INTRODUCTION
In September 2026, a citizen challenged legislation in Quebec that would prevent a voter from voting in English in Quebec.
This legal action was brought by Mr. Geoffrey Chambers, whom Judge Sylvain Lussier describes in his ruling as being very involved in his community in many ways (translation). This is a very generous description. Geoffrey Chambers is a long-time activist for the rights of English speakers in Quebec. He was so extremist in his behaviour while he was head of the English-speaking group QCGN ( Quebec Community Group Network ) that many English-speaking community groups resigned from QCGN, complaining about his overly aggressive behaviour .
Six board members at the Quebec Community Groups Network have resigned, in the latest blow to the organization representing English-language community groups in the province. In a statement issued Tuesday, the departing board members said they "have lost confidence in the QCGN president's ability to reform a leadership style that has so alienated numerous members that their entire boards have voted to resign." Geoffrey Chambers has led the organization since June 2018. Five of the six resigning board members are from organizations that have already withdrawn from the QCGN. They are: Mary Ellen Beaulieu of the North Shore Community Association; Cheryl Henry-Leggo of Vision Gaspé-Percé Now; Sharleen Sullivan, of Neighbors Regional Association of Rouyn-Noranda; Edward Sweeney, of Voice of English Quebec (Quebec City); and Guy Rodgers, of the provincewide English-Language Arts Network. The sixth person to resign is Christopher Neal, who does not represent a specific organization. More than 10 organizations have broken off from the QCGN in recent weeks, with many taking issue with what they view as an overly aggressive approach to relations with the CAQ government . See QCGN board members resign, take aim at president's leadership style .
This is not someone you would spontaneously invite to a happy hour with friends.
Judge Sylvain Lussier, in a judgment rendered on an emergency basis after only a few days of deliberation, ruled in his favour.
The decision is a direct, frontal attack on the status of French as the sole official language in Quebec; see section 1 of the Charter of the French Language. The Attorney General cannot let such a decision stand. He must challenge it.
THE LUSSIER JUDGMENT: A SUMMARY
The judge describes the dispute as concerning the right of English-speaking Quebecers to receive information about Quebec general elections in English. In reality, it applies to all voters.
The judge grants Mr. Chambers' request, suspends the application of the relevant paragraph of the Charter of the French Language to the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec, and declares:
The Court is of the opinion, at this stage of the proceedings, that the right to information necessary for the exercise of the right to vote, established as a fundamental right by section 3 of the Canadian Charter, includes the right of the English-speaking community to receive this information in English . (translation)
The Lussier Judgment: An Obvious Truth?
The judge declares that the merits of the request are evident:
ASKED AND ANSWERED WITHOUT CITING A SINGLE DECISION: Is it in the public interest to urgently deprive the English-speaking Quebec community of the right it has always enjoyed to receive electoral information in English? To ask the question is to answer it . (translation)
However, one may wonder whether the judgment, which cites no precedent examining language rights in the context of elections, is sufficiently respectful of the relevant legal texts, electoral practice elsewhere, and the history of our country.
Here are some reasons why this question needs to be asked.
The Lussier Judgment and Official Languages
The ruling states that the status of French is not restricted by the permission to inform English-speaking voters in their language . (translation)
However, the law is clear: French is the only official language in Quebec:
French is the official language of Québec. Only French has that status.
Recently, Mr. Charles Milliard , leader of the Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ), learned the hard way how important the uniqueness of French as an official language is to Quebecers. There are 200 languages spoken in Canada; see here . The status of a language as the sole official language is obviously limited if we start granting privileges associated with an official language to one or more of these 200 other languages. It's self-evident.
And official language status is always important, but particularly important in an electoral context.
According to the Library of the Parliament of Canada:
Official” status requires the government to communicate with citizens and provide them with services in that language. ... He cites the Gendron Commission to the effect that To speak of an Official Language means no more and no less than that the public authority – the State – has seen fit, in either constitutional or statutory form (usually the former), to place its power behind one or more languages as the public language or languages of the State.5. ... and cites the Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute (OLBI) at the University of Ottawa that an “official language” is the language in which a government decides it will operate and, as indicated by the OLBI, recognizing a language as official in a legal document usually bestows language rights on citizens.6
And according to Elections Canada:
Most countries provide ballot papers only in their official languages, and in the majority of countries there is only one official language .
The Lussier Judgment and the Commissioner of Official Languages
The Commissioner of Official Languages bases the right to vote in English or French in federal elections on the application of the Official Languages Act to elections. This application is not accepted by everyone:
The Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada and the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada have a different interpretation of sections 24(2) and 24(3)(b) of the Official Languages Act (the Act)... In a 2019 audit follow-up report, the Commissioner of Official Languages explained this difference in interpretation . According to the Commissioner, polling stations report directly to the Chief Electoral Officer. As a result, voters have the right to receive bilingual services at all polling stations across the country. For its part, Elections Canada is of the opinion that the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer and the offices of returning officers (ROs) – who are responsible for polling stations, among other matters – are separate entities. They are, therefore, subject to the Act in different ways . See Hillnotes.ca
However, despite differences in its application, the Commissioner is of the opinion that the Official Languages Act is the basis for language rights during election periods:
During an election period, we work closely with Elections Canada every day to resolve infringements of the Official Languages Act. Commissioner of Official Languages.
In this context, it is difficult to understand why the judgment ignored Article 1 of the Charter of the French Language.
