The Controversy over Religious Arbitration Tribunals in Ontario: Unspoken Identity-Based Justifications?

Abstract

Abstract This article deals with the 2002–2005 controversy over faith-based arbitration tribunals in Ontario. It seeks to contribute to the existing literature on the question by looking at new empirical sources. The analysis focuses specifically on the public discourse of social actors who opposed the creation of arbitration tribunals for Christians, Jews and Muslims. The majority of those who opposed arbitration tribunals did not formulate their position in terms of an opposition between religion and feminist values. Rather, they focused their arguments on the danger of Islam, which they perceived as an oppressive and alien religion. The controversy over religious arbitration becomes a way to claim a Western, secular and Judeo-Christian Canadian identity. From this perspective, the Ontarian controversy can be likened to European debates on Islam that have emerged over the last decade (e.g. caricatures of Muhammad in Denmark, minarets in Switzerland and the burqa ban in Belgium).