initiative (Proulx 1994).
In 1994-95, twelve pupils wearing the hijab made newspaper
headlines. Once again, "slippages and stereotyped presentations of
the Muslim community abounded, in particular in the discourse
originating from the civil society (letters and phone-in programs,
teachers' groups, and grass-roots feminists or nationalists)"
(Mc Andrew 2002:134). Islam as well as the Quebec Muslim community were
presented as a threat to democracy and to the equality of men and women.
As a result, Islam was implicitly, if not openly, compared to
fundamentalism and terrorism (Mc Andrew 2002:139). After six months of
public controversy by feminist, (7) nationalist (Lenk 2000), and
pro-laicite (Ciceri 1999) movements, in 1995 the Commission des droits
et libertes de la personne ruled that wearing the hijab must be allowed
for fear of infringing on the rights of the girls. The public dispute
ended.
Contrary to expectations, reported racist incidents between pupils
or between pupils and school personnel were rare following the September
2001 attacks and were quickly controlled. Measures were taken the week
of the attacks and during the following weeks to minimize racist acts
locally. In Montreal, the police established contacts with
representatives of Muslim organizations, and presentations about the
"Arab community" were made to the municipal police, to social
workers at schools, and to school directors in the Montreal-area primary
and secondary schools. Post-traumatic stress management teams were also
made available to student victims of racism. Such measures and their
impact remain to be documented in other Canadian schools.
Government Organizations and Their Agents as Perpetrators
Ethnic Profiling and Attacks on Freedoms
An anti-terrorism law (8) (C-36) was adopted on December 7 2001 by
the Canadian Parliament. It is interesting to note that since then,
Canadians have expressed little concern about terrorism. According to a
survey conducted by the Environics Research Group between September 26
and October 1 2002, 18 percent of respondents identified war as their
major concern; 16 percent, the environment; 11 percent, famine in the
world; and 9 percent, terrorism.
The law led to the modification of twenty-two existing Canadian
laws (Jezequel 2002) including the criminal code, the protection of
personal information, access to information, and the request for
evidence (which no longer obliges the Crown to provide all of the
elements). It also created criminal offenses: facilitating and inciting
terrorist acts, (9) affiliation with organizations suspected of
involvment in similar acts, and financial support of a terrorist entity
leading to the seizure of property and goods suspected of being used for
terrorist activities. The term "facilitating" is criticized by
the Canadian Bar Association because the facilitation of terrorist
activities is considered criminal even in the absence of any knowledge
of these activities by the defendant. Bill C-16 (Charities Registration
Act) also allows the cancellation of the charitable status of any
organization or group that finances, or is suspected of financing,
terrorist activities. (10)
Bill C36 erodes the protection of freedoms by increasing the powers
of the police. After September 11, the police force was given the right
to conduct secret searches, to expand the six-month period of electronic
eaves-dropping, and to listen to a person's overseas communications
based solely on the decision of the Minister of National Defence,
without any judicial oversight. The lave also gave police the right to
hold people for seventy-two hours without charging them, to conduct
inquiries without warrants, and to oblige detainees to undergo
interrogation in front of a judge under the penalty of a year's
imprisonment for refusal. It also allowed Canadians' air travel to
be tracked and the records kept for six years. Those measures pertaining
to evidence and custody are to be reviewed after five years: the others
are permanent.
The anti-terrorism law erodes the freedoms of all Canadians through
procedures that undermine the rights of the defendant to remain silent
and to know the charges against them. I argue that it directly targets
people of Muslim heritage and has two particular consequences for them.
The first is their profiling by security forces, especially at the
borders (Hurst 2002; Makin 2003). The second is attempts by the Canadian
Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the RCMP to collect
intelligence from persons active within the Muslim community or from
Muslims whose immigration status is precarious (such as foreign students
or asylum seekers whose files are being examined by authorities). These
attempts, justified by the need for intelligence on the possible
existence of Islamist networks in Canada, are extremely detrimental for
Muslims. They create suspicion in people's minds about the presence
of Muslim extremists in Canada and the Muslim population's failure
to report their existence to the authorities. Consequently, it
constitutes a serious infringement on the rights of Canadian Muslims and
has, as a result, been criticized by Muslim representatives.
INDIRECT DISCRIMINATION
Systemic Discrimination
Systemic discrimination against members of ethno-cultural minority
groups feeds on various unjust practices: refusal to hire; requiring
additional qualifications; or offering lower wages. On average,
immigrants are paid less than natives who have the same level of
schooling. (13) According to the 2001 census, in 2000, immigrant men
earned an average wage of 63.1 cents compared to one dollar for natives
with similar levels of schooling. In 1980, the ratio was 71.6 cents for
males who immigrated that year. Moreover, in 2000, male immigrants
living in Canada for ten years received an average of 79.8 cents
compared to one dollar paid to natives with similar levels of schooling.
In 1980, the rate of pay was equal (one dollar for all). For women, the
ratio was then, and is now, even more unfavorable. Thus, immigrants who
have arrived since the 1980s, a significant number of them Muslims,
surfer a structural disadvantage.
A study by Pendakur (2000) also shows that people from non-European
origins experience a clear disadvantage in the Canadian job market even
after age and education levels are controlled for. On average, their
income was eight percent lower compared to people of European origin.
Additionally, though census data shows that the percentage of visible
minorities with a post-secondary diploma is higher than that of other
Canadians, this fact is not reflected in the distribution of
occupations. Only the business and engineering sectors show similar
rates of employment between natives and immigrants (Kunz, Milan, and
Schetagne 2001), and the computer science and advanced technologies
sectors are the only true cultural mosaics in terms of the composition
of the personnel.
These data do not, (11) however, allow us to know if people of
Muslim heritage experience occupational and income disadvantages, then
and now. In addition, one cannot speak about systemic discrimination in
accessing jobs in the public sector, although recent immigrant groups
are under-represented in this sector. According to the 1996 census, 5.9
percent of federal public office jobs were held by members of
"visible minorities" (Working Group 2000). The precise
situation of people of Muslim heritage is unknown. The same observation
holds in the housing market, another field where systemic discrimination
exists.
