‘Realistic’ chance that SCC ruling on Bill 21 inspires violent extremist rhetoric: intelligence assessment

Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa March 4, 2026. The building will be undergoing renovations for approximately 10 years starting later this year. Photo by Blair Gable /Postmedia

Article content

OTTAWA — No matter what the decision is, the Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling on Quebec’s controversial secularism law will probably inspire violent extremist rhetoric, warns a federal intelligence assessment.

Article content

In a March intelligence brief, Canada’s Integrated Threat Assessment Centre (ITAC) said it was “very unlikely” that violent extremists would target the court’s four days of hearings later that month on the challenge of the law known as Bill 21.

Article content

Article content

Article content

But, ITAC noted, “it is a realistic possibility that the Court’s decision — whether the law is found to be constitutional or not — will inspire violent extremist rhetoric.”

Article content

Article content

Quebec’s controversial secularism law Bill 21 prohibits certain Quebec public sector workers, such as judges, police officers, teachers and prison guards, from wearing religious symbols at work. It also requires them to perform their duties with their faces uncovered.

Article content

Though popular in the province, the 2019 law is fiercely opposed by religious groups, civil liberties advocates and many groups representing women’s or anglophones’ rights.

Article content

To pass the bill seven years ago, then-Quebec Premier François Legault invoked section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, better known as the notwithstanding clause.

Article content

The pre-emptive invocation of the clause — which allows a government to suspend the application of certain Charter rights for up to five years before needing to renew it — to block a court challenge of the law is at the heart of the case at the Supreme Court.

Article content

Over four hearing days in March, dozens of challengers and interveners opposed the law and asked the top court to rule it to be unconstitutional or impose limits on the invocation of the notwithstanding clause.

Article content

Article content

On the other hand, seven provinces including Quebec and Ontario argued that the court had no power to limit the invocation of the clause and to do so would amount to a constitutional amendment.

Article content

Article content

The top court’s decision is expected in the coming months.

Article content

In its unclassified March brief, ITAC assessed that there was a higher chance of a violent extremist attack linked to the enforcement of Bill 21 than there was against the apex court.

Article content

“State actions seen to be sacrilegious or blasphemous could be a mobilizing factor for a violent extremist with intent, or a radicalizing factor for an individual with existing grievances,” reads the brief, though noting that there was no information at the time indicating such action was brewing.

Article content

ITAC is a part of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service that focuses on assessing the risks of violent extremism in the country. It also sets Canada’s national terrorism threat level, which is currently at “medium” or “realistic possibility.”

Article content

In an interview, foreign interference and national security specialist Jean-Christophe Boucher said no matter the decision, he expects the outcome of the decision to be “instrumentalized” by groups on either side of the issue.