ÿWPC# ù‡í3î(Þr0Ž‘ +È…ÙøÀ¿;Ú&ÆqÞr ¿}ת. îÓ6®‹OT5ã°{%aížgìíÇrEOò*ÏÝ–ñ­ÌÖíRØ3}qkf’ÅZ]Ÿ«q%•WÌÂãË£ÏyPæÁÆÊ„@<2_OXŒö¡ÅM»)¯Qkž”]·ôškøÀ>˜ZÕý8Ž êû¼yZLaß+çÎõÐç± çtam1ÎÑ ®ùÓëu"ÿç«àÖ†ÈÅ6`ŸÆÉ¬EWó´”´RiŠÎ¢°ùpóÊ Dº—ÍGpªÒg:„ÐðñQõEà‡]H™^¡gZšÐV߸SãO&ó¬·4ª"Ý-4 P°„h19­‘&’$\lƒt•ÀrÅÃ1p^¢—¤µ éh1mðI\Hè'ᣛË-hMýW…wŸ VÁõ⪌Ed†º’Quz¯7m*ôtm<>‘ºœ­æzòÊùµ_£û˜¶Ì(™#…hAwý¨VÙŸ‘Dåóß&I%‹A$ñø!6) Õë*ûaÓÌÜk«%¯2žæ2`¬å¨É4팮”'Ç_Ÿo8‰ÔU&Ë„ % Ü-š3¸äqZ#!ìUN  %[ 0:a^ ›w4§4Ûïþ m E 1‡ 72  0cÒ 0w5 0Ь 0 6 0´Ö 0ÇŠ 0ÛQ 0ï, 0D 1u_ 72ÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔÔ B˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PSÈÚØÚÚØÈÚ0&Öd9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(ûœ$¡¡ÔUKUS.,Ôav;)Æ ‚ £ D DDDDDas()da5.wp3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀhzbCEIMQUY]aAutoList1        i)1)a)  (;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(Oé;$µµà0  àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à(b·¤$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xir$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒÜ$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(ŸF$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³Àô$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(ǵ{$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à(F$ïïà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àà0p(#(#àÔ2#ÔÙ ÙÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÙ Ù)Ô3  Ôà0Èp(#p(#àÙ Ù3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i) dÝ ƒûœ!ÝÔUKUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEÐ ° ÐÌòòÔ_ÔBallantyneÔ_Ô,€Davidson€and€McIntyre€v.€CanadaóóÐ ˆØ ÐÌCommunications€Nos.€359/1989€and€385/1989€1/ÌÌ11€April€1991ÌÌÔ_ÔCCPRÔ_Ô/C/41/D/359/1989€and€385/1989*ÌÌÌADMISSIBILITYó óÐ Ô$  ÐÌÌòòòòSubmitted€byóó:€€John€Ô_ÔBallantyneÔ_Ô,€Elizabeth€Davidson€and€Gordon€McIntyreÐ ˜è  ÐÌòòAlleged€Victimsóó:€€The€authorsÐ pÀ ÐÌòòState€party€concernedóó:€€CanadaòòÐ H˜ ÐÌDate€of€communicationsóó:€10€April€1989€and€21€November€1989€(date€of€initial€letters)Ð  p ÐÌòòDocumentation€referencesóó:€€Prior€decisions€„€Special€Rapporteurððs€rule€91€decisions,Ð øH Ðtransmitted€to€the€State€party€on€26€May€1989€and€29€January€1990€respectively€(not€issued€inÏdocument€form);Ì„€Ô_ÔCCPRÔ_Ô/C/40?D/359/1989€and€385/1989€(decision€to€join)ÌÌòòDate€of€present€decisionóó:€€11€April€1991óóÐ ”ä ÐÌÌòòÓ  Óò òDecision€on€admissibilityóóó óÐ X ¨ ÐÓgÓÌÌÓ  Ó1.€€The€authors€of€the€communications€(initial€submissions€dated€10€April€1989€and€21€NovemberÏ1989€and€subsequent€correspondence)€are€John€Ô_ÔBallantyneÔ_Ô,€Elizabeth€Davidson€and€GordonÏMcIntyre,€Canadian€citizens€residing€in€the€Province€of€Quebec.€€The€authors,€one€a€painter,€theÏsecond€a€designer€and€the€third€an€undertaker€by€profession,€have€their€businesses€in€Sutton€andÏHuntington,€Quebec.€€Their€mother€tongue€is€English,€as€is€that€of€many€of€their€clients.€€They€allegeÏto€be€victims€of€violations€of€articles€2,€19,€26€and€27€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€andÏPolitical€Rights€by€the€Federal€Government€of€Canada€and€by€the€Province€of€Quebec,€because€theyÏare€forbidden€to€use€English€for€purposes€of€advertising,€e.g.,€on€commercial€signs€outside€theÏbusiness€premises,€or€in€the€name€of€the€firm.ÌÌòòThe€facts€as€submitted€by€the€authorsóóÐ T,¤'+ ÐÐ @-(, Ð2.1€€The€authors€of€the€first€communication€(No.€359/1989),€Mr.€Ô_ÔBallantyneÔ_Ô€and€Ms.€Davidson,€sellÏclothes€and€paintings€to€a€predominantly€English„speaking€clientele,€and€have€always€used€EnglishÏsigns€to€attract€customers.ÌÌ2.2€€The€author€of€the€second€communication€(No.€385/1989),€Mr.