Madam Chair and honourable members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, hello, bonjour and assalam alaikum. Thank you for the opportunity to address you today.

My name is Husein Panju. I have the pleasure of serving as the national chair for the Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association, also known as the CMLA. Our organization is a not-for-profit corporation that's dedicated to promoting the objectives and advocating on behalf of self-identifying members of the Muslim legal community. The CMLA consists of five provincial chapters consisting of over 400 members across the country, including professionals from all areas of the legal profession and several sitting judges. We regularly appear in appellate court matters related to human rights, and we provide legal input in government consultations just like this.

Recently, the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights adopted several elements of our testimony in its landmark report, “Combatting Hate: Islamophobia and its impact on Muslims in Canada”. This committee already heard very detailed testimony about the history of Islamophobia, including the recent high-profile incidents in Quebec City and in London, Ontario. In my submissions, I'm going to highlight the alarming rise in Islamophobia since October 7, with a focus on its impacts on local communities.

In 2018 the CMLA launched a legal clinic, known as the Muslim Legal Support Centre, which prioritizes access to justice for Muslims in Ontario. Since the conflict began, this clinic has encountered a 400% rise in intake on issues ranging from employment discrimination to improper treatment in schools. The CMLA also heard numerous concerning examples from lawyers and law students across Canada who have faced harsh and unwarranted consequences in response to legitimate speech regarding this conflict. There is a widespread fear that, if lawyers or students express political views that differ from those of their colleagues, they will face discrimination in the employment context. Furthermore, on social media, some lawyers have openly called for the establishment of blacklists of lawyers and law students who participate in pro-Palestinian activities and demonstrations, and two weeks ago a retired judge issued a 200-page review that denounced one such backlash against law students who signed a pro-Palestinian petition, which required him to publicly call for civility and respectful dialogue within the legal community.

Unfortunately, there's also been a recent rise in governmental policies that contribute to Islamophobia. These include police officers using a disproportionate amount of force and tactics on pro-Palestinian demonstrators; a provincial legislature now prohibiting elected officials from wearing the kaffiyeh in the workplace, which evokes another provincial bill banning public sector workers from wearing the hijab; and our highest court recently uninviting racialized speaking delegates, vaguely citing the speaker's social media comments regarding the same conflict. Our communities are already over-policed and underserved, and these recent decisions further embolden Islamophobic incidents on the ground.

In closing, if the government wants to address Islamophobia, it needs to take accountability and focus on three main areas. First is rebuilding trust with communities. The lack of trust is found across governmental institutions and is especially pronounced under national security, criminal justice and law enforcement departments. Second is recognizing that policies shape perceptions. Islamophobia is learned behaviour, and when governments introduce actions, language and policies that target particular groups, that often provides a licence for other Canadians to discriminate against these same communities. Third is meaningfully engaging with the Muslim community and related groups, and this includes an understanding of the intersectional forms of discrimination that include sexism and anti-Palestinian racism. These are distinct concepts that have a compounding effect that is greater than the sum of their parts, and there's an inherent need to appreciate the lived experiences of our groups when developing and implementing policies that directly affect us. Together these principles can lead to a more cohesive environment, but also to fairer policies and more defensible laws that will stand the test of challenges in our appeal courts and in the court of public opinion.

Thank you for your time. I'm happy to expand on any of these themes and any other issues that will be helpful for this committee.