
Making lawyers swear Oath of Allegiance to monarch unconstitutional: Alberta court
Global News
The Appeal Court's three-judge panel has declared the Oath of Allegiance requirement unconstitutional and of no force or effect, meaning it is no longer required in Alberta.
Alberta’s top court has ruled that requiring prospective lawyers to swear the Oath of Allegiance to the reigning monarch is unconstitutional and infringes on religious freedom.
The Court of Appeal of Alberta made the decision Tuesday in Prabjot Wirring’s years-long case against the province and Law Society of Alberta.
The court said the legally-required oath forced Wirring to choose between practising law in Alberta and his faith as an amritdhari Sikh.
The decision hinged on whether a judge previously erred in considering whether the law society’s requirement to swear Canada’s official oath to “bear true allegiance” to the reigning monarch, their heirs and successors infringes the Charter right to religious freedom.
The court said Wirring had sworn an allegiance to Akal Purakh, or the Creator in the Sikh faith, and couldn’t make an allegiance or devotion to any other figure or entity, including in the Oath of Allegiance to become a lawyer.
Wirring challenged the oath in June 2022.
More than a year after hearing arguments in October 2024, the Appeal Court’s three-judge panel declared the oath requirement unconstitutional and of no force or effect, meaning it is no longer required in Alberta.
“This case shows the real possibility that candidates with religious objections to the Oath of Allegiance may choose not to become members of the Alberta bar diminishing the bar’s representativeness,” the decision said.













