COVID-19
Randy Hillier wins appeal in Charter challenge to Covid lockdowns
Former Ontario Member of Provincial Parliament Randy Hillier in the Ontario Legislature (Photo credit: The Canadian Press/Chris Young)
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is pleased that the Ontario Court of Appeal has accepted former Ontario MPP Randy Hillier’s appeal and overturned a lower court ruling that had dismissed his Charter challenge to Ontario’s lockdown regulations. These regulations were in effect during the 2021 Covid lockdowns.
The decision was released by the Ontario Court of Appeal on Monday, April 7, 2025.
In the spring of 2021, Mr. Hillier attended peaceful protests in Kemptville and Cornwall, Ontario. He spoke about the importance of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the harms caused by the province’s lockdown regulations. The government’s health orders made it illegal for even two people to assemble together outdoors: a blatant and unjustified restriction of the Charter section 2(c) freedom of peaceful assembly. Other provinces allowed five or ten or more people to gather together outdoors.
Mr. Hillier has outstanding charges in Kemptville, Cornwall, Peterborough, Belleville, and Smith Falls. Prosecutors in those jurisdictions are waiting to see the results of this Charter challenge. Mr. Hillier has faced similar charges in many other jurisdictions across Ontario, but these have been stayed or withdrawn at the request of the respective prosecutors.
Mr. Hillier defended himself against the tickets that were issued to him for violating lockdown restrictions by arguing that these lockdown regulations were unjustified violations of Charter section 2(c), which protects freedom of peaceful assembly.
Four expert reports were filed to support Mr. Hillier’s case, including the report of Dr. Kevin Bardosh, which extensively reviewed the many ways in which lockdowns harmed Canadians. They showed alarming mental health deterioration during the pandemic among Canadians, including psychological distress, insomnia, depression, fatigue, suicidal ideation, self-harm, anxiety disorders and deteriorating life satisfaction, caused in no small part by prolonged lockdowns. Many peer-reviewed studies show that mental health continued to decline in 2021 compared to 2020. The expert report also provides abundant data about other lockdown harms, including drug overdoses, a rise in obesity, unemployment, and the destruction of small businesses, which were prevented from competing with big-box stores.
Justice Joseph Callaghan dismissed that challenge in a ruling issued November 22, 2023. Notably, Justice Callaghan did not reference any evidence of lockdown harms that Dr. Bardosh had provided to the court. Without reasons, the court declared that Dr. Bardosh is “not a public health expert” and then ignored the abundant evidence of lockdown harms.
Lawyers for Mr. Hillier filed a Notice of Appeal with the Ontario Court of Appeal on December 22, 2023.
Mr. Hillier’s Appeal argued that, among other things, Justice Callaghan erred in applying the Oakes test. As the Notice of Appeal states, Justice Callaghan “fail[ed] to recognize that a complete ban on Charter protected activity is subject to a more onerous test for demonstrable justification at the minimal impairment and proportionality branches of Oakes.”
The Oakes test was developed by the Supreme Court of Canada in the 1986 case R. v. Oakes, as a way to evaluate if an infringement of a Charter right can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. That test has three parts. The first requires that the means be rationally connected to the objective. The second is that it should cause minimal impairment to the right. The third is proportionality, in the sense that the objective of impairing the right must be sufficiently important.
Mr. Hillier’s Appeal focused on the second part of the Oakes test: whether the regulations were minimally impairing of Mr. Hillier’s 2(c) freedom where they effectively banned all peaceful protest.
Justice Centre President John Carpay stated, “It is refreshing to see a court do its job of protecting our Charter freedoms, by holding government to a high standard. There was no science behind Ontario’s total ban on all outdoor protests.”
Chris Barber leaves the courthouse in Ottawa after the verdict was delivered in his trial with fellow Freedom Convoy organizer Tamara Lich, on Thursday, April 3, 2025. (Photo credit: THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang)
“Chris Barber consistently followed the legal advice that he received from police officers, lawyers, and a Superior Court judge.”
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that Chris Barber has asked the Ontario Court of Justice for a stay of proceedings against him. He argues that the legal advice given to him by police officers, lawyers, and a Superior Court judge during the Freedom Convoy was erroneous and that, as a result, the Crown is not entitled to convict him.
On April 3, 2025, Justice Heather Perkins-McVey of the Ontario Court of Justice found Mr. Barber guilty of mischief and of counselling others to breach a court order. That decision followed upon a lengthy 45-day trial stretching from September 2023 to September 2024.