Reasonable Accommodation
In a 1985 judgment (Ontario Human Rights Commission vs. Simpsons
Sears Ltd., 1985, 2R.C.S. 536), the Supreme Court defined indirect
discrimination as "discrimination through prejudicial effect,"
and created the "obligation of accommodation" to counter this
effect. The case concerned a Seventh-day Adventist demanding the right
to observe the Sabbath without giving up her full-time job at Simpsons
Sears, which had refused her request. The Supreme Court ruled that a
compromise had to reduce the discrimination suffered by the employee
because of her faith and specified that the solution had to be
reasonable, i.e., no undue hardship should be imposed on the employer,
such as an exaggerated financial cost, reduction of safety requirements,
denial of other employees' rights or of collective agreements, or
other significant disadvantages. In this case, the work schedule could
be adjusted to accommodate her request without causing undue hardship.
The spirit of this judgment can be applied to other working
regulations as well as to other fields such as the offering of goods and
services, be they private or public. Frequently, cases of conflicting
cultural norms exist within a society illustrated by the diet of
in-patients, prisoners, and children placed in foster homes, the
provision of spaces of worship for minorities in the workplace and
schools, medical practices, burial modes, or the disciplining of
children (which can entail youth protection and parental authority
laws).
The notion of reasonable accommodation imposes itself in Canada
under the terms of the legislative text which calls for the promotion of
a pluralist and equitable society (Multiculturalism Act 1988) and of
Article 27 of the Canadian Charter which states that "The Charter
shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and
enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians." Contrary
to other Western countries, this notion represents a legal obligation
and implies two principles. The first is paramount: no cultural
arrangement can jeopardize a person's rights and freedoms and
fundamental laws. Thus, respect for cultural differences can never
contravene the basic principle of Canada's legal and political
systems, which is respect for individual rights. No collective cultural
right is granted to ethnic minorities that would enable them to create
closed communities, such as the right to separate judicial courts.
Cultural relativism is allowed in as much as this fundamental principle
is applied. The second principle requires that the accommodation
provided maintain a balance between the rights of the parties. The
spirit of any reasonable arrangement is to avoid litigation and reduce
cultural inequalities through negotiation.
Many religious accommodations have been adopted during the 1980s
and 1990s because, as the Supreme Court stated in its 1985 judgment:
"A tiny inconvenience is the price to pay for freedom of religion
in a multicultural society." In Quebec, numerous examples could be
presented which demonstrate how the spirit of the judgement has been
applied. At the Montreal Childrens' Hospital, parents of minority
patients are allowed to bring meals to their hospitalized children, and
a manually-opened door has been installed to allow Hassidic Jews to
visit patients on the Sabbath; in public schools, a flexible pedagogical day is scheduled so that Orthodox, Coptic, and Catholic children can
celebrate Easter on their respective dates; and at the Polytechnic
school, examinations are held on weekdays to accommodate Judaic students
(Conseil des relations interculturelles et de l'immigration 1993).
But other requests gave rise to trials, the most publicized of
which were the following: a Hassidim group demanded the right to put
erouv wire in one district (granted by the Quebec Superior Court, June
2001), and a student demanded the right to carry a Kirpan at school
(disallowed by the same court, 2004).
In the case of the Muslim population, before the 1980s, an
agreement was reached between the City of Montreal and two Muslim
organizations to open a Muslim space in two cemeteries, and one of these
organizations (Al Islam) was given the right to celebrate and record
marriages. During the 1980s and 1990s, Muslim girls were awarded the
right to wear a more modest uniform during physical education classes,
and Muslim pupils were granted a two-hour period to observe Friday
congregational prayer. In certain Canadian organizations, the work
schedule was adjusted to create three free periods per day to allow
Muslim employees time to pray. In municipal swimming pools, a three-hour
period, divided between boys and girls, has been reserved for young
Muslims, and in two anglophone universities Muslim students were given
space for prayers.
However, some requests made by the Muslim community were not
granted. Muslim sections were not created in the cemeteries of any
cities other than Montreal, a Quebec Provincial Police employee's
request not to translate the recording of a conversation collected
through eavesdropping (because his religion prohibited denunciation) was
denied, as was the request of a Montreal Police Department employee to
stop assessing parking tickets for reasons of conscience (he considered
assessing parking tickets to be a form of repression). Based on these
refusals among others, it appears that Muslims are targeted more in
terms of the frequency and extent of the conflict surrounding
accommodations, as Mc Andrew recognized (2002:138): "The religious
prescriptions of Jehovah's Witnesses are more questionable at the
level of pupils' success and psycho-social integration and contrary
to the school's function of critical education, but they never get
the same publicity as those of Muslims" (my translation).
However, since September 2001, the situation in Quebec and
throughout Canada is characterized not by a higher number of requests,
refusals, or acceptances of religious accommodations related to Muslim
demands, but rather, by one new trend--the coverage of these cases by
the media.
"USUAL" DISCRIMINATION
"Usual" discrimination remains difficult to prove because
of the lack of proof of the denial of freedoms or basic rights, but
certain facts lead us to assume it plays a definitive role.
Attitudes
A survey conducted across Canada (Angus Reid 1991) demonstrated
that persons of Muslim heritage were victims of unfavorable perceptions
before September 2001. Almost all respondents said they felt more
comfortable with Natives than with immigrants, and even less comfortable
with the Indo-Pakistani, Sikh, Black, West-Indian, Arab, and Muslim
groups. In the fall of 2001, 82 percent of Canadians feared that Arabs
and Muslims would become the target of discrimination (IPSOS-Reid), but
almost one year later, in July 2002, according to a CROP survey on the
religious beliefs of persons 16 to 35 years of age, 76 percent of Quebec
respondents and 55 percent of other Canadian respondents thought that
religion causes conflict between people, and 17 percent of the former
and 13 percent of the latter thought that Islam promotes confrontational
relations (Le Devoir, July 22 2002). In August 2002, according to
another IPSOS-Reid survey, 45 percent of Quebecers, 37 percent of
Albertans, 33 percent of Ontarians, and 22 percent of British Columbia residents agreed with the statement: "The September 11 attacks made
me more mistrustful of Arabs or Muslims coming from the
Middle-East" (as noted in the introduction, the majority of
Canadians of Middle Eastern origin are established in Quebec and
Ontario). In fact, according to a survey conducted by Leger Marketing in
September 2002, 33 percent of Canadian respondents declared they had
heard racist comments against Muslims and Arabs.
