In "Syndicat Northcrest v Amselem", the Supreme Court drew up a definition of freedom of religion under the "Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms", mindful of the overlap with section 2(a). The majority found freedom of religion encompasses a right to religious practices if the individual has a sincere belief that the practice is connected to religion. It would not matter whether the practice was needed according to religious authority. If courts can believe an individual is telling the truth in saying a practice is connected to religion, the courts then ask whether the infringement of freedom of religion is severe enough to trigger section 2. The Court also said religious beliefs are vacillating, so courts trying to determine an individual belief should be mindful that beliefs may change. Following this test in "Multani v Commission scolaire Marguerite‑Bourgeoys", the Court found freedom of religion should protect a non-violent Sikh student's right to wear a "kirpan" (dagger) in school.