Connect with us

COVID-19

Supreme Court will not hear case about government’s violation of rights and freedoms

Published

6 minute read

News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms 

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is disappointed that the Supreme Court of Canada has decided not to hear the appeal of the challenge to Manitoba’s lockdown restrictions. The decision was announced on Thursday, March 14, 2024.

The Leave to Appeal application, under the name Gateway Bible Baptist Church et al. v. Manitoba et al., was filed on September 18, 2023. Five Manitoba churches, a pastor and a deacon asked the Supreme Court of Canada to hear their appeal of the lower courts’ dismissal of their constitutional challenge to closures of churches and restrictions on outdoor gatherings during Covid lockdowns in late 2020 and 2021. Included in the application was protester Ross MacKay, who had been ticketed and who was seeking to appeal the lower courts’ dismissal of his constitutional challenge to the outdoor gathering limits.

Through public health orders, Manitoba had closed churches while permitting businesses to continue to operate. Taxis, in-person university classes, film and tv productions, law offices, and liquor stores were allowed to remain open. The Winnipeg Jets could meet and train indoors with their extended crew, and summer Olympic competitors were allowed to train indoors. Outdoor gatherings were reduced to no more than five people, while at the same time hundreds of people could legally gather indoors at big box stores.

The initial case was heard in May 2021 before the Manitoba Court of King’s Bench. The province did not produce any evidence that Covid spreads outdoors, or that outdoor gatherings were risky activities. That hearing did produce a significant admission from a government expert witness, Chief Microbiologist and Laboratory Specialist Dr. Jared Bullard, who, under questioning from Justice Centre lawyers, admitted that 56 percent of positive Covid cases were not infectious. The hearing was also notable for the Applicants’ expert report and testimony from world-renowned Stanford Professor, epidemiologist Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, co-author of The Great Barrington Declaration. Dr. Bhattacharya has moved on to even greater international fame as one of the litigants in a lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, against the U.S federal government for medical censorship uncovered in The Twitter Files investigation.

The Manitoba Court of King’s Bench ruled that the government’s public health officials should not be “second guessed” and that the government need not meet a high threshold of providing persuasive evidence to demonstrably justify that violations of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were reasonable. The Manitoba Court of King’s Bench did not order the unsuccessful Applicants to pay court costs, finding there to be significant public interest in having this case adjudicated.

In December 2022, the Applicants appealed. The appeal was dismissed by the Manitoba Court of Appeal in June 2023.

In the Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, lawyers provided by the Justice Centre argued that the case raised issues of national importance. For instance:

  1. How are constitutionally protected activities to be juridically measured against comparable non-constitutionally protected activities? What is the proper approach to the minimal impairment stage of the Oakes analysis with respect to public health orders that fully prohibit Charter-protected activities (e.g. In- person religious worship) while permitting comparable non-Charter-protected activities (e.g. In-person university classes, film and television productions, indoor team-training for the Winnipeg Jets, etc.).
  2. Does reliance on the “precautionary principle” satisfy the state’s onus under Charter section 1 to provide “cogent and persuasive” evidence to justify Charter-infringing measures?

The Applicants’ legal team believed the case was critically important, as it could have served as guidance for governments in crafting public health measures on efforts needed to accommodate Charter-protected rights and freedoms.

Allison Pejovic, lawyer for the Applicants, stated, “Our clients are disappointed in the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear their appeal. It was past time to have a conversation with Canada’s highest court about whether Charter-protected rights such as rights to worship and assemble ought to be prioritized over economic interests, such as ensuring that the Winnipeg Jets could practice indoors and that movie productions could continue. It was also critical to hear from the Court on the importance of respecting the Charter during a declared ’emergency’. Governments urgently needed the Supreme Court of Canada’s guidance as to the degree to which they should accommodate Charter rights during a future pandemic or other emergency proclaimed by government. Leaving that issue undecided at the highest level is a grave injustice for all Canadians.”

Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

Addictions

New Report – Five years on: Tracing the costs of lockdowns

Published on

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

In 2019, 67 percent of Canadians rated their mental health as “very good or excellent.” By 2023, that figure had dropped to just 54 percent.

A new report from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms examines the immediate and long-term negative impacts of Covid lockdowns, including physical, social, and economic harms. It also underscores the lack of transparent, evidence-based analysis by governments to justify these measures.

The report details how policies introduced with the stated goal of saving lives came at an extraordinary cost to Canadians’ mental and physical health, access to healthcare, economic security, and civil liberties.

One of the most concerning findings is the sharp decline in Canadians’ mental health. In 2019, 67 percent of Canadians rated their mental health as “very good or excellent.” By 2023, that figure had dropped to just 54 percent.

Meanwhile, the number of Canadians reporting “fair or poor” mental health nearly doubled—from 8 percent to 15 percent. This trend was seen across all age groups, but especially among young adults.

Indeed, despite facing minimal risk from Covid, young Canadians suffered some of the most serious consequences of lockdown measures. Non-Covid deaths among Canadians under age 45 rose by 22 percent, driven by factors such as disease, addiction, delayed treatment, and suicide. Physical activity among youth dropped significantly during this period, while time spent on screens—such as cell phones, computers, and tablets—increased sharply. Up to 70 percent of children and teens reported experiencing anxiety, depression, or other serious mental health issues.

