SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Alberta v. Hutterian ...

equiring them to be photographed are, at best, marginal. Over 700,000 Albertans do not have adriver’s license and are therefore not in the province’s facial recognition database. There is noevidence that in the context of several hundred thousand unphotographed Albertans, the photos ofapproximately 250 Hutterites will have any discernable impact on the province’s ability to reduceidentity theft.[116] This means that the serious harm caused by the infringing measure weighs far moreheavily on the s. 1 scales than the benefits the province gains from its imposition on the Hutterites.The province has therefore not discharged its onus of justifying the imposition of a mandatory photorequirement on the members of the Wilson Colony.Background[117] In 1974, the Province of Alberta introduced photographs on driver’s licences. Until2003, the Registrar required photos as a general rule, but could issue a non-photo Condition CodeG licence if a person had a sincere religious objection or a temporary medical condition whichaffected their appearance. The Alberta Operator Licensing and Vehicle Control Regulation, Alta.Reg. 320/2002, under the Traffic Safety Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. T-6, governed these licences and gavethe Registrar discretion to determine whether the exemption from a photograph requirement wasjustified.[118] The Hutterites of the Wilson Colony believe that the Second Commandment, whichprohibits idolatry, prohibits them from being photographed. They also believe in communal