Irish Canadian must salute the Queen

[stephenite]

From todays examiner

23 January 2008

Army captain must salute queen, court rules

By Conor Ryan
AN IRISH language campaigner has lost his battle to avoid the "institutional harassment" of a Canadian army pledge, which requires him to toast and salute Queen Elizabeth II.


Captain Aralt Mac Giolla Chainnigh objects to the Canadian army's tradition to toast the British monarch and occasionally salute the song God Save the Queen.

The army captain had taken his grievances to Canada's Federal Court, the equivalent of the Irish High Court, and Mr Justice Robert Barnes published its ruling on Monday.

Mr Justice Barnes said although Canadians were free to hold their own views on the queen, army officers had to pay her respect.

"The queen is, of course, Canada's constitutional head of state and commander-in-chief.

"It cannot be seriously disputed that she is legally at the pinnacle of the Canadian Forces hierarchy, albeit in an emblematic role.

"The obligation of members of the Canadian Forces to display respect to one another and loyalty to their commanders is critical to the maintenance of good order," he said.

Mr Justice Barnes said Captain Mac Giolla Chainnigh's anti-monarchist views were always respected since he joined the army in 1975 at the age of 16. However, to ignoreofficial toasts and salutes would constitute a display of rudeness and disrespect, he said.

The army captain is a leading member of the Canadian Irish language movement, which last year opened the first overseas' Gaeltacht — assisted by a €20,000 grant from ex-Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs Minister, Éamon Ó Cuív.

The captain applied for a judicial review after an internal grievances panel refused to excuse him from salutes to the queen on the grounds of "institutional harassment".

He said his issues were not with Elizabeth Windsor herself but rather her status as the symbolic Canadian head of state.

"I recognise loyalty to the people of Canada alone. I cannot in good faith toast her as the queen of Canada. In doing so I would be implicitly declaring the truth of a premise that I believe to be false," he said.

The court ruled against him and said that the situation was "constitutionally entrenched" and Capt Mac Giolla Chainnigh would have to respect that.

UNLIKE Ireland, Canada has never moved to detach itself from the apron strings of the British monarchy.

In 1926 it joined 15 other Commonwealth countries to sign the Balfour Declaration to gain equality with Britain under the one crown. Canadian law refers to a monarch but it stipulates that at all times this person must be the same as the king or queen of the United Kingdom.

And so while we made our burst for independence Canada remained part of the British Empire and today Queen Elizabeth II is its head of state and commander-in-chief.

She or her representative in Canada, the Governor General Michaëlle Jean, carries out duties on behalf of the "queen of Canada".

In 1982 Canada voted for constitutional independence but retained the queen as its figurehead.

At the turn of the millennium the Canadian parliament considered making a clean break but the public were overwhelmingly against such a move.

Queen Elizabeth II reigns over Canada's 10 provinces and three territories under her official title: "Elizabeth the Second, by the grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada and her other realms and territories queen, head of the commonwealth, defender of the faith

[Gabriel_Hurl]

when I go for citizenship - lizzie will not be mentioned

[stephenite]

when I go for citizenship - lizzie will not be mentioned

Same, if I go for citizenship.

[Zapatista]

Time to get the submarines out!

[thejuice]

Wouldnt be the first war we've had against Canada, eh!

[Donagh]

We wouldn't expect a Muslim or Jew to swear an oath on the Bible, so why should a republican not be excused from toasting a heredity monarch.

[Gnevin]

We wouldn't expect a Muslim or Jew to swear an oath on the Bible, so why should a republican not be excused from toasting a heredity monarch.

As you heard in so many chessey army films , you must respect the chain o command and she is on the top in Canada .

Sure he can always just do a dev on it.

Muslims and Jew's  have their equivalent holy text. Would an non believer be allow swear on the Constitution?


Lads is Lizzie not mentioned in the citizenship oath or will you be ignoring that part?

[stephenite]

Lads is Lizzie not mentioned in the citizenship oath or will you be ignoring that part?

Not in Australia - it's a few years away for me if I decide to go for it, a mate from Belfast got his last year and there was nothing about the Royal family mentioned

[Jim_Murphy_74]

We wouldn't expect a Muslim or Jew to swear an oath on the Bible, so why should a republican not be excused from toasting a heredity monarch.

Probably because religious rights/views tend to be enshrine in rights legislation to a greater degree than political views.

If the guy is such a conscientious republican he might be better off not joining the army of a state that has a monarch as it's head.

/Jim.

[Donagh]

Maybe he didn't know about it before he joined Jim. He's not asking that the toast is ended but simply that he should not be subjected to it. Quite a reasonable request in this day and age, especially for a person who has given  over thirty years service to his country. 

[Gnevin]

Maybe he didn't know about it before he joined Jim. He's not asking that the toast is ended but simply that he should not be subjected to it. Quite a reasonable request in this day and age, especially for a person who has given  over thirty years service to his country. 

And if I've a problem with my C/O can I refuse to salute him/her ?

This is the issue here any ruling here set a president which could break down the chain of command in the army. Why can't he just do a dev?

[Donagh]

No she is not an officer commanding, she is a titular head by virtue of her birth into a discriminatory royal family of another country. There is no question of a break down in command structures. This issue is about adhering to an ridiculous outdated tradition that should have been scrapped years ago. Just another example of the old establishment classes clinging onto a bygone age and well done to Captain Mac Giolla Chainnigh for highlighting it. Why can't he do a Dev? He shouldn't have to.

[Hardy]

Sure if he crosses his fingers behind his back it doesn't count.

[nifan]

I find the whole thing ludicrous. Having a royal family is bad enough, but having a what - 70 year old - woman as the head (albeit symbolic) of the army and making people pledge allegience is ridiculous.

Royal families should be a think of the past, but pledges/oaths to them should be gone even moreso - any pledge should be to the country and the people you are joining to defend.

[Gnevin]

No she is not an officer commanding, she is a titular head by virtue of her birth into a discriminatory royal family of another country. There is no question of a break down in command structures. This issue is about adhering to an ridiculous outdated tradition that should have been scrapped years ago. Just another example of the old establishment classes clinging onto a bygone age and well done to Captain Mac Giolla Chainnigh for highlighting it. Why can't he do a Dev? He shouldn't have to.

"And so while we made our burst for independence Canada remained part of the British Empire and today Queen Elizabeth II is its head of state and commander-in-chief."

I'm no lawyer but I would believe that if you set the precedent that you can ''disrespect'' the Commander in chief due to personal beliefs then anyone can use that excuse when they are pissed with their C/O and thus Chain of command breaks down