NAWL Intervenes before the Supreme Court in an Important Case for Women’s Equality Rights

On Thursday, May 15th, the National Association of Women and the Law, in partnership with the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights, had the honour of appearing before the Supreme Court of Canada in an important case for women’s equality rights. Attorney General of Quebec v. Bijou Cibuabua Kanyinda is about a woman in Quebec who was denied subsidized childcare because her refugee status had not been officially recognized yet.

The facts of the Case:

Ms. Kanyinda is a single mother of three, and an asylum seeker from the Democratic Republic of Congo. Upon arriving in Quebec, she applied for refugee protection. While waiting for her refugee claim to be processed, Ms. Kanyinda obtained a permit to work in Quebec and sought out childcare for her three young children. However, Ms. Kanyinda was denied access to Quebec’s subsidized childcare program, due to regulations which render asylum seekers ineligible.  Ms. Kanyinda argued that this policy infringed on the right to equality protected by s. 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

What’s at stake:

Section 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.”

The Supreme Court is being called to determine if this policy is discriminatory on the basis of sex, since it disproportionally disadvantages women, particularly single mothers, by hindering their ability to engage in paid work. This case has significant implications for economic justice for women, especially those who are racialized, migrant, single mothers with caregiving responsibilities.

NAWL’s position:

NAWL intervened jointly with the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights in this important case. We highlighted that when laws discriminate against women, that discrimination is inextricably entwined with other kinds based on race, parental or marital status, socioeconomic status, immigration status or other characteristics.

We argued that the Supreme Court should take an intersectional approach to the application of section 15(1), factoring in the whole person, and the myriad ways that discrimination under the law can intersect. Adopting an intersectional understanding of gender equality ensures that the most marginalized litigants receive the full protection of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In order to strengthen economic security and prosperity for all women in Canada, it is essential to dismantle the systemic barriers that can deepen economic inequality and injustice, and this case marks an important step towards that goal.

Acknowledgements:

The National Association of Women and the Law extends our heartfelt congratulations and gratitude to our legal team: Kerri Froc (NAWL), Cheryl Milne (David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights), and Suzanne Zaccour (NAWL). We are grateful for the support of our pro bono agents Jean-Simon Schoenholz and Debra Diepeveen (Norton Rose Fullbright). We also thank our National Steering Committee members and the Violence Against Women working group in particular: Lise Gotell, Vrinda Narain, Martha Jackman, Jennifer Koshan and Angela Lee for their invaluable expertise and contributions. Lastly, we also recognize the contributions of student interns Kabir Singh Dhillon, Bjorn Wagenpfeil and Katie Schmidt.

This work is part of our VOICE project, which focuses on advancing women’s economic security in Canada. NAWL acknowledges the financial support of Women and Gender Equality Canada.