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

underlies their designation in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as“fundamental”. They are the sine qua non of the political tradition underlying theCharter.Viewed in this context, the purpose of freedom of conscience and religion becomesclear. The values that underlie our political and philosophic traditions demand thatevery individual be free to hold and to manifest whatever beliefs and opinions his or herconscience dictates, provided inter alia only that such manifestations do not injure hisor her neighbours or their parallel rights to hold and manifest beliefs and opinions oftheir own. [p. 346][128] The European Court of Human Rights espoused a similarly liberal conception offreedom of religion in Kokkinakis v. Greece, judgment of 25 May 1993, Series A no. 260-A:. . . freedom of thought, conscience and religion is one of the foundations of a“democratic society” within the meaning of the Convention. It is, in its religiousdimension, one of the most vital elements that go to make up the identity of believersand their conception of life, but it is also a precious asset for atheists, agnostics, scepticsand the unconcerned. The pluralism indissociable from a democratic society, which hasbeen dearly won over the centuries, depends on it.While religious freedom is primarily a matter of individual conscience, it alsoimplies . . . freedom to “manifest [one’s] religion”. Bearing witness in words and deedsis bound up with the existence of religious convictions.. . . freedom to manifest one’s religion is not only exercisable in community withothers, “in public” and within the circle of those whose faith one shares, but can also beasserted “alone” and “in private” . . . . [para. 31][129] In Ôahin v. Turkey [GC], No. 44774/98, ECHR 2005-XI, the European Court of HumanRights compellingly wrote:Pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness are hallmarks of a “democratic society”.Although individual interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group,democracy does not simply mean that the views of a majority must always prevail: abalance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of people fromminorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position. [para. 108]