Federal Court: mandatory federal vaccination challenged in court

A few days before its entry into force, the vaccination obligation imposed by the federal government on its employees will be challenged in court. The duty has learned that a Quebec government subcontractor, who refuses to be inoculated for fear of possible side effects of the vaccine, will apply to the Federal Court this Friday in the hope of having the Trudeau government’s directive invalidated, or at the very least to be exempted from it himself.

The 35-year-old employee works in a Transport Canada test center located in Blainville, a suburb of Montreal, and managed by a private company, PMG Technologies. In an affidavit filed in Federal Court this week and of which The duty obtained a copy, the complainant mentions, to explain his refusal to be vaccinated, “the risks of serious complications associated with the current supply of vaccines” approved in Canada.

The man, who lives in Terrebonne, is not named in the suit. He argues in court that he enjoys an “inalienable and incontestable right to [son] physical integrity, which includes the right not to be subjected to medical treatment, whether experimental or not, against [son] voluntarily “.

This legal challenge would be the first brought against the federal government, which will demand from Monday that all its contractors, wherever they are in the country, be vaccinated. Same for federal civil servants, who will be placed on unpaid leave as of Monday if they are not vaccinated.

The technician at the Blainville road test center therefore risks being fired next week by his employer, who must comply with the Ottawa directive.

His cause is defended by independent lawyer Guy Lavergne. It is funded by the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, which has challenged several other health measures in the country, such as the mandatory quarantine at the hotel imposed by the federal government on travelers until this summer.

“It is not a follower of the theory of the conspiracy”, argued Me Lavergne interviewed at To have to, about his client. “These are strictly fears, anxiety about potential complications. “

The Federal Court will hear the application for an interlocutory injunction on Friday, according to Mr.e Lavergne. Case on merit hearings will follow thereafter.

In Quebec, two lawyers went to the Superior Court, in Beauce, to challenge the imposition of the vaccine passport by the government of François Legault. Their request to suspend this obligation to present the VaxiCode was rejected on Wednesday. The substantive study is continuing.

Elsewhere in the country, the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms also filed in mid-October a legal challenge to the vaccination passport imposed by the Ontario government.

In New Brunswick, four provincial officials are challenging the compulsory vaccination imposed on them by the provincial government. These two teachers and two health workers evoke, as Me Lavergne before the Federal Court, the right to life, liberty and security provided for in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The right to liberty

Lawyer Me Lavergne and his client argue that the latter is not in contact with the five federal officials who work at the Blainville Road Test Center (which employs 84 other employees), nor with the public. The complainant argues that he performs most of his tasks alone outside and that otherwise, he follows the health measures of his employer PMG Technologies, such as wearing a mask.

Their brief questions the federal power to impose compulsory vaccination on employees of a private supplier. He also argues that there is no indication that federal workplaces are hotbeds of COVID-19 outbreaks.

The consequence engendered by the government’s directive – that is, the loss of a job on which the complainant, who claims to be of “modest means”, depends on – is disproportionate, they say. But above all, the right to life, liberty and security of the person guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is being violated, insists the brief of Mr.e Lavergne.

The document argues that this cause also defends the public interest of “thousands of Canadians, who are denied the right to pursue the career of their choice because they defend their right to bodily autonomy.” Lawyer discusses Supreme Court rulings on Dr Henry Morgentaler – judgment which decriminalized abortion in 1988 – and that on the case of Sue Rodriguez – which maintained the ban on medical assistance in dying in 1993, and which was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2015.

The vast majority of federal officials have confirmed being fully vaccinated: 95% of the 268,000 employees covered by the Ottawa directive, as of last week, compared to only 1,255, who reported not being vaccinated, and 3,150 who refused. to give their vaccination status. Treasury Board has not released data on the immunization status of government contractors.

The complainant lists possible complications from the vaccine in his affidavit. However, these risks have been minimized by several experts, who compare them to the risks incurred with COVID-19 itself or other drugs.

The federal government had not yet filed its own brief in Federal Court on Thursday afternoon.

Watch video


source site