The terrorist acts of September 11 and the measures adopted by the
Canadian government to control the borders also had a notable effect on
the attitudes of Canadians toward immigration. According to an August
2002 survey conducted by the Association for Canadian Studies, 43
percent of respondents indicated that Canada accepted too many
immigrants from Arab countries, 40 percent from Asian countries, 24
percent from Africa, 21 percent from Latin America, and 16 percent from
Europe. When respondents feared a future terrorist attack in North
America, the percentages increased: 49 percent wanted a reduction of
Arab immigration and 47 percent of Asian immigration. In November 2002,
another survey by Maclean's magazine, Global TV, and The Citizen
indicated the same trend: 44 percent of Canadians wanted a reduction of
immigration from Muslim countries. The highest percentage was in Quebec:
48 percent agreed versus 45 percent in Ontario, 42 percent in
Saskatchewan and Manitoba, 43 percent in the Maritimes, 39 percent in
British Columbia, and 35 percent in Alberta. A year earlier, the average
percentage favoring a reduction of immigration from Arab countries was
49 percent.
By mid-March of 2003, the week the English-American war on Iraq
began (a war not endorsed by the Canadian government), 70 percent of the
2,002 Canadians polled by the Association for Canadian Studies and the
Environics Research Group "see intolerance towards immigrants and
ethnic groups as a serious problem in Canada, and 68 percent harbor
concerns over anti-Arab sentiment, 54 percent worry about anti-Semitism,
and 55 percent about an anti-Black sentiment. But still 30 percent felt
Arabs project a negative image, while 38 percent felt the same about
Aboriginals, 13 percent about Blacks, and 11 percent about Jews"
(Jayoush 2003).
According to these polls, negative stereotypes of Muslims appear to
be held by at least a third of the Canadian public, with no significant
change since the 1990s or between September 2001 and March 2003. Since
2001, however, some Canadian media outlets have fed that negative
perception.
Media Coverage
Over the past twenty years, an increase in violent events in Muslim
countries and violent activities involving individuals of the Muslim
faith gave rise to abundant media coverage intended for a Western
general audience. This is particularly true for the Israeli/Palestinian
conflict; the wars in Lebanon, Bosnia, Kosovo, the Persian Gulf, the
Caucasus, Afghanistan and Iraq, and the September 2001 attacks. Coverage
of these events, like that of other current events, tends to omit past
and present socio-political analysis of the conflicts (Helly 2002).
Moreover, the coverage frequently reproduces the Orientalist archetype (Said) of an insurmountable gap between Islam and other monotheist
religions, in addition to ignoring the evolution of Western and Islamic
cultures and countries.
Canadian media coverage of events concerning countries or people of
Muslim heritage since September 2001 constitutes one of the most
significant criticisms leveled by Canadian Muslim organizations. The
main critique is the constant usage of Islam to qualify positions and
political actions. We often hear about "Muslim extremists" or
"Islamic militants," whereas religious qualifications are
generally omitted when similar positions or actions by people of other
religions are discussed. In one interview (Weld 2003), Wahida Valiante,
vice-president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, explained: "We
never refer to those involved in the Northern Ireland conflict as
Catholic terrorists. In dealing with Bosnia and Kosovo, there were
Christian and Orthodox terrorists, but they were never called that,
though there was much discussion of Muslim Bosnian terrorists."
According to a CAIR-CAN investigation involving 296 Canadian
Muslims in 2001, 56 percent said that Canadian media coverage had become
more biased with regard to Islam and Muslims after September 2001, while
13 percent declared it had improved. In the view of the first group, the
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), The Toronto Star, and The Globe
and Mail were the most objective media, while The National Post, Global
Television, and The Ottawa Citizen were the most hostile to Islam (Press
release, May 9 2002; Alternative Perspective, September 2002). Also, the
181 participants in the discussion groups on the condition of
"Canadian-Muslim women" (Hussain 2002:28) agreed that the CBC
had presented balanced information regarding the events of September 11,
2001, especially with two of its programs, "The National" and
"The Passionate Eye."
Since 1998, the Canadian Islamic Congress has published Anti-Islam
in the Media, an annual study of the coverage of eight Canadian
newspapers (The Globe and Mail, La Presse, The National Post, The Ottawa
Citizen. The Gazette. The Toronto Star, The Toronto Sun, and The
Winnipeg Free Press). Each study counts the articles containing biased
or offensive terms with regard to Muslims and allots a rating of these
terms according to two criteria: their appearance in front page titles
and their repetition in the same article, and the newspaper's
circulation (CIC 2002:10). On Match 23 2003, the Canadian Race Relations Foundation awarded the Canadian Islamic Congress the prize for
excellence for its Anti-Islam in the Media 2002 report.
While The National Post was classified as the least-biased
newspaper and The Globe and Mail as the most biased in 1999, (12) since
2000, The National Post has been rated the most hostile. A renewal of
anti-Muslim stereotypes was notable from September 12 through November
28 2001 in a number of other publications: "Negative or biased
information on Islam" was found to appear ten times more often than
over the previous months in The Toronto Star, 18 times more in The Globe
and Mail, and 22 times more in The National Post (CIC 2001). A similar
conclusion was drawn from a study of The Vancouver Sun (Enns 2002). In
the 2002 CIC report, The Globe and Mail, which appeared to eliminate
biased terms over those months, found itself, together with The Winnipeg
Free Press, among the publications least condemned by the organization.
