COVID-19
Regulatory body continues prosecution of nurse over free expression
From the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
REGINA, SK: The Justice Centre announces that the disciplinary hearings against Saskatchewan nurse Leah McInnes continue today in what could become a landmark decision about freedom of expression for nurses and other professionals, and the power of regulatory bodies to control and censor the speech of professionals who are required to belong to a professional association in order to earn a living.
Exercising her Charter freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly, Saskatchewan Nurse Leah McInnes attended a national rally against mandatory Covid vaccination policies in early September 2021. Ms. McInnes also expressed her opposition to the government’s mandatory vaccination policies on social media between August and October 2021, even while stating that vaccines should be promoted by her profession, that vaccines can decrease severe disease, reduce the burden on the healthcare system and save lives, and that vaccines play a vital role in the fight against the Covid pandemic and should be promoted.
On September 26, 2021, a nurse filed a complaint against Ms. McInnes to the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan (CRNS). The Discipline Committee of the CRNS investigated the social media activities of Ms. McInnes and then charged her with professional misconduct under the Registered Nurses Act for her posts and for her participation in the rally. The CRNS accused Ms. McInnes of spreading misinformation, disinformation and/or misleading information surrounding vaccine mandates and vaccine passports. Further, the Disciplinary Committee of the CRNS alleged that Ms. McInnes had been operating from a position of power as a nurse when participating in the rally and when posting about vaccines, that she had misused this power, and that she had acted outside the proper scope of this power.
Lawyers acting for Ms. McInnes point to the Code of Ethics for Registered Nurses of the CRNS, which says, “Nurses support a climate of trust that sponsors openness, encourages the act of questioning the status quo and supports those who speak out in good faith to address concerns.” Lawyers argue that Ms. McInnes had questioned the merits of mandatory vaccine policies in good faith. Further, counsel for Ms. McInnes argue that her expression, however disagreeable it may have been to the CRNS, is protected by section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and by relevant case law.
In particular, counsel for Ms. McInnes point to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal ruling in Strom v. Saskatchewan Registered Nurses’ Association, which states that “…criticism, even by those delivering those services, does not necessarily undermine confidence in healthcare workers or the healthcare system. Indeed, it can enhance confidence by demonstrating that those with the greatest knowledge of this massive and opaque system, and who have the ability to affect change, are both prepared and permitted to speak and pursue positive change. In any event, the fact that public confidence in aspects of the healthcare system may suffer as a result of fair criticism can itself result in positive change. Such is the messy business of democracy.”
Lawyers for Ms. McInnes argue that, rather than bringing the nursing profession under disrepute, the good-faith objections to mandatory vaccination policies promote public confidence in the transparency of the healthcare system and in the dedication of healthcare professionals to pursue positive change.
Andre Memauri, one of the lawyers representing Ms. McInnes, stated, “The Discipline Committee today will hear how Ms. McInnes advocated against vaccine mandates and vaccine passports in support of patient autonomy, dignity and privacy in compliance with her ethical obligations. The Investigation Committee alleges Ms. McInnes disseminated misinformation, disinformation and misleading information, all while the record established that Ms. McInnes was not only remarkably accurate but also that the social media activity of CRNS itself disseminated false information.”
“It is very unfortunate that a registered nurse in the Province of Saskatchewan again faces regulatory reprisal for fair criticism of the healthcare system, after the Court of Appeal’s decision in Strom,” continued Mr. Memauri.
John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre, stated, “This case is about the freedom of nurses and other professionals to participate, as citizens in a democracy, in public discussions and debate. This case raises important questions about whether government agencies like the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan should have the power to determine what is true or false, and to impose that determination on professionals who are required to join the regulatory body in order to practice their profession and earn a living.”
From LifeSiteNews
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.
COVID vaccine mandates and lockdowns, which came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society.
COVID-19
Ontario student appeals ruling that dismissed religious objection to abortion-tainted COVID shot
From LifeSiteNews
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.”
COVID vaccine mandates, as well as lockdowns that came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The mRNA shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.
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.
Carney’s Toronto cabinet meetings cost $530,000
Integration Or Indignation: Whose Strategy Worked Best Against Trump?
What the Data Shows About the New Canada-Alberta Pipeline Opportunity
While Trump has southern border secure, hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants still flooding in from Canada
Alberta will use provincial laws to stop Canadian gov’t from trying to confiscate legal firearms
The Trickster Politics of the Tanker Ban are Hiding a Much Bigger Reckoning for B.C.
Alberta Sports Hall of Fame Announces Class of 2026 Inductees
-
espionage2 days agoWestern Campuses Help Build China’s Digital Dragnet With U.S. Tax Funds, Study Warns
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoWayne Gretzky’s Terrible, Awful Week.. And Soccer/ Football.
-
Health2 days agoCDC Vaccine Panel Votes to End Universal Hep B Vaccine for Newborns
-
Business1 day agoCanada invests $34 million in Chinese drones now considered to be ‘high security risks’
-
Agriculture2 days agoCanada’s air quality among the best in the world
-
Business2 days agoThe EU Insists Its X Fine Isn’t About Censorship. Here’s Why It Is.
-
Great Reset1 day agoSurgery Denied. Death Approved.
-
Business1 day agoThe Climate-Risk Industrial Complex and the Manufactured Insurance Crisis