Ballantyne, Davidson and McIntyre v. Canada
The subject-matter of the Ballantyne case, decided by the →Human Rights Committee in 1993, is Quebec’s language policy. Three English-speaking business-owners complained that in accordance with the Charter on the French Language, Quebec’s language law, they were forbidden to use their mother tongue in advertising or in the name of their firms. They alleged violations of Articles 19 (freedom of expression), 26 (equality before the law) and 27 (minority rights) of the → International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Ballantyne case is to date the only individual communication in which the Human Rights Committee directly addressed the →concept of minority. Specifically, the submission raised the question whether English-speakers within the province of Quebec qualify as a minority for the purposes of Article 27. The Committee concluded that „the minorities referred to in article 27 are minorities within a State, and not minorities within any province. A group may constitute a majority in a province but still be a minority in a State and thus be entitled to the benefits of article 27. English speaking citizens of Canada cannot be considered a linguistic minority”. Furthermore, the Committee found no discrimination, because the contested provision applied to both French and English speakers, „so that a French speaking person wishing to advertise in English, in order to reach those of his or her clientele who are English speaking, may not do so”. Crucially, however, the Committee established the violation of Article 19, and recognized the freedom of language in private life: „A State may choose one or more official languages, but it may not exclude, outside the spheres of public life, the freedom to express oneself in a language of one’s choice”.