The position of The National Post results from its control by a
media conglomerate (Can West Global) whose owners use their editorial
authority to promote anti-Muslim positions and support for the Sharon
government. Their newspapers, The Ottawa Citizen, The Gazette, and The
National Post, have, since 2000, held their position as the top three
newspapers most unfavorable to Muslims. They focus more on the rise of
anti-Semitism than on discrimination against Muslims (CIC 2002:13), but
The Gazette covered these two subjects in a series of articles in
September 2002. As examples of bias and/or malevolent inconsistency in
The National Post articles, one published on August 15 2002 read:
"Attacking infidels. Terrorists target the West for only one
reason: its religious values," and supported its thesis by
describing the assassination of 400 people in Algeria during the period
of fasting in 2001. After September 11, the paper published comments
(the first in September 2001, the second in March 2002; both written by
George Jonas) such as: "From the beginning, Western attempts to
draw a distinction between Islamist terrorists and Islam resulted in a
lop-sided effort" and "The terrorist enemy has no armies to
send against us; it has to penetrate our perimeter through fifth
columnists" (Elmasry 2002).
In 2002, the CIC and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)
carried out a pilot study on the evening news of three television
networks, CTV, Global, and CBC, over a period of 60 days. CBC was rated
as the network having presented the most negative references to Islam.
Coverage by radio stations has not yet been studied, though some appear
to have developed anti-Islam stereotypes. On July 8 2002, Mr. Green
declared on CFRA 580 AM, an Ottawa-based station, "North
America--democracy--the Christian faith--is under attack, not just in
North America, but elsewhere around the world"; the threat
"comes almost exclusively from Muslim men." A complaint was
later filed with the CRTC by CAIR-CAN.
Researchers sought to learn whether the attacks of September 2001
led Quebec French-speaking journalists to delineate a link between
terrorism and immigration. Piche and Djerrahian (2002) analyzed 78
articles published in La Presse and Le Devoir between September 11 and
October 31 2001 and concluded, if "the consensus on immigration has
been broken after September 11, (13) the majority of publications remain
on the side of moderation." They did not deem it obligatory that
the fight against terrorism lead to a re-examination of immigration law (p. 82, my translation) because a counter-argument was often presented,
that is, the pressure exerted by the United States to conduct such a
review. According to Pietrantonio's 2002 analysis of articles
published on September 12, 13, and 15 2001 in La Presse and Le Devoir
(and Liberation as an "echo newspaper"), the attacks were
described as a quasi inevitable consequence of unequal power
relationships. In addition, Radio-Canada and RDI networks offered
balanced coverage of events in Muslim countries. Francophone media
coverage seems less offensive and ambiguous when compared to some
Anglophone media coverage.
Education
School is a place where ideas and representations are transmitted
to younger generations. The only research regarding discrimination
against Muslims is Mc Andrew's 1985 analysis of textbooks written
during the second half of the 1970s in Quebec. These Quebec textbooks
were produced by private publishers and used by public school boards. Mc
Andrew pointed out that they encapsulated the "last legitimate
racism." Although the textbooks spoke about solidarity within the
Third World and black Americans' struggles (portraying Malcolm X,
Allende, Mao Tse Tung, and Castro very positively), Arab struggles for
emancipation were denounced as "radicalism,"
"anti-Westernism," and even "fanaticism." This
North-American discourse was influenced by the 1973 oil crisis and the
Western world's confrontations with Kadhafi. Moreover,
Quebec's long-established Arab population was not mentioned in the
texts. The stereotype of the "TV Arab" prevailed (Shaheen
1984, 2001) through such images as the rich sheik, the dangerous
terrorist, the uneducated peasant, and the noble Touareg. This negative
image apparently had some effect on the 200 French-speaking CEGEP students who evaluated English or anglophone ethnic groups (Jews,
Germans) more positively than Blacks and Arabs, placed at the bottom of
their list. Arabs were said to be dishonest, sly, cruel, and complaining
(Mc Andrew 2002:135), During the 1980s and thereafter, the textbooks
were updated. However, the presentation of Muslims did not change much.
This situation remains to be documented, not only in Quebec, but
throughout Canada's school systems.
Conflicts Regarding Places of Worship
The request for space for Muslim worship was not the subject of
conflict during the 1970-1980s when many places of worship were opened
by Muslim immigrants arriving from the Middle East and Asia. In
contrast, during the 1990s, conflicts appeared in Toronto and Montreal,
some of which remain unresolved. In 1995, a highly publicized conflict
took place regarding the opening of a place of worship in East York and
shortly after, in 1998-1999, the construction of a dome above a
Pakistani mosque provoked debates and disputes (Isin and Siemiatycki
2002). To illustrate these conflicts, particulars of cases in Montreal
are presented.
Since 1995, an insiduous conflict has taken place in
Dollard-des-Ormeaux, a well-to-do, English-speaking former municipality
in a residential suburb west of the island. The municipality was, and
is, particularly hostile to the opening of a mosque. The Azzahra
International Foundation, a multiethnic Shiite organization, wanted to
build a mosque and a cultural centre in 1995. Despite the favorable
opinion of the city's Planning Service, the City Council changed
the zoning in 1997 in order to prevent its construction. The project was
finally abandoned in 1998. A year later, the same organization bought a
vacant synagogue in the same city and opened a cultural and religious
centre. It did not obtain a licence from the municipality even though
the site was zoned for religious worship and the municipality was aware
of the center's existence and activities (Daher 2002). In 2001,
because of financial difficulties resulting mostly from people's
fears about donating to Muslim organizations following the September
2001 attacks, the Azzahra International Foundation sold the building to
a Sunnite organization, the Canadian Islamic Center. The new centre has
still not received legal authorization to operate from the municipality.
The conflict has been much more abrupt in the case of the creation
of an Ismaili cultural and religious centre (Jamat Khana). With a
capacity to host from 800 to 1,000 worshippers, this space would have
been built on a piece of land in the center of the former municipality
of Brossard (south of Montreal Island). The project was blocked in
August 2002 under pressure from 506 residents who signed a petition
opposing a zoning change proposal and asking for the creation of a
public park instead. The zoning change meant that taxes on 40 percent of
the land in question would be imposed. At the time, the zoning allowing
a 100 percent tax exemption had been in effect for 40 years without any
modification. The following are some of the arguments presented by
opponents of the project (La Presse, Forum, Monday August 12 2002):
"I do not like to live with different people. That does not make me
a monster, nor cretinous, only a different person"; "I oppose
this mosque project: The site does not lend itself to it. In my opinion,
its commercial value is too high to be used for religious purposes,
whether the religion is Muslim, Catholic, Buddhist, etc." But other
arguments were made: "According to opponents, the land must have a
neutral projection and must not be used for religious purposes. Why?
