UN Review Finds Canada Falling Short on Fundamental Rights Protections
March 27, 2026
Justice For All Canada welcomes the U.N. Human Rights Committee’s Concluding Report as part of its 7th periodic review of Canada’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Committee expressed concern with several issues regarding human rights in Canada. Justice For All Canada and Canadian Lawyers for Human Rights (CLAIHR) had drawn attention to some of these issues in our joint submission to the Committee. We raised other issues during the periodic review process in Geneva, as well as communications with Committee Members during and after our attendance in Geneva. Below we highlight four of the topics Justice For All Canada and other NGOs had raised in this entire engagement with the Committee, and which the Committee has highlighted in its Concluding Report.
1) Freedom of Expression and Assembly - The Committee expressed concern with reports of restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly in Canada, including the removal of protestors in encampments on university campuses. The Committee noted the potential chilling effect on advocacy in this context, and called on Canada to “take all measures necessary to guarantee that everyone can exercise the right to freedom of expression (p.12)” in accordance with the ICCPR.
2) Surveillance of Palestinian Human Rights Defenders - The Committee said it was concerned regarding reports of Canada’s increase of surveillance for “broadly defined ‘national security’ purposes (p.7),” including against individuals who advocate for Palestinian human rights. The Committee called on Canada to ensure that its surveillance activities “fully comply (p.7)” with the ICCPR.
3) Bill C-9 - In the context of freedom of assembly, the Committee showed concern with Bill C-9’s new prohibitions of “intimidation” or “obstruction” near community locations (such as religious buildings). The Committee also expressed concern with Bill C-9’s new prohibition of displaying terrorism and hate symbols as a “potential instrumentalization of a vague definition of what constitutes a terrorist symbol and its possible misuse to silence dissenting activism (p.7).” The Committee called on Canada to guarantee freedom of expression and assembly rights under the ICCPR and to “refrain from adopting broad or vague definitions of 'national security' or 'counterterrorism' as grounds for restricting rights (p.7).”
4) Quebec’s Religious Symbol/Prayer Bans - The Committee said it was concerned with Quebec’s Bill 21, which reportedly:
perpetuates discrimination by disproportionately targeting religious minorities, particularly Muslim women who wear the hijab, by prohibiting public employees in positions of authority from wearing visible religious symbols while performing their duties, resulting in barriers to employment and career advancement (p.12).
The Committee also expressed concern with Quebec’s Bill 94 that restricts religious practices (including prayer in schools), as well as Quebec’s proposed Bill 9 that would further shrink religious freedoms in Quebec society (such as the ability to pray in public spaces), which can “intensify the discriminatory effects associated with Bill 21 (p.12).” The Committee issued a strong recommendation in this regard, calling for individuals not to be “unduly penalized (p.12)” for exercising freedom of religion or belief and that Canada “should consider revising all relevant laws and practices, including Bills, 21, 94 and 9, with a view to removing any restriction that exceed the narrow limitations permitted under article 18 of the [ICCPR] (p.12).” It is also worth noting that for all three of these Bills (21, 94 and the proposed 9), Quebec has pre-emptively invoked the “Notwithstanding Clause,” which is a unique constitutional override in Canada that allows the government to override certain rights and freedoms. The Committee showed concern about this practice “derogating from fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter and shielding legislation from substantive judicial review (p.2).”
Finally, we welcome the Committee’s expression of concern regarding another important issue advocated for by our partner NGOs. Notably, the Committee showed concern regarding Canadian arms flowing to conflict zones “where they may have been used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law (p.8).” The Committee called on Canada to take greater efforts to “mitigate the adverse human rights impacts of arms transfers and exports (p.8),” including via indirect transfers through other countries, and to prosecute/punish those who engaged in unlawful arms transfers.
The Committee’s statements and recommendations reveal a disquieting situation in Canada. In light of the foregoing, Justice For All Canada calls on the Canadian government to heed the concerns of the Committee and meaningfully implement its recommendations, lest Canada violate its international obligations under the ICCPR. We take solace in the fact that there is a chance the communities we advocated for can obtain justice and change on the basis of international law. We stand ready to work with our partners in the Canadian government to see this change come to fruition.
