Quite unnoticed so far, a new law in Ontario has discouraged a return of the Freedom Convoy to Ottawa this year, sowing confusion over what to do with the protest movement. Experts see the Ford government’s law as a rollback of the right to protest, whatever the cause.
“We want to go to Ottawa, but we can’t. With [la loi] 100, it’s burned,” explained Jonathan Mongrain, an administrator of the main French-speaking Facebook page devoted to the Freedom Convoy, when canceling Quebec’s participation in the new convoy of trucks which was then planned.
It seems to be the first social movement officially discouraged by this recent provincial law. Ontario’s “Bill 100” has since last April prohibited people or vehicles from interfering with “protected transportation infrastructure” if doing so would disrupt ordinary economic activity or public safety.
These infrastructures are defined as border crossings, international airports or any other transport infrastructure “that is of importance for international trade” and that is prescribed by regulation for a period of one month. The government could therefore protect a particular road for 30 days. Protesters face fines of up to $100,000 a day if they break the law.
“I can’t guarantee […] organizers protection from being charged under Ontario’s Bill 100,” James Bauder, founder of the band Canada Unity, wrote on social media. The one who had first launched the idea of returning to Ottawa to mark the first year of the famous occupation, from February 17 to 21, gave notice of the complete cancellation of this great return on December 30. Less than a week earlier, on Christmas Day, he had instead announced the event’s move to Winnipeg, Manitoba.
An anti-protest law
The Keeping Ontario Open for Business Act, 2022 was passed by the Ford government two months after truckers mobilized in Ottawa. Supporters of the movement, such as former Ontario MP Randy Hillier, who faced nine criminal charges in connection with the convoy, were the most numerous to denounce it. But unions and civil liberties groups are also concerned about the scope of the law.
“The Act presumes that any economic impact makes a protest illegal. In my opinion, this undermines the right to demonstrate in general, ”said Cara Zwibel, director at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CLAC). In a parliamentary committee at Queen’s Park in April, the organization had suggested that the government revoke the Act, or at least specify what is “important for international trade”.
Me Alain Bartleman, lawyer at the Aboriginal law firm Nahwegahbow Corbiere, denounces the deterrent effect of the text, according to him caused by the use of imprecise terms and “draconian” penalties. It is marginalized communities like Indigenous peoples, he says, who will be disproportionately affected. “What is the purpose of this law? Is it to respond to a specific problem that cannot be addressed with the existing tools? Or is it something more political in response to the protests? he asks himself.
The Act is above all “populist”, thinks University of Ottawa law professor Joao Velloso, who has studied the convoy of truckers. “We put a lot of things in it that already exist elsewhere and we give it a flamboyant name,” he continues. It differs only in terms of vehicle-specific penalties. For example, the police can tow a car and store it for 30 days. It can also suspend an offender’s driver’s licence.
In this sense, the professor predicts that the Act will not necessarily have a greater effect on marginalized communities, since these do not tend to use trucks during demonstrations. And still it is necessary that the police services have recourse to it, which is not guaranteed. “It is not because we have more laws that the police will apply them”, notes Cara Zwibel.
This story is supported by the Local Journalism Initiative, funded by the Government of Canada.