Could it be because of the image such a center would give to Brossard,
which is nevertheless a largely multiethnic city? The argument does not
make any sense." Due to the misunderstanding between residents and
City Council on the technicalities of the zoning change and the harsh
public debate that took place, the council issued a three-month
moratorium on the question. The Muslim association's purchase
option expired before the end of the moratorium, and the seller refused
to extend it. The association abandoned the project, and there was no
follow-up on the idea of building a public park. We should recall that
the Quebec Ismaili association had established religious centers in
other municipalities for twenty years without opposition (Mount-Royal,
Laval, Sherbrooke, Granby, and Quebec City).
In a similar situation, although an extension project submitted in
1999 was approved by the advisory City Planning Council in Pierrefonds,
Makka Al Mukarramah has not yet received a permit from City Council
which argues that traffic problems have escalated and will be worsened
by the arrival of more worshippers.
These cases, though not directly related to the events of September
11, demonstrate new opposition to the opening of Muslim places of
worship since the mid-1990s, a trend that has not yet been examined in
other Canadian cities.
THE FOUNDATION OF NEGATIVE STEREOTYPES
Four dynamics explain the presence of anti-Muslim stereotypes
within Canada. The first, similar to other countries, is the view of
Islam as an intolerant religion that oppresses women and is closely
related to conflict and terrorism. This view emerges from negative
images spread in the West and reproduced by influential Canadian media.
In this respect, according to studies conducted by Abu-Laban and Karim,
Canadian media coverage of Islam remains deficient with no perceptible
progress made since the 1990s. Karim (2000) described how Canadian media
reportage of terrorist actions carried out by Muslims during the years
1980-90 reinforced negative stereotypes, and Abu-Laban and Abu-Laban
(1991) reached similar conclusions regarding coverage of the 1991 Gulf
War.
A second dynamic is the result of the relatively recent immigration
of Muslims to Canada. The fact that the majority of Muslim immigrants
arrived in Canada during the 1990s contributes to their quasi-absence
among media personnel and from the political arena (and hence, their
weak political voice). Recent immigrancy allows for the development of a
stereotype of Canadian Muslims as being insular, poor, indifferent to
Canadian society, and more concerned with life in their country of
origin. Ethnic, national, and religious fragmentation combined with the
absence of federal programmes to support Muslim associations during the
1990s also explain their weak community structure and political
mobilization. These deficiencies prevent this population from benefiting
as a community from favorable dispositions to religions minorities, such
as the legal obligation of reasonable accommodations, the permanent
invocation of the merits of multiculturalism policy by the political
authorities, and recourse to tribunals in cases of discrimination.
Another fact characterizes Canadian Muslims: more than twenty-five
percent of the total Canadian Muslim population is concentrated in
Montreal. Within this region, there tends to be more public debate on
Islam due to several factors that feed friction. A militant secular
movement in Quebec adheres to the anti-religious, French interpretation
of secularism and considers religiosity as an archaic cultural trait.
Thus, the principle of "laicite" (14) was recently invoked to
justify the refusal to grant a prayer room for Muslim students at Ecole
de Technologie Superieure (MontrealMuslimNews.net, March 11 2003). In
addition, ethno-nationalists see in Islam (and in other non-Christian
minority differences) a threat to Quebec national identity rooted in the
Christian religion, influential feminist movements are hostile to Islam,
and there are some Christian lobbies. In 1997, Law 118 proposed courses
about the "culture of the religions of the world," beginning
at the elementary level. The Catholic movement and evangelical groups
strongly mobilized against this proposal under the guise of the need to
teach pupils "their religion," that is to say, the Christian
religion, before presenting other religions to them. They won their
battle to some extent: the courses will be offered only at the high
school level beginning in September 2005. In this context, however, we
should note that despite the secularization of the school boards in
1997, the Law on Public Education continues to make provisions for
teaching Catholic and Protestant religions in public schools.
In addition to these frictions, public opinion in Quebec generally
recognizes Palestinians' right to a State, and three populations
(Arabs, Pakistanis, and Jews) concerned with this debate are strongly
represented. (15) Tensions between activists from these groups are high
and have led to confrontations about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict at
Concordia University. (16)
As a result of these characteristics, unique to Quebec, the debate
on the Middle East situation and Islam is more apparent in the public
sphere there than elsewhere in Canada. In English Canada, the debate on
Islam has given free reign to proponents who lobby for a reduction in
the number of immigrants and refugees. But polemics surrounding Islam
bring journalists, media owners, and members of the Jewish community
face to face. The latter have, for instance, blamed the Canadian
Broadcasting Company for calling Hamas members "extremist
militants" rather than "terrorists," and also for
ignoring the recrudescence of anti-Semitism in Canada and elsewhere in
the West (Schlesinger 2002; The Gazette 2003; Block 2002; Spector 2003).
The majority of the Canadian Jewish community views the Palestinian
struggle as a deadly threat to Israel and equates Islam with terrorism.
Also, in the view of the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Jewish identity
and the State of Israel are currently one.
Finally, a fourth crucial dynamic is Canada's geographical
proximity to the United States--Canada's primary political,
military, and economic ally. (17) On the one hand, the United States is
the principal source of news regarding events in the Middle East and the
fight against terrorism (Maybee 1980; Karim 2000:14), particularly for
the English Canadian media (Karim 1996, 2000). Since September 2001, the
United States has pressured Canada to bring its policies regarding
immigration control, political asylum and security, as well as
international positions, in line with American policies. It particularly
insists on border control and the surveillance of asylum seekers,
refugees, and the Muslim population generally. In addition, the Canadian
government tends to remain silent on any issue related to this
population. The importance of not stigmatizing Muslims was publicly
declared by politicians at all levels of government shortly after the
attacks of September 2001, but since then, there has been little
out-reach by the federal government toward associations representing
Canadians of Muslim heritage, and the government has paid little
attention to disclosures of discrimination against Muslims.