Justice For All Canada welcomes the U.N. Human Rights Committee’s Concluding Report as part of its 7th periodic review of Canada’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Committee expressed concern with several issues regarding human rights in Canada. Justice For All Canada and Canadian Lawyers for Human Rights (CLAIHR) had drawn attention to some of these issues in our joint submission to the Committee. We raised other issues during the periodic review process in Geneva, as well as communications with Committee Members during and after our attendance in Geneva. Below we highlight four of the topics Justice For All Canada and other NGOs had raised in this entire engagement with the Committee, and which the Committee has highlighted in its Concluding Report.
1) Freedom of Expression and Assembly - The Committee expressed concern with reports of restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly in Canada, including the removal of protestors in encampments on university campuses. The Committee noted the potential chilling effect on advocacy in this context, and called on Canada to “take all measures necessary to guarantee that everyone can exercise the right to freedom of expression (p.12)” in accordance with the ICCPR.
2) Surveillance of Palestinian Human Rights Defenders - The Committee said it was concerned regarding reports of Canada’s increase of surveillance for “broadly defined ‘national security’ purposes (p.7),” including against individuals who advocate for Palestinian human rights. The Committee called on Canada to ensure that its surveillance activities “fully comply (p.7)” with the ICCPR.
3) Bill C-9 - In the context of freedom of assembly, the Committee showed concern with Bill C-9’s new prohibitions of “intimidation” or “obstruction” near community locations (such as religious buildings). The Committee also expressed concern with Bill C-9’s new prohibition of displaying terrorism and hate symbols as a “potential instrumentalization of a vague definition of what constitutes a terrorist symbol and its possible misuse to silence dissenting activism (p.7).” The Committee called on Canada to guarantee freedom of expression and assembly rights under the ICCPR and to “refrain from adopting broad or vague definitions of 'national security' or 'counterterrorism' as grounds for restricting rights (p.7).”
4) Quebec’s Religious Symbol/Prayer Bans - The Committee said it was concerned with Quebec’s Bill 21, which reportedly:
perpetuates discrimination by disproportionately targeting religious minorities, particularly Muslim women who wear the hijab, by prohibiting public employees in positions of authority from wearing visible religious symbols while performing their duties, resulting in barriers to employment and career advancement (p.12).
The Committee also expressed concern with Quebec’s Bill 94 that restricts religious practices (including prayer in schools), as well as Quebec’s proposed Bill 9 that would further shrink religious freedoms in Quebec society (such as the ability to pray in public spaces), which can “intensify the discriminatory effects associated with Bill 21 (p.12).” The Committee issued a strong recommendation in this regard, calling for individuals not to be “unduly penalized (p.12)” for exercising freedom of religion or belief and that Canada “should consider revising all relevant laws and practices, including Bills, 21, 94 and 9, with a view to removing any restriction that exceed the narrow limitations permitted under article 18 of the [ICCPR] (p.12).” It is also worth noting that for all three of these Bills (21, 94 and the proposed 9), Quebec has pre-emptively invoked the “Notwithstanding Clause,” which is a unique constitutional override in Canada that allows the government to override certain rights and freedoms. The Committee showed concern about this practice “derogating from fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter and shielding legislation from substantive judicial review (p.2).”
Finally, we welcome the Committee’s expression of concern regarding another important issue advocated for by our partner NGOs. Notably, the Committee showed concern regarding Canadian arms flowing to conflict zones “where they may have been used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law (p.8).” The Committee called on Canada to take greater efforts to “mitigate the adverse human rights impacts of arms transfers and exports (p.8),” including via indirect transfers through other countries, and to prosecute/punish those who engaged in unlawful arms transfers.
The Committee’s statements and recommendations reveal a disquieting situation in Canada. In light of the foregoing, Justice For All Canada calls on the Canadian government to heed the concerns of the Committee and meaningfully implement its recommendations, lest Canada violate its international obligations under the ICCPR. We take solace in the fact that there is a chance the communities we advocated for can obtain justice and change on the basis of international law. We stand ready to work with our partners in the Canadian government to see this change come to fruition.