The oath to the Queen is constitutional – as is changing it – Globe Editorial

Globe Editorial on the recent court ruling on the citizenship oath (ruling itself not surprising):

The oath – which is a constitutional requirement for MPs, and a legal obligation for new citizens and many officials within our system of government and justice – is a pledge to respect the deepest and highest principles of Canada’s Constitution. And those principles include the right to freedom of belief and conscience, democratic participation and the working of change by peaceful and democratic means. The constitutional order is strong and supple enough that, from 1993 to 1997, Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition was a party dedicated to dismembering the country. Yet Bloc Québécois MPs could take the oath to the Queen and, simultaneously and in good conscience, call for the removal of Quebec from Canada. In taking their oath, they were pledging allegiance to the democratic and legal processes of our constitutional order – not to the person or beliefs of the sovereign.

Want a constitutional monarchy with, say, the governor-general as the head of state? An elected head of state? No head of state? Want to write the Queen out of the oath, or get rid of all oaths? You can take the oath to the Queen, and then work for that. To do so will not offend the Queen, the law or the Constitution. Working through violent or illegal means would be a failure to bear true allegiance, as promised in the oath. But to advocate legally, non-violently and democratically for a change in Canada’s laws or system of government, including even the abolition of the monarchy? To do so would respect the Constitution that the monarchy represents.

Having spent years pushing their case against the monarchy through the courts, the complainants have become the embodiment of our Constitution’s inherent reasonableness. In Canada, it is not just possible to take an oath to the Queen and oppose the existence of the monarchy. Being able to do so is a fundamental right. It is the whole point of our constitutional order.

Should the oath to the Queen be rewritten? The Constitution, like the oath itself, neither demands nor forbids it. It leaves that question to the only people qualified to decide: Canadians and their democratically elected governments.

The oath to the Queen is constitutional – as is changing it – The Globe and Mail.

The related news story:

The three longtime permanent residents had argued before the Ontario Court of Appeal that they oppose the oath on religious or conscientious grounds, arguing the requirement was discriminatory and unjust.

“The purpose of the oath is not to compel expression,” wrote Justice Karen Weiler. “But to obtain a commitment to our form of government from those writing to become Canadian citizens. If there is a violation of the appellants rights to freedom of expression, it is justified.”

Oath to the Queen upheld by Ontario Court of Appeal – Toronto – CBC News.