The Prime Minister visited an Ottawa mosque on September 21 2001
"to reaffirm that Islam has nothing to do with the massacre
prepared and executed by the terrorists," and on November 15 2001,
he declared in Parliament that it was necessary to devote efforts to
fighting discrimination as much as, if not more than, terrorism. Since
then, like other members of the government, he has remained silent on
this question, except for the controversial declaration offered in the
fall of 2002 that the policies of humiliating Arab countries could form
part of the cause of the terrorist attacks in September 2001.
The 296 respondents in a CAIR-CAN survey during the summer of 2002
expressed their appreciation of the Prime Minister's messages as
well as similar ones by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and
the Secretary of State, but they also criticized the Prime Minister for
"his lack of clear actions against the wave of Anti-Muslim
hate." About three-quarters rated his interaction with the Muslim
community as poor or below average (CAIR-CAN Press release, September 5
2002). Examples of indifference by public authorities were described by
R. Khouri, president of the Canadian-Arab Federation:
Why did the Justice Department, after agreeing to work with
us on 11 specific concerns, then walk away? Why did the
solicitor-general, after expressing empathy with our plight,
then refuse to help us monitor abuses of the Anti-Terrorism
Act by law enforcement agencies? Why did the minister of
foreign affairs lift the travel advisory to the U.S. when
Arab and Muslim Canadians traveling there continue to face
humiliation and are subjected to treatment normally reserved
for charged criminals? Why did the Ontario public safety
minister condone the racial profiling taking place at the
U.S. border against his own citizens? Why is it that the mayor
of Canada's largest city, whose logo is "Diversity is Our
Strength," never spoke out against the victimization of Arabs
and Muslims post-Sept. 11?
R. Khouri at the conference, "Policing in a
Multicultural Society," Ottawa 2003
Khouri then concluded:
By and large, Arab and Muslim Canadians were left on their
own, having to explain themselves and prove their loyalty;
defend their religion and demonstrate its goodness; and at
times bide their ethnicity and deny their heritage in a
bid to escape scrutiny.
CONCLUSION
During the weeks following September 11 2001, hate crimes against
Muslims increased in Canada before subsiding in 2002 and thereafter.
Hate crimes usually took the form of insults, and violent attacks
against persons were rare in Canada (contrary to events in other Western
countries). Ethnic profiling by police and intelligence authorities,
negative news coverage by some influential English media, and negative
attitudes held by 30-45 percent of the Canadian population all resulted
in a high level of harm and fear within the Muslim population.
Inequitable access to the labor market only compounded the effects on
Muslim newcomers to Canada.
However, positive factors must also be noted. The passing of the
Anti-terrorist Act gave way to a public debate, measures aimed at
establishing or reactivating bonds between the Muslim communities and
municipal authorities were adopted in a number of cities, and the
majority of Canadians did not share negative stereotypes of Muslims.
Moreover, Canadian political parties did not call for the ostracism of
Muslims, nor demand limits to Muslim immigration, contrary to the wishes
of one vocal segment of the public. The New Democratic Party (NDP), for
example, took issue with discrimination against Muslims, particularly
federal MPs Joe Comartin (Windsor) and Svend Robinson (Burnaby-Douglas).
If this all seems reassuring, these positive points were not strong
enough to counter the disillusionment which settled upon people of
Muslim heritage regarding their status within Canadian society after
September 2001. For example, 61 percent of CAIR-CAN 2002 survey
respondents said "they experienced kindness or support from friends
or colleagues of other faiths," and 60 percent said, "they
experienced bias or discrimination since the 9/11 terrorist
attacks." Unfortunately, 33 percent said that their lives changed
for the worst, felt disliked by fellow Canadians, and were concerned for
their own safety and that of their families (CAIR-CAN press release,
September 5 2002). In another poll in the spring of 2002, 41 percent of
the 253 Arab respondents indicated that Canadians "do not like
Muslims," while 84.6 percent believe that Canadians think Muslims
are violent (Canadian Arab Federation 2002:11).
The foregoing discussion calls into question the Canadian principle
of respect for, and promotion of, cultural pluralism. If an
ethno-cultural group becomes the clear target of discriminatory
practices and relatively widespread hostile attitudes, and if this
principle and its attendant policies prove ineffective in reducing these
discriminatory acts, then what is the reality of the message of cultural
pluralism and its goal of equity and equality for all, especially in a
country said to be a leader regarding multiculturalism issues?
This paper also raises questions about the way discrimination is
addressed by the government. If public policy cannot completely erase
racism, ethnocentrism, and xenophobia, it can mitigate their effects not
only with strong symbolic gestures but also by empowering the victimized
groups and persons, helping them to defend themselves, to organize
coalitions, to learn about their rights and their access to judicial
bodies, and to build relationships with their representative
organizations. Unfortunately, this has not been done extensively in the
case of the Muslim population since 2001. The government should
certainly take note of the lack of information regarding Islam and other
minority religions, not to mention the extent of negative stereotypes
Canadians hold of Muslims. During the 1980s, through the
Multiculturalism Program, numerous initiatives have been launched to
educate the Canadian population and media personnel about the new
cultural diversity created by immigration from non-European countries.
Major research projects addressing the needs of specific cultural
communities were also funded, though none were undertaken in the case of
Islam, despite the increase of the Muslim population in Canada during
the 1990s, and the ongoing dismissal of the Program since the mid-1990s
will not help Canadian Muslims defend their rights.
Notes
(1.) This text is part of a report submitted in May 2003 to
partners in a study funded by the Sciences and Humanities Research
Council (CRSH-IDR-2003-2005): "The Challenges Facing the
Integration of Muslims in Canada and Quebec." A French version of
this article will be published in Revue Europeenne des migrationales in
2005.
(2.) Andrews vs Law Society of British Columbia [1989] R.C.S. 143.
(3.) Three categories of hate crimes are defined in the section of
the Criminal Code on hate propaganda: inciting genocide (art.318),
public incitement of hatred (art. 319, par. 1), and the voluntary
fomenting of hatred other than in a private conversation. Hate
propaganda was criminalized in 1971.
(4.) The other 64 hate crimes targeted people based on their
cultural origin (most often attached to the Islamic culture: Pakistani,
Somali, Afghan, Middle-Eastern, Arab, etc.).
