The Impact of Pierre Foucher: Advancing French Language Rights in Canadian Schools

[LA RENCONTRE D’ONFR]

If you are today able to send your child to a French-speaking school in a minority environment or in one of the four corners of Ontario, you can certainly thank Pierre Foucher. Lawyer and professor by right for more than 40 years, he has been a shadow worker in causes involving the right of French speakers to have schools managed in their language, advising parent associations or lawyers who have argued over the years in this type of causes. Recently, around thirty colleagues of Professor Foucher launched a book in his honor, entitled Rights, languages ​​and communities and bringing together writings on various themes related to law.

You were born in Montreal and studied law there. What pushed you towards linguistic law and French-speaking minorities?

This is the school record. When I decided to teach, it was at Moncton University. There, I made contact with Acadia and then I saw the problems that people were having with their schools. They had no or very few French-speaking schools. It was bilingual and there were no school boards. My first file was educational rights and, from there, my interest came in other areas of linguistic rights.

Did you initially envisage a future in such a field?

No. Neither linguistic law nor education. It’s entirely a combination of circumstances. When I was doing my master’s degree at Queen’s University, a professor became ill and I was asked to teach the course in his place. When I left my first classroom lesson, it was like Saint Paul on the road to Damascus: an illumination to tell me: ”This is what I’m going to do”.

Some of your colleagues identify school causes affecting francophones as one of your main legacies. For what ?

After the adoption of the (Canadian) Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, I had the opportunity to travel across the country and meet parent groups, explain to them what they could do, preparation of cases, etc. And then the trials began. The first judgment to come out on this issue was in 1984 at the Ontario Court of Appeal, which began to shed some light on the subject. Then there were other cases that started in Alberta, Manitoba, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and across Canada. The first to go to the Supreme Court was the Mahé case (in Alberta). I was indirectly involved in many of these files. I didn’t litigate them, but I was an advisor or sort of a consultant to the lawyers who litigated.

You were a sort of shadow worker but, ultimately, who had an impact on the French-speaking schools that exist in the country today?

I wrote a lot at the time on these issues and the lawyers (who argued for school cases) read what I did and put it in their files and then the courts used it and mentioned what I had. writing.

Tell us about the impact of the Mahé case which went to the Supreme Court, a case in which you were indirectly involved, and which gave the right to manage schools to French speakers?

It was huge. Without Mahé, everything else would not have happened. You know, jurisprudence is like a building to which bricks are added. If your first bricks are firmly laid, then you are able to continue assembling your building.

To hear you say, you are practically a legal encyclopedia?

Ah! Well, after 40 years, we end up remembering it (laughs)! (…) But today, I am retired and I believe that we must give way to young people. It’s their turn.

How do you view linguistic law today?

We have reached a new phase. At the beginning, we had to clear the land. I remember the first chapters that I wrote on linguistic rights – at the request of Michel Bastarache in his book – there was nothing! It was the first time that we had linguistic rights in Canada, so we had to rack our brains and have imagination to create something coherent. Today, it is settled with the rules of interpretation. Now it’s more a question of fulfilling the obligations in the Charter.

When you look back on your 40-year career, what do you remember?

It was very fun ! It’s certain that linguistic rights were something. Both highlights of my career will remain the Meech Lake Accord (aborted constitutional reform project negotiated in 1987) and the reference on the secession of Quebec. The jugement. Meech, because I was asked a lot by French-speaking associations outside Quebec for three years to help them and I put my body and soul into it. And then, the dismissal, I had the chance to be an analyst on RDI. Every two hours, we were on the air, one of my very fond memories of my professional career even if it was not teaching.

What was your reaction when you found out there would be a book in your honor?

It was a pleasure. Firstly, because I retired at the start of the pandemic and there was nothing, no real celebration. Second, it’s a tribute I didn’t expect. I was surprised, flattered and honored… I wrote around a hundred articles. I worked hard but, as someone said in the preface, you do your work and you don’t think about it. Almost 40 years later, you look back and say, ‘OK yeah, I did that.’

PIERRE FOUCHER’S KEY DATES:

1956: Born in Montreal

1980: Becomes a law professor at the University of Moncton

2008: Becomes a full professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Ottawa.

2016: Receives the Order of the Pléiade from the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

2017: Receives the Order of Francophones of America in 2017.

Every weekend, ONFR meets an actor in French-speaking or political issues in Ontario and Canada.