€McIntyre,€states€that€in€July€1988,Ïhe€received€notice€from€the€Commissioner„Enquirer€of€the€ð ðCommission€de€protection€de€la€langueÏÔ_Ôfran aiseÔ_Ôðð€that€following€a€ð ðcheck„upðð€it€had€been€ascertained€that€he€had€installed€a€sign€carryingÏthe€firm€name€ð ðKelly€Funeral€Homeðð€on€the€grounds€of€his€establishment,€which€constituted€anÏinfraction€of€the€Charter€of€the€French€Language.€€He€was€requested€to€inform€the€CommissionerÏwithin€15€days€in€writing€of€measures€taken€to€correct€the€situation€and€to€prevent€the€recurrence€ofÏa€similar€incident.€€The€author€has€since€removed€his€company€sign.ÌÌ2.3€€Mr.€McIntyreððs€business€was€established€over€100€years€ago€and€in€the€25€years€under€hisÏmanagement€has€always€operated€without€language€constraints.€€Now€he€is€allegedly€disadvantagedÐ ¬ü  Ðòòvis„„visóó€French€speaking€competitors€who€are€allowed€to€use€their€mother€tongue€withoutÐ ˜è  Ðrestriction.€€Of€the€seven€funeral€homes€in€the€area,€his€is€the€only€one€operated€by€an€English„¼speaking€Canadian€serving€the€English„speaking€community.€€Out€of€a€total€population€of€15,600Ïin€the€town€(area)€in€question,€some€5,600€inhabitants€speak€English.€€Bill€No.€178,€however,Ïprevents€him€from€indicating€in€his€commercial€sign€in€English,€the€service€he€provides.€€The€authorÏalleges€a€loss€of€business€and€a€reduced€impact€on€passers„by,€who€no€longer€identify€his€servicesÏby€an€external€sign.ÌÌ2.4€€Mr.€McIntyre€also€claims€that€since€he€has€ð ðtaken€on€the€Governmentðð€a€certain€ð ðfear€factorððÏdiscourages€potential€clients.€€It€leads€to€hate€calls,€threats€and€ridicule€in€the€press€by€suggestionsÏthat€he€is€a€ð ðracistðð.ÌÌòòThe€complaintóóÐ ¨ø ÐÌ3.1€€The€authors€challenge€sections€1,€6€and€10€of€Bill€No.€178€enacted€by€the€ProvincialÏGovernment€of€Quebec€on€22€December€1988,€with€the€purpose€of€modifying€Bill€No.€101,€knownÏas€the€Charter€of€the€French€Language€(Ô_ÔCharteÔ_Ô€de€la€langue€Ô_Ôfran aiseÔ_Ô).€€The€òòratio€legisóó€of€Bill€No.Ð X ¨ Ð178,€as€stated€explicitly€by€the€Quebec€legislature,€was€to€override€two€judgements€rendered€by€theÏSupreme€Court€of€Canada€on€15€December€1988,€declaring€several€sections€of€the€CharterÏunconstitutional.€€The€official€explanatory€note€preceding€the€text€of€the€Charter€states€that€onlyÏFrench€may€be€used€in€public€bill„posting€and€in€commercial€advertising€outdoors.€€It€stipulates€thatÏthis€rule€shall€also€apply€inside€means€of€public€transport€and€certain€establishments,€includingÏshopping€centres.€€The€authors€claim€to€be€personally€affected€by€the€application€of€Bill€No.€178.ÌÌ3.2€€The€authors€furthermore€claim€that€the€ð ðnotwithstandingðð€clause€contained€in€section€10€of€BillÏNo.€178€overrides€the€safeguards€contained€in€the€Canadian€Charter€of€Human€Rights€and€FreedomsÏ(Canadian€Charter)€and€the€Quebec€Charter€of€Human€Rights€and€Freedoms€(Quebec€Charter).€€TheyÏpoint€out€that€section€33€of€the€Canadian€Charter,€and€its€counterpart€section€52€of€the€QuebecÏCharter,€allow€for€the€suspension€of€protection€against€human€rights€violations.ÌÌ3.3€€The€authors€claim€that€these€provisions,€whenever€applied,€violate€Canadaððs€obligations€underÐ @-(, Ðthe€Covenant,€in€particular€article€2.€€Exempting€legislation€from€compliance€with€the€provisions€ofÏthe€Canadian€or€Quebec€Charters€of€Human€Rights€and€Freedoms€effectively€denies€a€remedy€toÏcitizens€whose€rights€have€been€or€are€being€violated€by€the€legislation€thus€exempted.ÌÌòòLegislative€provisionsóóÐ `° ÐÌ4.1€€The€relevant€original€provisions€of€the€Charter€of€the€French€language€(Bill€No.€101,€Ô_ÔS.Q.Ô_Ô€1977,ÏC„5)€have€been€modified€several€times.€€In€essence,€however,€they€have€remained€substantially€theÏsame.€€In€1977,€section€58€read€as€follows:Ì€ð ðExcept€as€may€be€provided€in€this€Act€or€the€regulations€of€the€Office€de€la€langue€Ô_Ôfran aiseÔ_Ô,€signsÏand€posters€and€commercial€advertising€shall€be€solely€in€the€official€language.