The Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony are a Christian sect who believe that the Second Commandment prohibits them from having their photographs voluntarily taken. They also believe in communal living. All property and assets are owned and managed by the Colony. Although the Hutterian Brethren live in community, they are required to engaged with the outside world for medical appointments, to conduct banking and to sell their crops and other goods. Since 1974, Alberta driver’s licenses have borne photographs but the Alberta government has permitted individuals to have a driver’s license with no photo if the holder objected to having their photograph taken for religious reasons.
In 2003, the Alberta government revoked the exception to having a photo-license. The Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony objected. The Alberta government admitted that requiring a photograph of the license bearer constituted a violation of the members of the Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony’s right to religious freedom, but argued that the violation was necessary to prevent identity theft and could be saved under section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony were successful before the Court of Queen’s Bench and the Alberta Court of Appeal. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada and Christian Legal Fellowship intervened before the Supreme Court of Canada and presented arguments in favour of religious freedom. Particularly, the EFC and CLF argued that religious freedom was not limited to the individual, but that it has communal and collective aspects to it and therefore extends to the Colony. EFC and CLF argued that although only 15 members of the Colony held driver’s licenses, the photo-requirement violated the freedom of religion of all members of the Colony. Without the 15 members who held a license, the remaining 127 members could not live in community as required by their faith.
The Supreme Court’s decision was split 4 to 3. Chief Justice McLachlin, writing for the majority, allowed the appeal and found that the violation was justified under section 1 of the Charter. In the majority’s reasons, as well as in the two dissenting reasons, the Court acknowledged and agreed that freedom of religion was not limited to the individual, but that it also has a collective component.
Click here for the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada and Christian Legal Fellowship’s factum.
Click here for the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision.