Article content continued

In an email to Conservative party supporters, Mr. Alexander wrote that new citizens “should recite the oath proudly, loudly and for everyone to see and hear.” He then seemed to use the terms niqab and hijab interchangeably, stating: “It’s why we filed a notice to appeal this week’s court decision allowing people to wear the hijab while taking the oath.”

Liberal MP Chrystia Freeland zeroed in on the remark in the House of Commons. “Surely the minister, of all people, ought to know the difference between a niqab and a hijab,” she said.

Mr. Alexander, who once served as an ambassador to Afghanistan, doubled down on his remarks, stating that “the hijab has been used to cover the face[s] of women, just as the niqab has been used and just as the burka has been used under the terrible influence of the Taliban in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

Mr. Alexander’s spokesman would not clarify on Friday if it was the minister’s position that hijabs that do not cover the face should also be banned from citizenship ceremonies.

Meanwhile, court documents have revealed more details about Ms. Ishaq, the 29-year-old Pakistani national whose successful federal court challenge of the niqab ban is now under appeal by the government.

In her affidavit filed with the court, Ms. Ishaq wrote that through research, she came to the conclusion that wearing a niqab was “mandatory to my faith” and “integral to the modesty that a Muslim woman must show.” (Only a small minority of Muslim women wear niqabs in Canada.)