ððÌÌ4.2€€The€original€wording€of€section€58€was€replaced€in€1983€by€section€1€of€the€Act€to€amend€theÏCharter€of€the€French€Language€(Ô_ÔS.Q.Ô_Ô€1983,€C„56)€which€read:€Ìð ð58.€€Public€signs€and€posters€and€commercial€advertising€shall€be€solely€in€the€official€language.Ìð ðNotwithstanding€the€foregoing,€in€the€cases€and€under€the€conditions€or€circumstances€prescribedÏby€regulation€of€the€Office€de€la€langue€Ô_Ôfran aiseÔ_Ô,€public€signs€and€posters€and€commercialÏadvertising€may€be€both€in€French€and€another€language€or€solely€in€another€language...ððÌÌ4.3€€The€initial€language€legislation€was€struck€down€by€the€Supreme€Court€in€òòLa€Ô_ÔChaussureÔ_Ô€BrownððsÐ 4„ ÐInc.€et€al.€v.€the€Attorney€General€of€Quebec€(1989)€90€Ô_ÔN.R.Ô_Ô€84óó.€€Following€this,€section€58€of€theÐ  p ÐCharter€was€amended€by€section€1€of€Bill€No.€178.€€While€certain€modifications€were€made€relatingÏto€signs€and€posters€inside€business€premises,€the€compulsory€use€of€French€in€signs€and€postersÏoutside€remained.ÌÌ4.4€€Section€58€of€the€Charter,€as€modified€in€1989€by€section€1€of€Bill€No.€178,€now€reads:ÌÌð ð58.€€Public€signs€and€posters€and€commercial€advertising,€outside€or€intended€for€the€public€outside,Ïshall€be€solely€in€French.€€Similarly,€public€signs€and€posters€and€commercial€advertising€shall€beÏsolely€in€French,Ìð ð1.€€Inside€commercial€centres€and€their€access€ways,€except€inside€the€establishments€located€there;Ìð ð2.€€Inside€any€public€means€of€transport€and€its€access€ways;Ìð ð3.€€Inside€establishments€of€business€firms€contemplated€in€section€136;Ìð ð4.€€Inside€the€establishments€of€business€firms€employing€fewer€than€fifty€but€more€than€fiveÏpersons,€where€such€firms€share,€with€two€or€more€other€business€firms,€the€use€of€a€trademark,€aÏfirm€name€or€an€appellation€by€which€they€are€known€to€the€public.ððÌÌð ðThe€Government€may,€however,€by€regulation,€prescribe€the€terms€and€conditions€according€toÏwhich€public€signs€and€posters€and€public€advertising€may€be€both€in€French€and€in€anotherÏlanguage,€under€the€conditions€set€forth€in€the€second€paragraph€of€section€58.1,€inside€theÏestablishments€of€business€firms€contemplated€in€subparagraphs€3€and€4€of€the€second€paragraphðð.ÌÌð ðThe€Government€may,€in€such€regulation,€establish€categories€of€business€firms,€prescribe€termsÏand€conditions€which€vary€according€to€the€category€and€reinforce€the€conditions€set€forth€in€theÏsecond€paragraph€of€section€58.1.ððÐ @-(, Ї4.5€€Section€6€of€Bill€No.€178€modified€section€68€of€the€Charter,€which€now€reads:ÌÌð ð68.€€Except€as€otherwise€provided€in€this€section,€only€the€French€version€of€a€firm€name€may€beÏused€in€Quebec.€€A€firm€name€may€be€accompanied€with€a€version€in€another€language€for€useÏoutside.€€That€version€may€be€in€another€language€for€use€outside€of€Quebec.€€That€version€may€beÏused€together€with€the€French€version€of€the€firm€name€in€the€inscriptions€referred€to€in€section€51,Ïif€the€products€in€question€are€offered€both€in€and€outside€of€Quebecðð.ÌÌð ðIn€printed€documents,€and€in€documents€contemplated€in€section€57€if€they€are€both€in€French€andÏin€another€language,€a€version€of€the€French€firm€name€in€another€language€may€be€used€inÏconjunction€with€the€French€firm€nameðð.ÌÌð ðWhen€texts€or€documents€are€drawn€up€in€a€language€other€than€French,€the€firm€name€may€appearÏin€the€other€language€without€its€French€versionÌÌð ðOn€public€signs€and€posters€and€in€commercial€advertising,Ìð ð1.€€A€firm€name€may€be€accompanied€with€a€version€in€another€language,€if€they€are€both€in€FrenchÏand€in€another€language;Ìð ð2.€€A€firm€name€may€appear€solely€in€its€version€in€another€language,€if€they€are€solely€in€a€languageÏother€than€French.ððÌÌ4.6€€Section€10€of€Bill€No.