The death of a Montreal woman last Thursday after her clothing became entangled in a subway escalator should have been a moment of sombre reflection on the fragility of human life. Instead, sensationalist francophone media coverage and the comments it unleashed online turned this tragic death into one of the darkest moments of racism and xenophobia in Quebec’s charter of values saga.
Naima Rharouity, wife and mother of two, was wearing a hijab on the day of the incident. The Journal de Montréal, among others, capitalizing on heightened sensitivities towards the garb in the current charter debate reported with no verification that Naima had been strangled by her hijab. The Journal maintained the report even after police stated the cause of death was unknown. But wearing the hijab was all it took for Naima’s death to become fair game for online commentators who, fuelled by irresponsible media coverage, hurled statements such as “This is what you get for deciding to keep it on,” “Where was Allah?” and “One less terrorist in Montreal.”
How did this woman’s sad death become the target of so much hatred? The seemingly never-ending charter of values debate has ramped up xenophobia against Quebec’s religious minorities who would be banned from wearing religious symbols in the public service if the legislation passes. But one could never have imagined the debate would sink so low. If it was another woman commentators might have expressed regard for her family and concerns about subway safety. Naima’s death, however, was overshadowed by a crude obsession over whether it was an ordinary scarf or her hijab that had caught in the escalator treads. It seems there was less sympathy to spare if her hijab was to blame.
The values of state secularism, religious neutrality, and equality between men and women have been forcefully extolled in the charter debate, but it is clear that the virtues of common decency and respectful discussion have fallen to the wayside. Quebec is seized with xenophobia.
General consultations on the proposed ban that began in January have become an opportunity to purge one’s prejudices, with once-closeted discrimination toward religious minorities now everyday fare. Last month, the Quebec National Assembly heard testimony from the Pinault-Caron family who, discussing their travel in Morocco, described how frightened they were to see Muslims praying on all fours on carpets. People like this should not be welcome in Quebec, they argued. Line Chaloux, director of an immigrant’s centre, testified that Mormons should be expelled from Quebec if found proselytizing.
One would expect such bigoted testimony to be stopped in its tracks. Instead, elected representatives encourage this commentary, nodding along and asking follow-up questions to fan the flames. Minister of Democratic Institutions Bernard Drainville, who is charged with overseeing the hearings, has even banned the word racist, saying he will not accept any charges of racism during the proceedings. The government has decided to wilfully ignore the manifest xenophobia promulgated by some parties.
But while the sort of outrageous testimony that has dominated the headlines has been by no means rare, it is not representative of the wider range of Quebec public opinion. Professors, universities and civil society organizations have provided strong testimony against the charter so far, with major unions and medical associations scheduled to speak against the ban this month.
Last Thursday, the Quebec Employers Council, representing 75,000 employers in the province, delivered a significant blow to the proposed charter testifying that it would undermine Quebec’s economy, making it less attractive to investment and workers. The Quebec Bar Association, whose written submission rebuked the ban as unconstitutional, is scheduled to speak along with other public opinion heavyweights. Drainville’s response to Quebec’s leading business, legal, medical and education bodies speaking against the charter, however, is to dismiss them as elitist and intellectual fear-mongers, pitting them against the average Quebecer whose opinions, he says, are of greater concern.
The Quebec government is legislating based on perceptions and anecdotes that peddle the politics of fear, not facts. And by absolving itself of the responsibility to ensure the charter is debated with a modicum of tolerance, the government has opened the floodgates to the kind of vitriolic commentary that followed Naima’s death.
Like the faceless woman in a hijab featured in the charter-promoting government ads plastered across Montreal’s subway stations, in the moments following her death, Naima was stripped of her humanity and reduced to nothing more than the cloth over her hair. She was a victim not only of a tragic accident, but also, posthumously, of Quebec’s deteriorating social climate. As long as the public spectacle of minority-bashing continues unabated, she will not be the last.
Humera Jabir is a law student at McGill University in Montreal.