Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Justice Centre brings legal challenge against ArriveCAN and quarantine measures

Published

4 minute read

News Release from The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

TORONTO: The Justice Centre filed a lawsuit today in the Federal Court of Canada, on behalf of 11 Canadians either fined for not using the ArriveCAN and/or ordered to quarantine for 14 days after returning home from abroad. The Applicants involved in this legal challenge have received fines of up to $8,500 each and been forced to disclose private medical information via ArriveCAN. The legal challenge seeks to strike down the mandatory use of ArriveCAN and declare unconstitutional the 14-day quarantine requirements for Canadians who refuse to use ArriveCAN when returning home.

ArriveCan was initially implemented in April 2020 to force Canadian citizens returning home to submit quarantine plans due to Covid. It was mandated for air travellers November 21, 2020. In February 2021, the federal government mandated ArriveCan for all land travellers, while the US-Canada land crossing was still closed. After the Covid vaccine rollouts, travellers were required to upload their vaccination certificates onto the ArriveCAN app.

Mr. Matthew Leccese, one of the applicants, went to the United States for 25 minutes to pick up some parts for his vehicle. Upon his return, the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) demanded that he submit his vaccination certificate via ArriveCAN. Mr. Leccese refused because he had privacy concerns with ArriveCAN, but offered to present his vaccination certificate. CBSA refused to accept his paper certificate and issued him a ticket for $7,210 for not using ArriveCAN.

Mr. Alexander Macdonald, another applicant, attempted to cross the U.S. border in April 2022. He was refused entry by U.S. border agents and was allowed to return to Canada without issue. He tried to cross the U.S. border again in July 2022 and was again denied entry and returned to the Canadian side of the border. This time a CBSA agent ordered Mr. Macdonald to download ArriveCAN and submit to the 14-day quarantine despite never having set foot in the U.S.

Ms. Amanda Yates returned to Canada via a land crossing. Her husband used ArriveCAN on their behalf, but a glitch in the system sent them to secondary screening. She refused to disclose her vaccination status and was fined and required to quarantine for 14 days.  Her husband did disclose his vaccination status, and was not required to quarantine, despite living in the same house with Ms. Yates.

A glitch with ArriveCAN sent an automated message to over 10,000 vaccinated Canadians, requiring them to quarantine for 14 days. It took the government 12 days to inform the affected individuals that the app had malfunctioned.

ArriveCAN continues to come under heavy criticism for creating massive delays at international crossings. In July 2022, Toronto Pearson International Airport ranked number one worst airport in terms of delays and there were also significant delays reported at Montreal Pierre Elliot Trudeau International Airport.

The Minister of Transport has defended ArriveCan as vital in preventing the spread of Covid despite evidence that vaccines cannot stop transmission or infection. The minister also claimed ArriveCAN has not caused the ongoing travel backlog, despite evidence that the CBSA agents have stated it is in fact causing delays.

The Justice Centre has filed a Notice of Application against the federal government and is awaiting a trial date.

“The Justice Centre has heard from thousands of Canadians who have been negatively impacted by the federal government’s mandatory requirement to use ArriveCan. Thousands of law-abiding citizens have been fined egregiously simply for returning to their home country. The differential treatment and discriminating between vaccinated and unvaccinated travellers also defies science, which the federal government claims to follow,” says Eva Chipiuk, a lawyer on this case.

COVID-19

Canadian Health Department funds study to determine effects of COVID lockdowns on children

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The commissioned study will assess the impact on kids’ mental well-being of COVID lockdowns and ‘remote’ school classes that banned outdoor play and in-person learning.

Canada’s Department of Health has commissioned research to study the impact of outdoor play on kids’ mental well-being in light of COVID lockdowns and “remote” school classes that, for a time, banned outdoor play and in-person learning throughout most of the nation. 

In a notice to consultants titled “Systematic Literature Reviews And Meta Analyses Supporting Two Projects On Children’s Health And Covid-19,” the Department of Health admitted that “Exposure to green space has been consistently associated with protective effects on children’s physical and mental health.”

A final report, which is due in 2026, will provide “Health Canada with a comprehensive assessment of current evidence, identify key knowledge gaps and inform surveillance and policy planning for future pandemics and other public health emergencies.”

Bruce Squires, president of McMaster Children’s Hospital of Hamilton, Ontario, noted in 2022 that “Canada’s children and youth have borne the brunt” of COVID lockdowns.

From about March 2020 to mid-2022, most of Canada was under various COVID-19 mandates and lockdowns, including mask mandates, at the local, provincial, and federal levels. Schools were shut down, parks were closed, and most kids’ sports were cancelled. 

Mandatory facemask polices were common in Canada and all over the world for years during the COVID crisis despite over 170 studies showing they were not effective in stopping the spread of COVID and were, in fact, harmful, especially to children.

In October 2021, then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced unprecedented COVID-19 jab mandates for all federal workers and those in the transportation sector, saying the un-jabbed would no longer be able to travel by air, boat, or train, both domestically and internationally.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, a new report released by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) raised alarm bells over the “harms caused” by COVID-19 lockdowns and injections imposed by various levels of government as well as a rise in unexplained deaths and bloated COVID-19 death statistics.

Indeed, a recent study showed that COVID masking policies left children less able to differentiate people’s emotions behind facial expressions.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Ontario student appeals ruling that dismissed religious objection to abortion-tainted COVID shot

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

An Ontario Tech University student is seeking judicial review after the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ruled his beliefs did not qualify as protected ‘creed.’

An Ontario university student who was punished for refusing the COVID shot is contesting a tribunal ruling that rejected his religious objection to the vaccine.

In a November 28 press release, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) announced that a judicial review has been filed on behalf of former Ontario Tech University student Philip Anisimov after his religious objection to the COVID vaccine was dismissed by an Ontario court.

“Mr. Anisimov’s objection to the Covid vaccine was deeply rooted in his religious commitment to live according to biblical precepts,” Constitutional lawyer Hatim Kheir declared. “He hopes the Divisional Court will clarify that his religious objection was protected by the Human Rights Code and entitled to protection.”

In 2021, Ontario mandated that all students in the province show proof of vaccination unless they had an exemption or agreed to attend a COVID jab education session boasting about the shots. The third option was not available at Ontario Tech University, as schools could choose whether or not they would offer such a program to students.

Anisimov had requested an exemption from the experimental, abortion-tainted COVID shots on religious grounds but was denied and deregistered from his courses.

He was then forced to spend an entire extra year to complete his studies. According to his lawyers, Ontario Tech University’s decision to not approve his COVID jab exemption request “not only disrupted his career plans but also violated his right to be free from discrimination on the basis of religion, as protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code.”

The university’s refusal to honor his exemption prompted Anisimov to take legal action in April with help of the JCCF. However, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario rejected his religious objection, arguing that it was not protected as a “creed” under the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Now, Anisimov is appealing the ruling, hoping that his case will serve as a precedent for justice for students who were discriminated against for refusing the abortion-tainted vaccine.

“My hope is that this case helps set an important precedent and encourages Canadians to reflect on the direction our society is taking,” he explained. “My trust is that God does all things for the good of those who love Him, who are called by His purposes.”

Beyond health concerns, many Canadians, especially Catholics, opposed the vaccines on moral grounds because of their link to fetal cell lines derived from the tissue of aborted babies.

Continue Reading

Trending

X