€178€contains€a€so„called€ð ðnotwithstandingðð€clause,€which€provides€that:ÌÌð ðThe€provisions€of€section€58€and€of€the€first€paragraph€of€section€68,€brought€into€effect€underÏsections€1€and€6€respectively€of€the€present€Bill,€shall€operate€irrespective€of€the€provisions€of€sectionÏ2,€paragraph€(b),€and€section€15€of€the€Constitutional€Act€of€1982€...€and€shall€apply€notwithstandingÏarticles€3€and€10€of€the€Charter€of€Human€Rights€and€Freedoms.ððÌÌ4.7€€Another€ð ðnotwithstandingðð€provision€is€incorporated€into€section€33€of€the€Canadian€CharterÏof€Human€Rights€and€Freedoms,€which€reads:ÌÌð ð1.€€Parliament€or€the€legislature€of€a€province€may€expressly€declare€in€an€act€of€Parliament€or€ofÏthe€legislature,€as€the€case€may€be,€that€the€Act€or€a€provision€thereof€shall€operate€notwithstandingÏa€provision€included€in€section€2€or€sections€7€to€15€of€this€CharterÌÌð ð2.€€An€Act€or€a€provision€of€an€Act€in€respect€of€which€a€declaration€made€under€this€section€is€inÏeffect€shall€have€such€operation€as€it€would€have€but€for€the€provision€of€this€Charter€referred€to€inÏthe€declaration.ÌÌð ð3.€€A€declaration€made€under€subsection€(1)€shall€cease€to€have€effect€five€years€after€it€comes€intoÏforce€or€on€such€earlier€date€as€may€be€specified€in€the€declaration.ÌÌð ð4.€€Parliament€or€the€legislature€of€a€province€may€re„enact€a€declaration€made€under€subsection€(1).ÌÌð ð5.€€Subsection€(3)€applies€in€respect€of€a€re„enactment€made€under€subsection€(4).ððÐ @-(, ЇòòThe€State€partyððs€observationsóóÐ ° ÐÌ5.1€€The€communications€were€transmitted€to€the€State€party€under€rule€91€of€the€rules€of€procedureÏon€26€May€1989€and€29€January€1990.€€The€deadlines€for€observations€was€set€for€26€July€1989€andÏ29€March€1990,€respectively.€€On€several€occasions,€the€State€party€requested€an€extension€of€timeÏto€make€its€submission,€explaining€that€it€needed€more€time€as€the€issues€involved€were€factually€andÏlegally€complex€and€concerned€both€federal€and€provincial€areas€of€legislative€competence.ÌÌ5.2€€In€its€submission€of€28€December€1990,€the€State€party€objects€to€the€admissibility€of€theÏcommunications€under€article€5,€paragraph€2(b),€of€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€InternationalÏCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€€It€argues€that€domestic€remedies€have€not€been€exhausted,Ïsince€the€authors€have€made€no€attempt€to€challenge€Bill€No.€178€and€to€ð ðseek€redress€from€theÏCanadian€courts€or€other€bodies€that€may€be€competent€to€resolve€the€issue€pursuant€to€CanadianÏlawðð.ÌÌ5.3€€The€State€party€also€states€that€in€at€least€two€legal€proceedings€before€the€courts€of€Quebec,Ïlitigants€are€challenging€this€legislation.€€Ô_ÔK.N.Ô_Ô,€charged€on€30€January€1990€on€two€counts€ofÏcontravening€the€Charter€of€the€French€Language,€was€scheduled€to€appear€before€the€Court€ofÏQuebec€on€19€December€1990,€when€the€trial€date€was€to€have€been€set.€€In€another€case€pendingÏbefore€the€Court€of€Quebec,€Ô_ÔH.S.Ô_Ô€was€charged€in€June€1990€on€two€counts€of€contravening€theÏCharter€by€displaying€a€welcome€sign€outside€his€bakery€in€35€languages.€€The€respondent€wasÏscheduled€to€appear€in€court€on€28€February€1991.ÌÌ5.4€€The€State€party€further€submits€that€Quebec€law€provides€the€possibility€for€the€authors€to€testÏthe€constitutional€validity€or€application€of€Bill€No.€178€through€the€use€of€an€application€for€aÏdeclaratory€judgement€and€refers€to€national€jurisprudence€in€which€certain€provisions€of€the€CharterÏof€the€French€Language€were€declared€to€be€of€no€force€or€effect.ÌÌ5.5€€The€State€party€also€points€to€the€availability€of€the€Federal€Court€Challenges€Programme,€whichÏalleviates€the€financial€hardship€associated€with€the€conduct€of€such€litigation€and€states€that€the€legalÏissues€raised€would€be€within€the€scope€of€the€programme€and€the€authors€could,€therefore,€seekÏfunding€from€the€programme€for€the€purpose€of€contesting€the€restrictions€imposed€by€the€provincialÏlaw.