The public inquiry which must determine if it was justified for the federal government to invoke emergency measures to dislodge the Freedom Convoy takes off on Thursday for a period of six weeks. But the Trudeau government is only likely to pay a political price, experts say.
“There are several ways to prove that it was unjustified and extreme [d’user de la Loi sur les mesures d’urgence]. But [les autorités] are not suddenly going to come and arrest the Prime Minister, ”says Chris Dacey, cotton hoodie in the colors of the protest movement which disrupted the city of Ottawa last winter on the back.
The 39-year-old Ontarian intends to attend the public hearings which begin Thursday in the federal capital. In the meantime, he was strolling near parliament on Wednesday with a friend who wore around his neck, like a cape, a flag insulting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. He clings to the hope that they will contribute to the downfall of the Liberal government.
Judge Paul Rouleau, who chairs the Commission on the state of emergency, will have to hear at least 65 witnesses by November 25. Among them: the Prime Minister and seven of his ministers, senior government officials, residents of Ottawa affected by the blocking of streets, as well as some leaders of the Freedom Convoy arrested by the police, such as Quebecer Steeve “L’ Artiss” Charland, who is still awaiting trial for misdemeanor.
The political price to pay
The experts consulted by The duty are of the opinion that this public inquiry, the holding of which is mandatory in accordance with the Emergency Measures Act, will essentially serve to ask a single question: was it really necessary to call upon such special powers?
If the answer is negative, it will be up to voters to remember it in the next federal election, they note.
“Commissions of inquiry, whether or not they are mandatory, always have the same powers: to make recommendations, to draw conclusions from the facts, or to conclude that one or more people are at fault. It does not condemn anyone to a sentence, it does not order any payment of damages or interest, ”says Martine Valois, professor of law at the University of Montreal.
“It tells the next prime minister who is tempted to use emergency measures that he will still hear about it a year later,” adds Patrick Taillon, professor at the Faculty of Law at Laval University.
Contrary to what happened in October 1970 when Ottawa invoked the War Measures Act, the federal government does not seem to have abused its special powers, compares Professor Taillon. But the Trudeau government may have more difficulty demonstrating that they were necessary to end the crisis last February, he says.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is convinced that the legal threshold justifying the invocation of emergency measures has not been reached, for lack of a demonstrated threat to national security. “The actions of this government were illegal and unconstitutional,” said its director, Cara Zwibel, at a press conference on Wednesday.
MPs and senators have expressed similar doubts after reading a mass of largely redacted documents filed by the Trudeau government last summer with a parliamentary committee which is examining in parallel the use of these same emergency powers. .
A long-awaited testimony
“It’s important that Canadians know[ch]ent that the use of the Emergency Measures Act was an option of last resort, ”repeated Justin Trudeau during a visit to Sorel-Tracy on Tuesday.
The Prime Minister said he himself offered to testify to the Commission on the State of Emergency.
He played a pivotal role in the very first invocation of the Emergencies Act since it was passed in 1988, documents obtained by The duty. A report of a meeting held on February 10 between several ministers and senior officials indicates, among other things, that Mr. Trudeau asked to discuss two possible avenues for ending the Freedom Convoy: “1) actions that can be taken under existing authority, and 2) the process of invoking the Emergencies Act,” it read. Four days later, emergency measures were resorted to.
Judge Paul Rouleau has the power to compel witnesses to appear. Its preliminary list of speakers includes the name of Peter Sloly, the Ottawa police chief at the time, who told a committee of parliamentarians last Thursday that law enforcement had a plan to put end to the demonstrations without resorting to emergency measures.
The Ottawa police refused to provide the To have to a list of persons arrested or accused on the margins of the Freedom Convoy.