The lawyer for a Muslim woman who has been ordered to remove a religious veil while testifying in a sexual assault trial, says his client's charter rights have been compromised by a judge's ruling.
Her lawyer, David Butt, spoke to CTV Newsnet on Monday afternoon and said his client is the complainant in the courtroom matter, currently in preliminary stages.
The evidence presented to court is under a publication ban, though the Toronto Star reported Monday that there are two accused involved in the case.
The Toronto complainant has been ordered by a judge not to wear her niqab -- a veil that covers everything but her eyes -- when testifying in court.
Butt said his client is being asked to compromise religious practices that are part of her daily routine.
"I think that we have to recognize, without commenting specifically on the evidence, that in this sort of situation, people come with long-established religious practices that they carry into their everyday lives," he told CTV Newsnet.
"And that's the kind of situation that we're faced with here: She's worn the veil for years, it's part of her religious identity and it needs to be respected as a matter of her charter right to freedom of religion," he said.
The issue, Butt said, pits a complainant's right to freedom of religion against the right of a defendant to confront his or her accuser in open court.
"In a case like this, a judge is always engaged in a sensitive balancing process and that's what occurred in this case, and obviously it's going to be reviewed in a higher court to reassess that balance," he said.
Toronto author Raheel Raza disagreed that wearing a niqab was part of Muslim religion.
"I think the important thing to remember here for everyone is that this is not pitting law against religion, because covering the face is not a part of Islam, covering the face is not a requirement for Muslim women," she told CTV Newsnet on Monday evening.
"It's a personal belief, it's a choice, it's probably a political statement," she added.
"But whatever it is, it doesn't have a place in a Canadian courtroom where the Canadian law should supersede any kinds of cultural preferences."
Raza, author of "Their Jihad...Not My Jihad," contends that it is a "small minority that seems to think that this is part of their faith."
Butt said that there are few, if any, prior cases dealing with the matter in Canadian courts.
"Really what we're doing is taking the general principles around respecting religious freedom on the one hand and according the accused a full defence on the other,and trying to fashion a particularly Canadian outcome that respects both those rights as much as possible," he said.
"This is a question of reviewing it in the higher courts to find an accommodation that will, as I say, try to respect both those rights as much as possible," he added.
Raza said she was concerned about the judgement that the higher court may hand down on the matter.
"Whatever decision here is made will set a precedent," she said.
"I think the judge made a very wise decision by saying that the face should be uncovered and I think that this should be the standard procedure for everything, whether it's driving licenses, whether it's voting -- not just for Muslim women, but for everybody who comes to Canada and wants to live here and wants to uphold Canadian values and Canadian goals."