ÌÌòòExhaustion€of€Domestic€RemediesóóÐ $X" ÐÌ6.1€€With€respect€to€the€requirement€of€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies,€the€authors€maintain€thatÏfollowing€the€enactment€of€Bill€No.€178€there€are€no€effective€remedies€which€they€could€pursue.€ÏThey€refer€to€the€relevant€judgements€of€the€Superior€Court€to€the€District€of€Montreal,€the€AppealÏCourt€and€the€Supreme€Court€of€Canada.ÌÌ6.2€€In€particular,€the€authors€of€the€first€communication€claim€that€because€Bill€178€applies€in€spiteÏof€Canadian€human€rights€laws€and€because€the€notwithstanding€clauses€of€the€Canadian€and€QuebecÏCharters,€when€invoked,€suspend€human€rights€as€guaranteed,€òòinter€aliaóó,€by€international€humanÐ T,¤'+ Ðrights€norms,€they€are€denied€an€effective€remedy€within€the€meaning€of€article€2,€paragraph€3,€ofÐ @-(, Ðthe€Covenant.ÌÌ6.3€€With€regard€to€steps€taken€to€assert€their€rights,€the€authors€refer€to€numerous€letters€addressedÏto€various€provincial€and€federal€authorities€by€individuals€and€lobby€groups€with€no€effect.€€As€toÏjudicial€remedies,€the€authors€explain€that€the€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€in€òòLa€Ô_ÔChaussureÔ_Ô€BrownððsÐ `° Ðet€alóó.,€which€supports€their€plea,€has€no€effect€in€view€of€the€subsequent€Quebec€legislation€whichÐ L œ Ðmakes€any€further€challenge€of€section€of€Bill€No.€178€futile.ÌÌ6.4€€As€to€the€possibility€of€initiating€proceedings€for€a€declaratory€judgement,€the€authors€contendÏthat€the€very€existence€of€the€notwithstanding€clause€renders€Bill€No.€178€immune€to€challenge.ÌÌ6.5€€The€author€of€the€second€communication€states€that€he€has€written€to€the€Prime€Minister€ofÏCanada,€the€leaders€of€the€Opposition,€members€of€the€Senate€of€Canada€and€the€premiers€of€allÏprovinces,€only€to€receive€a€number€of€replies€that€express€various€forms€of€support€and€indicate€thatÏBill€No.€178€indeed€violates€the€right€to€freedom€of€expression€and€runs€contrary€to€both€theÏCanadian€and€Quebec€Charters€of€Human€Rights.€€As€a€member€of€the€Chateauguay€Valley€EnglishÏSpeaking€Peopleððs€Association,€he€helped€to€organize€a€demonstration€in€Ottawa€and€to€circulate€aÏpetition,€which€gathered€some€10,000€signatures€and€was€subsequently€sent€to€the€Secretary„GeneralÏof€the€United€Nations.ÌÌ6.6€€In€a€case€submitted€by€other€complainants,€the€Superior€Court€held,€on€28€December€1984,€thatÏsection€58€of€the€Charter€of€the€French€Language,€in€so€far€as€it€prescribed€that€public€signs€andÏposters€and€commercial€advertising€shall€be€solely€in€French,€was€inoperative€from€1€February€1984.ÌÌ6.7€€The€Court€of€Appeal€upheld€the€judgement€and€allowed€an€appeal€declaring€Section€68€of€theÏCharter,€in€so€far€as€it€prescribed€that€only€the€French€version€of€a€firm€name€is€to€be€used,€to€beÏinoperative€from€1€January€1986€by€reason€of€the€Quebec€Charter€of€Human€Rights€and€FreedomsÏand€from€17€April€1982€by€reason€of€the€Canadian€Charter€of€Rights€and€Freedoms.ÌÌ6.8€€The€authors€argue€that€both€the€Quebec€and€federal€courts€have€thoroughly€considered€theÏimplications€of€the€challenged€provisions€and€that€they€have€found€them€in€violation€of€relevantÏconstitutional€provisions.€€The€authors€stress€that€while€recognizing€that€there€are€reasonable€limitsÏto€the€exercise€of€human€rights,€the€courts€have€held€that€the€prohibition€of€the€use€of€any€otherÏlanguage€than€French€in€commercial€signs€was€neither€an€appropriate€nor€a€justifiable€remedy€againstÏthreats€to€the€French€culture.€€In€particular,€they€found€that€the€obligation€to€use€only€French€onÏcommercial€signs€and€in€advertising€violated€the€right€of€freedom€of€expression€and€constitutedÏdiscrimination€based€on€language.