(5.) This low response rate requires us to interpret the results
very carefully.
(6.) In Ottawa, women wearing a hijab were refused jobs.
(7.) Not all feminist movements opposed the wearing of the hijab:
the Council for the Status of Women, for instance, shared the view of
the Commission.
(8.) In some respects, this law is similar to the American Patriot
Act passed in October 2001 and to the British Crime and Security Act
passed in December 2001.
(9.) A terrorist activity is defined by Bill C-36 as an act made
"in the name of a goal, an objective or a cause of a political,
religious or ideological nature" and which "seriously
compromises the health or the safety of the whole population or part of
it."
(10.) This clause raised fears of having the properties of people
of Islamic culture seized without evidence and of a drop in donations to
places of worship and other organizations for fear of seeing the funds
diverted to activities prohibited by the law.
(11.) Forty percent of immigrants who arrived in the 1990s held a
university degree compared to 23 percent of native Canadians the same
age (25 to 54 years of age).
(12.) Without taking account of the circulation factor, La Presse
was the most biased newspaper in 1999. In 1998, the most biased daily
newspapers was The Toronto Star, followed by The Globe and Mail.
(13.) A poll in Montreal during the fall of 2001 indicated that 83
percent of Montrealers wanted immigration laws to be tightened, and 77
percent wanted increased border controls.
(14.) Laicite means the total separation of the state from
religion. Canada is not a "laicite" state.
(15.) According to a recent Compas Inc. poll, 26 percent of
Quebecers and 10 percent of other Canadians think that Jews have too
much power in Canada. Fifteen percent of Canadians (including 26 percent
of Francophones and 39 percent of those with relatively little education
high school or lower education levels) believe that "the
persecution suffered by Jews before and during WWII was in part or
mostly their fault," The Gazette, September 25 2002.
(16.) Ten percent of the 30,000 students at Concordia are Muslims.
(17.) Eighty-four percent of Canadian exports go to the United
States, and manufacturers and industrial pressure groups that have a
stake in this market influence debates about Islam and the control of
Canadian borders.
REFERENCES
Abdelkarim, Riad Z. (2003). "Surge in hate crimes followed by
official U.S. targeting of Muslim, Arab men." The Washington Report
on Middle East Affairs April: 51.
Abu-Laban, Baha, and Sharon Abu-Laban (1991). "The Gulf War
and its impact on Canadians of Arab and Muslim heritage," in Baha
Abu-Laban and M. Ibrahim Alladin, eds., Beyond the Gulf War. Edmonton,
MRF Publishers, 120-142.
Angus-Reid Group (1991). Attitudes about multiculturalism and
citizenship. Ottawa: Multiculturalism and Citizenship Canada, July.
Bel Hassen, Amel (2002). "De l'insertion professionnelle
des immigrants: Le cas des Maghrebins." Vivre Ensemble 11 (38): 6.
Blais, Yvon, ed. (1994). "Les mouvements racistes et la Charte
des droits et libertes de la personne du Quebec." Les Cahiers de
Droit 35: 483-625.
Block, Irwin (2002). "Can West chief attacks
'cancer' in the media. Anti-Israeli bias 'destroying
credibility'." The Gazette, October 31: A3.
Bosset, Pierre (1989). La discrimination indirecte dans
l'emploi. Montreal: Aspects juridiques.
Bouchard, Helene, Yuho Chang, and Rachid Raffa (2002). "Emploi
et immigration dans la capitale nationale." Vivre Ensemble 11 (38):
8.
Canadian Arab Federation (2002). Arabs in Canada. Proudly Canadian
and marginalized. Ottawa: Canadian Arab Federation, April.
Canadian Islamic Congress (2001). Anti-Islam in the media 2001.
www.canadianislamiccongress.com.
--. (2002). Anti-Islam in the media 2002.
www.canadianislamiccongress.com.
Canadian Press (2003). "Anti-semitic incidents jump 60
percent: B'nai Brith." The Gazette, March 7: A10.
Ciceri, Coryse (1999). Le foulard islamique a l'ecole
publique: Analyse comparee du debat dans la presse francaise et
quebecoise francophone (1994-1995). Montreal: Immigration et Metropole.
Conseil des relations interculturelles et de l'immigration
(1993). La gestion des conflits de normes par les organisations dans le
contexte pluraliste de la societe. Montreal: Le Conseil, 109 p.
Crepeau, Francois (1996). "Le migrant dans l'ordre
juridique canadien." Hommes et Migrations 1220: 15-24.
Daher, Ali (2002). Les lieux de culte islamique en immigration: Le
cas montrealais. rapport de recherche. Montreal: Unpublished Research
Report.
Diene, Doudou (2003). Special report. Situation of Muslim and Arab
peoples in various parts of the world in the aftermath of the events of
11 September 2001 (ECN4/2003/23). New York: United Nations, January 3.
Duchesne, Andre (2001). "Les incidents racistes demeurent
marginaux." La Presse, September 20: El.
Elmasry, Mohamed (2002). "Words of intolerance." The
Gazette, September 5: B3.
Enns, Aiden J. (2002). "Assessing the coverage of Islam in the
Vancouver Sun after September 11." Vancouver: Master's thesis.
University of British Columbia.
Groupe de travail sur la participation des minorites visibles dans
la fonction publique federale (2000). Faire place au changement dans la
fonction publique federale. Ottawa: Government of Canada.
Helly, Denise (2002). "Occidentalisme et islam: Lecons de
'guerres culturelles'," in Jean Renaud, Guy Bourgault,
and Linda Pietrantonio, eds., Les evenements du 11 septembre et les
orientations de recherche en relations ethniques. Montreal: University
of Montreal Press, 229-252.
Hurst, Lynda (2001). "Who is high risk?" The Toronto
Star, October 20: A30.
Hussain, Samira (2002). La voix des Canadiennes-Musulmanes.
Mississauga, ON: Le Conseil Canadien des Femmes Musulmanes (Canadian
Council of Muslim Women), 41 p.
Isin, E.F., and M. Siemiatycki (2002). "Making space for
mosques: Struggles for urban citizenship in immigrant Toronto," in
Sherene H. Razack, ed., Race, space and the law: The making of a white
settler society. Toronto: Between the Lines, 185-209.