Diane Magas, Chris Barber’s lawyer, filed a Stay of Proceedings Application with the Court on April 16, 2025. In that Application, Mr. Barber and his legal team argue that he did, in fact, seek legal advice regarding his actions during the Freedom Convoy protest.
For example, he followed Ottawa Police Services directions on where to park trucks in downtown Ottawa. When an officer asked him to move his truck, “Big Red,” from downtown Ottawa, he moved it. On February 7 and 16, 2022, his lawyer at the time advised him that Justice Maclean of the Superior Court had confirmed that the protest could continue so long as it continued to be peaceful and safe.
In essence, Chris Barber and his legal team are now arguing that he followed all legal advice that was given to him in 2022, but that some of the legal advice he was given turned out to be erroneous.
His Application argues for a stay of proceedings against him on the grounds that “he sought advice from lawyers, police officers, and a Superior Court Judge on the legality of the protest he was involved in.”
This Application was filed one day after Chris Barber was informed that the Crown was pursuing a two-year prison sentence against him. In an April 15 Facebook post, Mr. Barber wrote, “My family got bad news today. The Crown prosecutor wants to lock Tamara Lich and me in prison for two years-for standing up for freedom. They also want to [seize] my truck, Big Red, and crush her like she’s just scrap metal or sell it at auction.”
If the Application is successful, Mr. Barber would not see prison time, nor would his truck be seized.
“Throughout the peaceful Freedom Convoy, Chris Barber did what any law-abiding Canadian would do: seeking out and acting upon the best legal advice available to him,” stated John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre. “Chris Barber consistently followed the legal advice that he received from police officers, lawyers, and a Superior Court judge.”
“To hold a well-meaning man behind bars for two years and to confiscate his property, as is now demanded by the Crown, would bring the administration of justice into disrepute,” Mr. Carpay continued. “Crown prosecutors are painting a portrait of a dangerous criminal, even while Chris Barber sought out and followed legal advice when participating in the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa in 2022. Chris worked within the law when peacefully exercising his Charter freedoms of expression, assembly and association.”
COVID-19
Tamara Lich and Chris Barber trial update: The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues..
Here are the last two posts on Tamara Lich’s Substack posted April 16 and April 17:
April 17:
We weren’t able to secure a date yesterday for the sentencing hearing and instead another ‘speak to’ was set for April 28. In addition to time needed to enter numerous impact statements (coincidentally and conveniently comprised of individuals suing us for $300,000,000.00), the Crown has added a forfeiture order to seize Big Red which will add significant time to argue. Therefore I suspect all parties will need to find 4-5 days in their schedules for the sentencing hearing.
The Crown is also seeking two years in federal prison for each of us.
Three days were tentatively set aside at the end of May for a Stay of Proceedings application put forth yesterday by Ms. Magus on Chris’ behalf.
And so The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues to plod along, still no end in sight.
April 16:
In our trial, the longest mischief trial of all time, we set hearing dates to set hearing dates.
There will be a ‘speak to’ this afternoon to set a date for the sentencing hearing which we think will take 3-4 days. Following that hearing, Chris and I will return to Ottawa again for the actual sentence.
The Crown is seeking 2 years in a federal penitentiary for both of us, plus they have decided to file an application to confiscate Big Red. Funny, there hasn’t been a single other convoy case in which the Crown demanded that persons property or vehicle, yet they seem to want Big Red. You need to ask yourself why.
Chris raised his children in that truck, changed their diapers in that truck, had his old dog, Buddy, put to sleep in the passenger seat when his time came because that was Buddy’s favourite place in the world.
This is not about the rule of law.
It’s about crushing a Canadian symbol of Hope, Pride & Unity
Conservative Party urges investigation into Carney plan to spend $1 billion on heat pumps
Mark Carney To Ban Free Speech if Elected
Expert Medical Record Reviews Of The Two Girls In Texas Who Purportedly Died of Measles
Communist China helped boost Mark Carney’s image on social media, election watchdog reports
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoRCMP Whistleblowers Accuse Members of Mark Carney’s Inner Circle of Security Breaches and Surveillance
-
Also Interesting2 days agoBetFury Review: Is It the Best Crypto Casino?
-
Autism2 days agoRFK Jr. Exposes a Chilling New Autism Reality
-
COVID-192 days agoCanadian student denied religious exemption for COVID jab takes tech school to court
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoBureau Exclusive: Chinese Election Interference Network Tied to Senate Breach Investigation
-
International2 days agoUK Supreme Court rules ‘woman’ means biological female
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoNeil Young + Carney / Freedom Bros
-
Health2 days agoWHO member states agree on draft of ‘pandemic treaty’ that could be adopted in May