ÌÌ6.9€€The€authors€argue€that€the€Supreme€Courtððs€judgement€in€the€òòLa€Ô_ÔChaussureÔ_Ô€Brownððs€et€al.óó€caseÐ ¸'#& Ðdirectly€applies€to€their€situation.€€Bill€No.€178,€however,€overrides€the€Courtððs€judgement€andÏoperates€notwithstanding€section€2(b)€(freedom€of€expression)€and€section€15€(equality)€of€theÏCanadian€Charter.€€The€authors€contend€that€it€would€be€futile€to€go€to€the€courts€in€view€of€theÏcertain€application€of€the€ð ðwithstandingðð€clauses€of€the€Canadian€or€Quebec€Charters.ÌÌ6.10€€In€addition,€the€authors€complain€that€the€Federal€Government€of€Canada€has€not€yet€used€itsÐ @-(, Ðconstitutional€authority€under€section€90€of€the€Constitution€Act,€1867,€to€disallow€or€set€aside€a€BillÏof€a€provincial€government€allowing€fundamental€human€rights€to€be€disregarded.ÌÌòòIssues€and€proceedings€before€the€CommitteeóóÐ tÄ ÐÌ7.1€€On€18€October€1990,€the€Human€Rights€Committee,€acting€through€its€Working€Group,€decided,Ïpursuant€to€rule€88,€paragraph€2,€of€its€rules€of€procedure,€to€deal€jointly€with€both€communications.ÌÌ7.2€€Before€considering€any€claims€contained€in€a€communication,€the€Human€Rights€CommitteeÏmust,€in€accordance€with€rule€87€of€its€rules€of€procedure,€decide€whether€or€not€it€is€admissibleÏunder€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€Covenant.ÌÌ7.3€€While€taking€note€of€the€State€partyððs€argument€that€the€authors€have€not€exhausted€domesticÏremedies,€the€Committee€is€unable€to€accept€the€State€partyððs€suggestion€that€there€are€effectiveÏdomestic€remedies€that€remain€available€in€the€specific€circumstances€of€these€communications.ÌÌ7.4€€The€Committee€has€noted€that€while€some€of€the€original€statutory€provisions€protecting€òòvisageÐ pÀ ÐÔ_ÔlinguistiqueÔ_Ôóó€of€Quebec€have€been€modified€several€times,€also€after€they€were€found€to€beÐ \¬ Ðunconstitutional€and€declared€inoperative€successively€by€the€Superior,€Appeal€and€Supreme€Courts,Ïthe€only€effect€this€has€had€was€that€the€relevant€provisions€were€replaced€by€ones€that€are€the€sameÏin€substance€to€the€ones€they€replaced€but€reinforced€by€the€ð ðnotwithstandingðð€clause€of€section€10Ïof€Bill€No.€178.€€The€net€result€has€been€that€there€has€been€a€continued€ban€on€the€use€of€any€otherÏlanguage€than€French€since€1978,€in€circumstances€that€are€at€issue€in€the€present€communications,Ïand€that€it€is€a€criminal€offence€to€disregard€the€ban.ÌÌ7.5€€The€State€party€contends€that€Bill€No.€178,€which€modified€certain€sections€of€the€Charter€of€theÏFrench€Language,€can€be€and€is€being€challenged€by€others€before€the€courts€in€Quebec.€€However,Ïthe€situation€is€that€certain€persons€have€been€charged€with€criminal€offences€for€violating€provisionsÏof€the€Charter€of€the€French€Language,€including€provisions€of€section€205,€which€are€not€affectedÏby€the€ð ðnotwithstandingðð€clause€in€section€10€of€Bill€No.€178.€€These€persons€raise,€in€defence,€issuesÏas€to€whether€Bill€No.€178€creates€a€civil€or€penal€liability€and€as€to€whether€a€particular€signÏinfringed€the€law.€€These€concrete€issues€are€not€before€the€Human€Rights€Committee€and€cannotÏbear€upon€whether€the€authors€of€the€communications€now€under€examination€by€the€Committee€stillÏhave€local€remedies€which€they€must€pursue.€€The€Committee€further€notes€that,€even€were€it€to€beÏheld€by€the€Quebec€courts€that€section€205€of€the€Charter€of€the€French€Language€violates€theÏCanadian€Charter€of€Rights€and€Freedoms€and€the€Quebec€Charter€of€Human€Rights€and€Freedoms,Ïthe€ð ðnotwithstandingðð€clause€still€remains€applicable€to€section€58,€which€is€the€clause€at€issue€in€theÏcommunications€that€the€Committee€has€before€it.