Jayoush, Kinda (2003). "We're intolerant, Canadians
say." The Gazette, April 22: A10.
Jezequel, Myriam (2002). "Au nom de la loi C36." Journal
du barreau, December 20 (34): n/p.
(http://www.barreau.qc.ca/journal/vol34/no20/).
Karim, Karim H. (2000). The Islamic peril: Media and global
violence. Montreal: Black Rose, 204 p.
Khouri, Raja (2003). "Can multiculturalism survive security
agenda?" The Toronto Star, March 9: A13.
Kunz, J.L., A. Milan, and S. Schetagne (2001). Inegalite
d'acces : Profil des differences entre les groupes ethnoculturels
canadiens dans le domaine de l'emploi, du revenu et de
l'education. Ottawa: Conseil canadien de developpement social.
Ledoyen, Alberte (1992). Montreal au pluriel. Huit communautes
ethno-culturelles de la region montrealaise. Quebec: Institut quebecois
de recherche sur la culture, 318 p.
Lenk, Helle-Mai (2000) "The case of Emilie Ouimet: News
discourse on hijab and the construction of Quebecois national
identity," in Agnes Calliste and George J. Sefa Dei, eds.,
Anti-racist feminism. Halifax: Fernwood, 73-90.
Lubuto Mutoo, Valentin (2001). Discrimination raciale en milieu de
travail dans la region metropolitaine de Quebec. Montreal: La Ligue des
droits et des libertes du Quebec.
MacDonald, Gayle (2003). "Jewish group plans rally against
CBC." The National Post, January 14: A2.
Mc Andrew, Marie (1985). "Le traitement du monde arabe dans
les manuels scolaires quebecois: Dernier racisme legitime?" Near
East Foundation of Canada, Newsletter 1 (3), November: 6.
--. (2002). "Le remplacement du marqueur linguistique par le
marqueur religieux en milieu scolaire," in Jean Renaud, Linda
Pietrantonio, and Guy Bourgeault, eds., Ce qui a change depuis le 11
septembre 2001. Les relations ethniques en question. Montreal:
University of Montreal Press, 131-148.
Makin, Kirk (2003). "Police engage in profiling, chief counsel
tells court." The Globe and Mail, January 18: n/p.
Maybee, Jack (1980). "Reporting the Third World: The Canadian
angle." Carleton Journalism Review, Winter: 6-9.
Montgomery, Sue (2003). "Music's over for Osama."
The Gazette, January 8: A7.
No author (2002). "Permitting the hijab." The Toronto
Star, December 21: H6.
Pendakur, Ravi (2000). Immigrants and the labor force. Policy,
regulation and impact. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's University
Press, 248 p.
Piche, Victor, and Gabriella Djerrahian (2002). "Immigration
et terrorisme: Une analyse de la presse francophone," in Jean
Renaud, Linda Pietrantonio, and Guy Bourgeault, eds., Ce qui a change
depuis le 11 septembre 2001. Les relations ethniques en question.
Montreal: University of Montreal Press, 81-94.
Pietrantonio, Linda (2002). "Rapports de pouvoir dans le
savoir public? Les mots de mi-septembre 2001," in Jean Renaud,
Linda Pietrantonio, and Guy Bourgeault, eds., Ce qui a change depuis le
11 septembre 200l. Les relations ethniques en question. Montreal:
University of Montreal Press, 113-127.
Proulx, Jean-Pierre (1994). "La prise en compte de la
diversite religieuse a l'ecole quebecoise: une tentative avortee,
l'enseignement coranique a l'ecole," in Marie Mc Andrew,
Rodolphe Toussaint, and Olga Galatanu, eds., Pluralisme et education:
Politiques et pratiques au Canada, en Europe et dans les pays du sud.
Montreal: University of Montreal Press, 251-265.
Said, Edward W. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 368
p.
--. (1997). Covering Islam. How the media and the experts determine
how we see the rest of the world. New York: Vintage Books, 200 p.
Schlesinger, Frank (2002). "Anti-Semitism is there but it is
less overt." The Gazette, September 25: A23.
Shaheen, Jack G. (1984). The TV Arab. Bowling Green: Bowling Green
State University Popular Press.
--. (2001). Reel bad Arabs. How Hollywood vilifies a people. New
York: Olive Branch, 573 p.
Spector, Norman (2003). "CBC news on Mideast smacks of
propaganda." The Gazette, January 21: A27.
Tadlaoui, Jamal-Eddine (2002). Pistes d'action pour contrer
les manifestations de la discrimination raciale et de l'intolerance
dans le champ de l'integration en emploi des personnes immigrees au
Canada au cours des dix dernieres annees. Montreal: Table de
concertation des organismes au service des personnes refugiees et
immigrantes, 45 p.
Taillefer, Guy (2002). "Coupables par association?" Le
Devoir, September 11: A3.
The Gazette. (2003). "Plug pulled on CBC debate on whether to
say 'terrorist'." The Gazette, January 16: A15.
Toronto Police Service Hate Crime Unit (2001). 2001 hate bias crime
statistical report, www.torontopolice.on.ca/publications.
--. (2002). 2002 hate bias crime statistical report,
www.torontopolice.on.ca/publications.
Weld, Kirsten (2003). "Anti-Islamic stereotyping in the
Canadian media. The Daily navigates the murky waters of anti-Muslim bias
in Canada's newspapers." The McGill Daily, April 3: Vol. 92,
no. 45 (Online archive: http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=1517)
Zappi, Sylvia (2003). "2002: Le racisme progresse, les actes
antisemites se multiplient." Le Monde, Se'lection
Hebdomadaire, April 5: 5.
Denise Helly's research interests include national and ethnic
minorities, citizenship, nationalism, policies of cultural pluralism and
immigration, and the integration of immigrants. She has published
articles and books on Chinese overseas, national minorities in China,
Canadian multiculturalism, the social integration of immigrants in
Quebec, and Quebec's policy regarding ethnocultural minorities. She
is currently collaborating with two European research teams studying the
status of Muslims in Canada as well as in Europe. Email:
Denise_Helly@inrs-UCS.uquebec.ca