The Lussier Judgment and the Constitution
The judgment cites section 3 of the Canadian Charter and section 133 of the Constitution of 1867.
3- Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.
133 Either the English or the French Language may be used by any Person in the Debates of the Houses of the Parliament of Canada and of the Houses of the Legislature of Quebec; and both those Languages shall be used in the respective Records and Journals of those Houses; and either of those Languages may be used by any Person or in any Pleading or Process in or issuing from any Court of Canada established under this Act, and in or from all or any of the Courts of Quebec. The Acts of the Parliament of Canada and of the Legislature of Quebec shall be printed and published in both those Languages .
But the ruling cites no precedent applying these articles in an electoral context. As we have seen, the Commissioner of Official Languages makes no connection between these articles and elections. When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau chose to answer questions in English only in French during a cross-Canada tour, complaints were filed, not under sections 3 and 133, but under the Official Languages Act.
Formal complaints have been filed against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with the Commissioner of Official Languages for refusing to speak English to an anglophone Quebec Tuesday in Sherbrooke....at a town hall held at Sherbrooke's armory, where Trudeau — holding a town hall style meeting as part of his national listening tour — refused to answer half a dozen questions in English...“Thank you for using our country's two official languages,” Trudeau replied in French to Judy Ross who asked about health services. “But since we're in Quebec, I'll respond in French.”..On Wednesday Trudeau at first defended his behavior saying he answered a question asked in French in English in Ontario at the start of his tour. “I will always defend official bilingualism,” he said. “I believe deeply in it, but I understand the importance of speaking French and defending the French language in Quebec. ” The Gazette .
In summary, the judgment invokes article 3, but acknowledges that this article does not deal with language at all; and article 133 does not deal with the holding of elections.
The Lussier Judgment and History
What was the right to ballot papers in French or English in 1867?
a) In 1867, there were no ballot papers:
Until 1874, all voters had to announce their vote publicly. Unscrupulous candidates could snatch potential voters with alcohol, or hire a gang of bullies to protect their supporters while scaring off his opponent's voters. This combination of gangs and drunkenness meant that violence at polling stations was commonplace, and at least 20 people died in 20 different election riots before 1867.5 No one knows how many more were injured. In 1874, Canada introduced the secret ballot, so that people now voted privately . A History of the Vote in Canada .
b) according to AI research , at the time of Confederation, it was not possible to vote in French in the provinces of Ontario, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
c) The father of confederation and our first Prime Minister, John A. Macdonald, considered voting a privilege, not a right.
There is no inalienable right in any man to exercise the franchise . John A. Macdonald in Parliament in 1865, arguing that voting is not a right, but a privilege. [12]. A History of the Vote in Canada .
The judgment is not based on the country's history.
The Lussier Judgment and Francophones outside Quebec
The ruling states that the vast majority of Acadians, Franco-Ontarians, and Franco-Manitobans receive information in both languages during provincial elections.
But the judgment does not examine whether this is a practice versus a legal obligation and ignores other provinces. And as we have seen, historically this right did not exist.
Et même aujourd’hui voter en francais est difficile: Malgré les obligations d’Élections Canada en matière de langues officielles, voter en français s’est avéré difficile dans bon nombre de bureaux de scrutin....Le président de la Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada (FCFA), Jean Johnson, l’a lui-même vécu dans sa circonscription, en Alberta. En entrevue à Y a pas deux matins pareils, il explique qu’il a voulu voter le jour du scrutin afin de voir s’il y avait des services en français. Il s’est heurté à des Bonjour ! Sorry, I don’t speak French. FCFA.
The Lussier Judgment and the Decline of French
French is in decline in Canada AND in Quebec… The House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages recommended in May 2023 that this decline be formally recognized.
That the Government of Canada formally recognize that French is in decline in Canada
and in Quebec, particularly in urban areas including the metropolitan region of Montreal
and that it take steps to reverse this alarming trend.House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages, 2023.
Why this recognition? Among other reasons, because too many English speakers lack the motivation to learn and use French:
I've been able to live in Montreal (for 14 years) without speaking French, and I think that's a testament to the city of Montreal . Michael Rousseau, Air Canada, 2021.
Exercising the right to vote in French is an opportunity to participate, with other citizens, in an important activity in French. It is part of integrating into the Quebec nation, recognizing French as an official language, and creates a motivation to learn French.
7. All Quebecers, including imigrants, are expected to
(1) recognize that French, Québec’s official language and common language, lies at the heart of the common culture;
(2) learn the French language if they do not master it, and contribute to its unifying role; ; Act respecting integration into the Quebec nation.
And voting in French is not difficult:
To be fair… you don't really need any language to vote You get a piece of paper and you stick an X in a circle It's not a complicated process . A blogger on X.
The judgment reduces the motivation to learn French.
The judgment also goes against one of the objectives of the Official Languages Act which recognizes the need to advance the existence of a majority-French society in a Quebec where the future of French is assured ; Bill C-13 ( An Act for the substantive equality of Canada's official languages).
CONCLUSION
The right to vote in a particular language depends on its classification as an official language. The ruling completely missed the point. On the contrary, it grants English a status it does not have in Quebec, and undermines the motivation to learn it.
Appeal Court Justice Patrick Healy refused to hear an appeal of Justice Lussier's interim ruling. The government must return to the lower court to insist on hearing Mr. Chambers' original application on its merits in a non-urgent context, in order to challenge it.
Marc Ryan
Author