€€The€Committee€is€unable€to€find€from€theÏsubmission€of€the€State€party,€that€an€effective€remedy€is€available€in€respect€to€this€claim.ÌÌ7.6€€The€Committee,€moreover,€is€satisfied€that€the€authors€have€made€a€reasonable€effort€toÏsubstantiate€sufficiently€their€allegations,€for€purposes€of€admissibility,€and€finds€that€theÏcommunications€should€be€examined€on€the€merits.ÌÌ7.7€€Finally,€the€Committee€is€well€aware€that€the€State€party€annexed€to€its€submission€under€ruleÐ @-(, Ð91€of€the€Committeeððs€rules€of€procedure€the€observations€made€by€the€Provincial€Government€ofÏQuebec,€which€mainly€concern€the€merits€of€the€cases€before€it.€€At€this€stage€the€Committee€must,Ïhowever,€limit€itself€to€the€procedural€requirement€of€deciding€on€the€admissibility€of€theÏcommunication.€€Should€the€State€party€wish€to€make€a€further€submission€on€the€merits€of€the€cases,Ïit€should€do€so€within€six€months€of€the€transmittal€to€it€of€the€present€decision.€€The€authors€of€theÏcommunications€will€be€given€an€opportunity€to€comment€thereon.€€If€no€further€explanations€orÏstatements€are€received€from€the€State€party€under€article€4,€paragraph€2,€of€the€Optional€Protocol,Ïthe€Committee€will€proceed€to€adopt€its€views€in€the€light€of€the€written€information€alreadyÏsubmitted.€ÌÌ8.€€The€Human€Rights€Committee€therefore€decides:ÌÌ(a)€€That€the€communications€are€admissible;ÌÌ(b)€€That€any€further€explanations€which€the€State€party€may€wish€to€submit€to€clarify€the€matter€andÏthe€measures€taken€by€it,€should,€in€accordance€with€article€4,€paragraph€2,€of€the€Optional€Protocol,Ïreach€the€Human€Rights€Committee€within€six€months€of€the€date€of€transmittal€to€it€of€this€decision.€ÏShould€the€State€party€not€intend€to€make€a€further€submission€in€the€case,€it€is€requested€to€soÏinform€the€Committee€as€soon€as€possible€to€permit€an€early€disposition€of€the€matter;ÌÌ(c)€€That€any€further€explanations€or€statements€received€from€the€State€party€shall€be€communicatedÏby€the€Secretary„General,€under€rule€93,€paragraph€3,€of€the€Committeeððs€rules€of€procedure,€to€theÏauthors,€with€the€request€that€any€comments€that€they€may€wish€to€submit€thereon€should€reach€theÏHuman€Rights€Committee€in€care€of€the€Centre€for€Human€Rights,€United€Nations€Office€at€Geneva,Ïwithin€six€weeks€of€the€date€of€transmittal;ÌÌ(d)€€That€this€decision€be€communicated€to€the€State€party€and€to€the€authors.Ìñ ñÌòòñ ññ ñÌñ ñÌÌñ ñóóñ ñññ______________ññ____________òòÐ l¼ Ðñ ñßA€Y )¹J+ŒdýAE¹J+ŒAßñ ñññÌññññà  àññ*óó/€€All€persons€handling€this€document€are€requested€to€respect€and€observe€its€confidential€nature.Ð X ¨ ÐÌññà  àññòò1óó/€€The€text€of€an€individual€opinion€by€Ms.€Christine€Ô_ÔChanetÔ_Ô€is€reproduced€in€the€appendix.Ð 0"€  ÐòòÌÌÌò òñ ñÓ  Óñ ñAppendixó óÐ à%0!$ Ðñ ñÓ]aÓñ ñÌÌIndividual€opinion€by€Christine€Ô_ÔChanetÔ_Ô€on€the€Committeeððs€decision€concerning€the€admissibilityÏof€communications€359/1989€and€385/1989óóÐ )à$( ÐÌAt€its€41òòstóó€session€the€Human€Rights€Committee€found€Communications€Nos.€359/1989€andÐ h+¸&* Ð385/1989€admissible.ÌÐ @-(, ÐFrom€my€point€of€view€this€decision€is€arguable.ÌÌWhen€the€Committee€considers€the€admissibility€of€a€communication,€it€must€consider€theÏcommunication€in€the€light€of€the€requirements€of€the€Optional€Protocol,€notably€articles€1€to€3€andÏarticle€5,€paragraph€2.ÌÌIn€order€to€make€this€point,€the€two€communications€must€be€taken€separately.ÌÌ1.€€As€regards€Communication€No.€359/1989,€the€allegations€made€by€the€authors€relate€only€to€theÏlaw€itself.€€The€authors€do€not€complain€of€any€action€against€them€by€the€administration.€ÌÌThe€question€is€thus€whether€the€authors€can€be€considered€to€be€victims€within€the€meaning€of€theÏOptional€Protocol€of€a€violation€of€any€of€the€rights€set€forth€in€the€Covenant.