A particularly alarming trend was the surge in opioid-related deaths. From 2020 to 2023, annual opioid overdose deaths increased by 108 percent. In 2023 alone, 8,606 Canadians died from opioid toxicity—more than double the pre-lockdown average. British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario recorded the highest rates, with the vast majority of deaths involving fentanyl.

During Covid, thousands of medical check-ups, diagnoses, and treatments were delayed or cancelled, resulting in a serious and ongoing backlog in Canada’s healthcare system.

Wait times for medical treatments increased by 43 percent between 2019 and 2024, reaching a median of 30 weeks. MRI wait times rose by 55 percent. For certain cancers, including breast and prostate, surgery delays increased by as much as 34 percent. Since 2018, more than 74,000 Canadians have died while waiting for surgery or diagnostic care—over 15,000 of them in 2023–24 alone. The actual number is likely higher, due to poor provincial tracking and reporting.

The economic impact was equally severe. Lockdowns resulted in widespread job losses, particularly among low-wage workers, while the “laptop class” remained largely unscathed. While many public sector jobs expanded during this time, Canadians in hospitality, retail, and service sectors faced prolonged unemployment. The expansion of public spending and government debt contributed to rising inflation, driving up the cost of food, housing, and other essentials.

Crime rates also rose during the lockdown years. Homicides peaked in 2022 at 17 percent above trend, with 882 victims across Canada. Cybercrime nearly doubled, rising from 48,000 cases in 2019 to over 93,000 in 2023. Identity theft and fraud increased to 120 percent above trend in 2020, with similar levels in the following years. Particularly troubling was the rise in online child sexual exploitation, which reached 18,650 reported cases in 2023—a 173 percent increase from 2019.

Benjamin Klassen, Education Coordinator at the Justice Centre, says the findings demand accountability. “This report calls for governments to take responsibility for the damage done during this period and ensure that future public health policies uphold the Charter rights and freedoms of all Canadians.”

Mr. Klassen continues, “The Charter requires governments to ‘demonstrably’ justify any freedom-limiting policy. To date, no federal or provincial government in Canada has conducted the kind of comprehensive impact assessment required to justify the lockdowns.”

He concludes, “The evidence is clear: the harms of lockdowns outweighed their benefits. Canadians deserve an honest and transparent evaluation of lockdown harms, so that these mistakes are never repeated.”

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Canada’s top doctor signed oath to withhold COVID info that could ‘embarrass’ Trudeau’s cabinet: records

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Dozens of Canada’s top health managers and the nation’s top doctor were required to sign a secret oath that prevented them from divulging information relating to the COVID crisis to not “embarrass” the federal government at the time.

Access to Information records show that Dr. Theresa Tam, Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer, and “quite a few” other COVID pandemic managers had to sign the pledge, as noted by Blacklock’s Reporter.

An internal staff email sent in 2020 from Alan Thom, vaccine supply manager with the Public Health Agency, showed he complained that so many managers had to take an oath of secrecy “at a certain point the Department of Public Works determined individual non-disclosure agreements were no longer needed for federal employees as we are all covered through our responsibilities as public servants.”

In total, 29 managers signed the oath with the Public Health Agency and Departments of Foreign Affairs, Health, Industry and National Defence.

The oath came right after the federal government, under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, signed a deal to buy mRNA COVID jabs with pharmaceutical companies.

The oath noted, in part, that “Unauthorized disclosure of any confidential information, including but not limited to disclosures or communications to supplier competitors or to the media may result in embarrassment, criticism or claims against Canada and may jeopardize Canada’s supplier relations and procurement processes.”

It continued, stating, “As an employee of the Government of Canada I acknowledge I have read and understood the Values And Ethics Code For The Public Sector,” the pledge stated. “I remain bound by my oath.”

Tam is a strong proponent of the COVID shots. At the peak of the COVID crisis in Canada, the Trudeau government signed about $8 billion in contracts with multiple companies, including, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Medicago, Moderna, Novavax, Pfizer and Sanofi.

The first COVID jab to be approved for use in Canada was Pfizer’s BioNTech mRNA injection, which became available on December 9, 2020. Moderna’s mRNA jab followed a couple of weeks later. Of note is the launch of the jabs came after the Trudeau government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding jab-related injuries.

Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) was launched in December 2020 after the government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries.

Recently, VISP injury payments are expected to go over budget, according to a Canadian Department of Health memo.

As reported by LifeSiteNews last week, a government-funded inhaled version of the COVID mRNA vaccines developed with abortion-tainted fetal cell lines is now entering Phase 2 clinical trials.

The federal government continues to purchase the COVID shots despite the fact its own data shows that most Canadians are flat-out refusing a COVID booster injection. It also comes as the government has had to increase spending on VISP, as reported by LifeSiteNews last week.

Canadians’ decision to refuse the shots also comes as a Statistic Canada report revealed that deaths from COVID-19 and “unspecified causes” rose after the release of the so-called “safe and effective” jabs.

LifeSiteNews has published an extensive amount of research on the dangers of the experimental COVID mRNA jabs that include heart damage and blood clots.

The mRNA shots have also been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children, and all have connections to cell lines derived from aborted babies.

Continue Reading

Trending

X