Nothing against Lizzy II, but how exactly is she still relevant in the process of becoming a Canadian citizen?
Haven’t we been royally removed long enough now? We’ve been our own dominion since 1867, held our own in two World Wars, and have our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
What more do we need to be released from the monarch’s grip?
Well, last week the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear a challenge that would see the pledge of allegiance to the Queen removed from the citizenship oath.
For the born and bred Canadians in the dark, here’s the deal: a provision in the Citizen Act requires those seeking Canadian citizenship to swear to be “faithful and bear true allegiance to Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, her heirs and successors.”
But it means nothing (obviously). It’s purely a symbolic nod – and one some potential new Canadians aren’t happy about.
Understandably, isn’t this setting the wrong tone for new Canadians, as they surely scratch their heads and question the relevance of the oath? Even worse, pledging allegiance to the monarchy goes against the religion and values of some.
The Supreme Court challenge came from three permanent residents of the country who want to obtain citizenship, but refuse to pledge allegiance to the monarchy.
The federal government maintained its position that taking the oath has been around since Confederation.
But isn’t that all the more reason for change? Aren’t we a country of change?
Either way, in its ruling, the Ontario Court of Appeal said that the Queen remains Canada’s head of state, and called the oath a “symbolic commitment to be governed as a democratic constitutional monarchy unless and until democratically changed.”
Well, we think it’s about time that happened.
Cover photo from: inextlive.jagran.com