Smith: Supreme Court must address citizenship oath | Ottawa Citizen

Not everything needs to be decided by the Courts, given that requiring the current wording of the Oath, while objectionable to some, is not as fundamental breach of rights as in other cases where the Courts have ruled against the Government.

Better to have this addressed by the political process as almost happened in the past:

Aspiring citizens do not get these freedoms if they contractually promise allegiance to the Crown. Freedom of speech and the Crown’s legal authority already exist, regardless of the oath.

When I became a lawyer over a decade ago, I chose not to swear the regal oath. The choice I made did not hurt Canada, because the words had not made Canada any better.

Nor did it make me any less committed to Canada. It simply expressed, through quiet protest, my political opinion that hereditary British rule is morally wrong in today’s Canada, a view that millions of Canadians share.

The forced regal words were not justifiable for Ontario police officers, lawyers, school children or school board members, or federal public servants. They are not justifiable for citizenship applicants either.

The Supreme Court must step in, respect the evidence and declare the words optional for any citizenship applicant who does not want to express them based on personal democratic opinions.

Smith: Supreme Court must address citizenship oath | Ottawa Citizen.