Ìà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àÌThe€notion€of€victim€has€gradually€been€expanded€thanks€to€decisions€by€the€Committee.€ÏNevertheless,€the€Committee€has€hitherto€refrained€from€allowing€òòÔ_ÔactioÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔpopularisÔ_Ôóó.€€On€the€contrary,Ð H˜ Ðtaking€the€same€position€as€the€Commission€and€the€European€Court€of€Human€Rights,*€theÏCommittee€stated€in€Communication€No.€35/1978,€òòÔ_ÔAumeeruddyÔ_Ô„Ô_ÔCziffraÔ_Ô€et€al€v.€Mauritiusóó,€that€ð ðnoÐ  p Ðindividual€can€in€the€abstract€by€way€of€an€òòÔ_ÔactioÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔpopularisÔ_Ôóó,€challenge€a€law€or€practice€claimed€to€beÐ  \ Ðcontrary€to€the€Covenant€[...]€if€the€law€or€practice€has€not€already€been€concretely€applied€to€theÏdetriment€of€that€individual.ðð€€In€the€same€case,€the€Committee€agreed€to€allow€a€challenge€to€theÏnational€law€provided€that€it€was€ð ðapplicable€in€such€a€way€that€the€alleged€victimððs€risk€of€beingÏaffected€[was]€more€than€a€theoretical€possibility.ððÌÌIn€the€current€case€it€should€have€been€up€to€the€authors,€in€the€absence€of€any€action€against€themÏby€the€administration,€to€show€that€the€application€of€the€law€affected€them€directly,€personally€andÏconstantly€and€was€thus€likely€to€constitute€a€violation€of€one€of€their€civil€and€political€rightsÏguaranteed€by€the€Covenant.ÌÌThe€difficulties€which€Bill€No.€178€might€pose€for€the€authors€in€their€professional€activities€inÏattracting€a€particular€kind€of€clientele€are€not,€in€my€judgement,€sufficiently€substantiated€to€justifyÏthe€finding€that€the€individuals€concerned€might,€simply€through€the€application€of€the€law,€sufferÏa€violation€by€Canada€of€any€of€the€rights€guaranteed€by€the€Covenant.ÌÌ2.€€As€regards€Communication€No.€385/1989,€the€situation€is€different€in€as€much€as€the€author€wasÏrequested€by€the€administration€to€comply€with€Bill€No.€178.€€The€beginning€of€enforcement€hereÏpermits€the€conclusion€that€the€risk€was€not€just€theoretical.€€The€basic€question€regarding€theÏadmissibility€of€this€communication€concerns€article€5,€paragraph€2,€of€the€Optional€Protocol€andÏthe€rule€on€the€exhaustion€of€domestic€remedies.€€In€order€to€answer€this€question€the€CommitteeÏshould€have€considered€not€only€the€opportunities€for€domestic€remedy,€as€it€did,€but€also€theÏlikelihood€that€the€author€of€the€communications€could€have€obtained€from€the€administration€aÏwaiver€as€authorized€by€section€58.2€of€Bill€No.€178,€which€reads:€ð ðPublic€signs€and€posters€andÐ @-(, Ðcommercial€advertising€may€be€both€in€French€and€in€another€language€or€solely€in€another€languageÏin€the€cases€and€under€the€conditions€or€circumstances€prescribed€by€òòregulationóó€of€the€Office€de€laÐ œì Ðlangue€Ô_Ôfran aiseÔ_Ô.ððÌÌWhat€regulations€has€the€Office€de€la€langue€Ô_Ôfran aiseÔ_Ô€issued€in€this€respect?€€How€are€they€applied?€ÏWho€can€benefit€from€such€a€waiver?ÌÌWhen€the€author€of€a€communication€asserts€that€the€remedies€available€in€the€State€concerned€areÏnot€effective,€it€is€up€to€the€author€to€provide€evidence€of€the€fact.ÌÌHence€it€was€not,€in€my€view,€up€to€the€State€to€demonstrate€the€effectiveness€of€the€remediesÏavailable€in€this€particular€case,€but€up€to€the€author€to€indicate€why€he€did€not€try€to€obtain€a€waiverÏfrom€the€administration€under€section€58,€paragraph€2,€of€Law€No.€178.ÌÌChristine€Ô_ÔChanetÔ_ÔÌÌññÌÌòòà  àÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà  àà  àÌÌÌÌà€(#(#K(#àÌÌÌññññ________ññññññ_______ññññññ___ññÌññà  àññ*ññóóññ/€à0  àSee€Commission€XC€Ireland€petition€No.€290/57Ð\¬(#(# Ðññà  àññà  àEuropean€Court€Ô_ÔKlassÔ_Ô€6.9.78ÌÓb€ (zbx3bÓññà  àññà  àEuropean€Court€Ô_ÔMarckxÔ_Ô€15.6.79Ìñ ñà  àñ ñà  àEuropean€Court€Ô_ÔBruggemanÔ_Ô€et€Ô_ÔStreutenÔ_Ô.