| I understand
that you addressed the Canadian Bar Association's Conference on the
Act of Settlement 1701 on May 9-11 in Vancouver. The conference was
billed as a 'celebration' of the 300 year old Act which provided for
the independence of the judiciary. That is one side of the Act. But
the focus should also be on the ugly side of an Act, which
institutionalized bigotry.
The 300-year-old Act spells out in
clear language that no Roman Catholic or anyone married to a Roman
Catholic can be head of state. Since the Act decides who shall be
monarch in England and by law that monarch also is our head of
state, it is a blatant insult to the 42% of Canadians who are Roman
Catholics.
For the past ten years and the latter
part of my political life as a councillor in the City of Toronto,
the existence of such a legal document gnawed at my conscience. I
found it hard to believe that a young country such as Canada would
still carry the inherited shackles of European religious strife.
Since I was born in Ireland, I could
more easily understand the Irish Act of Settlement of 1662 as well
as explain the Penal Laws of the 17th, 18th, and 19th
centuries, to those who asked me about 'the troubles in Ireland'.
Although these laws have now disappeared, the last relic - 300 year
old Act of Settlement 1701 - is a constant reminder of the turmoil
and religious bitterness of that sad era in the British Isles. It
speaks volumes - far better than I can explain - what religious
intolerance can do to a people.
I have tried, in my own small way to
have the Act amended so that it would reflect our democratic
progress and that the very fabric of our country would not be soiled
as we entered the third millennium. Most politicians - the last
three Prime Ministers - Trudeau, Mulroney and Chretien and a few
Governor Generals have all ducked the issue. The standard answer has
been -"it is not in our jurisdiction". My colleagues in
politics, at the local level, have suggested that "I let
sleeping dogs lie". But the simple principles I hold on
equality, fair play and justice will not allow me to remain silent.
As I am not a monarchist, I have no
particular person in mind, who meets the hereditary qualifications
for head of state. But since Canada has a monarchy system, the
obvious action should be to request the British Government to amend
the Act by deleting any references to the unsuitability of a Roman
Catholics to be head of State. Indeed, the Act, in a modern
constitution, should not discriminate and should advocate the
separation of church and state. Race, gender, creed or colour should
mot be a hindrance to reach the highest office in the land. That
should not pose a difficulty for anyone to accept in a democracy. It
is, as they say - a 'no brainer'.
I respect your position as a justice
of the Supreme Court of Canada and I know of your interest in the
Act of Settlement 1701. I am therefore soliciting your guidance on
how the Act of Settlement can be changed to reflect the changes
which are required to 'modernize' the law as it applies to the
Canadian head of state.
I am enclosing some news clipping
from the UK which focus on the issue.
Yours truly,
Tony O'Donohue |