Seventh Essay Assignment

Philosophy 020E 2003-2004

Choose ONE of the following three news articles.  Briefly summarize the current event chosen, then use one or more of the philosophers from this unit to evaluate the question of whether justice was served in the event in question.  Your answer should focus less on the particular details of the case you’re evaluating than upon the features of the philosophy of justice you think relevant to the case.

Papers are due in class on Wednesday March 24^th. 1% late penalty/day, please drop off late papers in the Philosophy Department Drop Off Box on the wall opposite TC317.  Papers should be 3-4 pages, double-spaced. Remember also to submit papers to Turnitin.com. E-mail questions or concerns to me at aporter5@uwo.ca

ARTICLE 1

France's Chirac seeks law banning head scarves

CTV.ca News Staff

Islamic head scarves and other religious insignia, such as Jewish skullcaps and large crucifixes, will be banned from public schools as early as this autumn if French President Jacques Chirac gets his way.

Chirac said he will ask parliament to pass the law banning head scarves and other religious insignia. Some smaller medallions and pendants would be allowed.

"Secularism is one of the great successes of the Republic," Chirac said in a televised address to the nation Wednesday. "It is a crucial element of social peace and national cohesion. We cannot let it weaken."

The French president made his comments in reaction to a report last week from a French panel that agreed France should impose a law banning "obvious" religious and political symbols from public schools.

The legislation is likely to pass since most lawmakers have voiced their support of the ban in the past. As well, opinion polls show the ban is supported by a large majority of French citizens -- although Muslim, Jewish and Christian leaders have opposed it.

France's perception of religious expression is fundamentally different from virtually any other Western nation. Public displays of religion are not seen as welcome diversity. The country strictly separates church and state, and secularism is even written into the constitution.

Proponents of the law saying wearing head scarves to school threaten France's secular foundation. But religious leaders say the Muslims -- who make up about eight per cent of France's population -- should be better integrated.

"A law on religious symbols in the school environment could stigmatize a whole community," said Dalil Boubakeur, president of the French Council of the Muslim Faith.

Also Wednesday, Chirac rejected a commission recommendation to establish the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur and the Muslim Eid el-Kabir feast as school holidays. He said French schools already had many official days off.

Raheel Raza Canadian Council for Muslim Women says she's been watching developments in France and is deeply disappointed.

"I saw it coming but it's absolutely bizarre, because the so-called immigrants that he's talking about are largely Algerian Muslims who were colonized by the French. And now today, he wants to colonize them again while they're living in France. These are French citizens. And I look upon this as a blatant human rights violation," she says.

France has grappled with the hijab issue for nearly 15 years. It began in 1989 when two 14-year-old school girls refused to remove their head coverings. Over the years, scores of Muslim girls have been expelled for keeping their scarves.

The International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights says a law that would ban religious symbols violates France's international commitments to protect freedom of religion.

The group added that a hijab ban would result in increased alienation and marginalization of Muslims in France. France has the largest population of Muslims in Western Europe -- an estimated five million.

ARTICLE 2

Ottawa to recognize same-sex marriages
Last Updated Wed, 18 Jun 2003 9:23:01

OTTAWA - Ottawa will introduce legislation to make same-sex marriages legal, while at the same time permitting churches and other religious groups to "sanctify marriage as they see it," the prime minister said Tuesday.

Jean Chrétien made the announcement after a day-long cabinet retreat. It means Ottawa will not appeal two provincial court rulings allowing same-sex unions.

"There is an evolution in society," Chrétien said, "but what is important to me is the freedom of the churches."

To pre-empt legal challenges by the provinces, Chrétien says the legislation will be first checked out by the Supreme Court of Canada. The prime minister says the legislation will be drafted within weeks, and MPs will be free to vote their conscience when the bill is introduced.

Courts in British Columbia and Quebec have made rulings in favour of same-sex marriages, but gave Ottawa time to change the law. Ontario's court ordered the definition of marriage to be changed to include gay couples.

Justice Minister Martin Cauchon says the provincial rulings highlighted conflicts between two fundamental freedoms: the right of association and religious rights. Cauchon says the new legislation will allow the two rights to "cohabitate."

Written by CBC News Online staff

ARTICLE 3

Laws needed to ban racial profiling
'For persons profiled, the indignity is real'

SUJIT CHOUDHRY
SPECIAL TO THE STAR

Two recent events have placed racial and ethnic profiling on the national agenda.

The first is the Toronto Star's recent study of race, policing and crime. One of the Star's most provocative findings was that African Canadians were much more likely to be charged with traffic-related offences that are not apparent from external observation, such as driving with an expired licence. This evidence suggests that African Canadian drivers are being stopped at much higher rates than other drivers, which is consistent with racial profiling.

The second is the decision of author Rohinton Mistry to discontinue his U.S. book tour. Mistry has accused U.S. airport security officials of routinely singling out him and his wife for additional screening, on the basis of their physical appearance. Indeed, in the aftermath of Sept. 11, some commentators proposed the routine use of ethnic and racial profiling at the border and airports.

Racial and ethnic profiling is the use of race or ethnicity either as the sole factor, or as one factor among many, in a decision to detain or arrest an individual, or to subject an individual to heightened scrutiny.Profiling employs race and ethnicity as a proxy for the risk of committing criminal acts. But to profile in this way raises the serious danger of tarring an entire group with the crimes of the few, by giving rise to the myth that being a member of a certain ethnic group reflects a propensity to engage in criminal activity.

For the persons who are profiled, the indignity is real. In essence, profiling requires them to establish their legitimacy to the satisfaction of state officials. The cumulative effect on individuals of bearing this burden, simply because of their looks, would be enormously damaging on their self-respect. It would also undermine fundamental principles of equal dignity and worth and respect for the presumption of innocence.

Thus far, the debate over racial profiling has focused on changing law enforcement practices. However, there is a legislative option as well. In the debate surrounding the enactment of Bill C-36, the Anti-Terrorism Act, my colleague Kent Roach and I proposed that the Criminal Code be amended to include a ban on racial and ethnic profiling in both terrorism and non-terrorism related contexts. This amendment was not accepted.

Given the events of the past month, it is time to reconsider this proposal, to ensure that law enforcement comports with Canada's constitutional commitments. This amendment would prohibit the use of racial and ethnic profiling by any law enforcement agent or agency. But an exception would be allowed to permit the use of race or ethnicity — in combination with other identifying factors — when the law enforcement agent is seeking to apprehend a specific suspect whose race, ethnicity, or national origin is part of the description of the suspect.

Although this exception could be abused, such a use of race and ethnicity does not, in my view, amount to profiling.

If racial and ethnic profiling has occurred, this amendment would allow a court to award any remedy that is appropriate and just in the circumstances, including damages, injunctions, declarations and costs. The court may also refer the matter to a human rights commission that has jurisdiction with respect to the particular law enforcement agent or agency.

The involvement of human rights commissions may be critical in producing systemic reform. An example of how this may occur is the settlement of the Selwyn Peters' complaint against Canada Customs, which provides for mandatory anti-racism and cultural-diversity training for all customs officers.

Finally, to strengthen compliance with the ban on profiling, this amendment would require the attorney-general of Canada and every province to publish an annual report on racial profiling. The report shall include steps taken to ensure that law enforcement officers and agencies not engage in profiling, and data that is sufficiently detailed to determine whether law enforcement agencies are engaged in racial and ethnic profiling.