“Freedom Convoy” | Use of the Emergency Measures Act unjustified, rules the Federal Court

(Ottawa) The historic use of Emergency Measures Act to end the “freedom convoy” in 2022 was not justified and contravened the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, according to a judgment rendered Tuesday by the Federal Court. The government has already indicated that it will appeal the decision.

This is the first time a court has drawn the line since this legislative measure, adopted in 1988 to replace the War Measures Act, had never been used before. This judgment contrasts with the conclusions of the Rouleau commission, which “reluctantly” agreed with the Trudeau government almost a year ago.

“It must be a measure of last resort for the government,” said lawyer Ewa Krajewska, who argued for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association in this case. The organization is one of the groups which contested the use of this exceptional law in February 2022.

“It’s not something we invoke because it’s more practical, easier or faster,” she adds. There must be objective proof that it is a national crisis that threatens the security of Canada. »

And the government has failed to demonstrate this, according to Judge Richard Mosley. However, he admitted that he tended to believe that recourse to Emergency Measures Act was reasonable before hearing the arguments of all parties.

The decree led to the suspension of certain civil liberties, banning public gatherings; it also gave additional powers to police forces and allowed the freezing of demonstrators’ bank accounts.

No threat to national security

Judge concludes ‘freedom convoy’ did not pose threat to national security even though other protesters began blocking border crossings elsewhere in the country and the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, a critical trade corridor between Canada and the United States.

The judge notes that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) had ended the blockade of Coutts, Alberta, after the discovery of a large weapons cache and that the Sûreté du Québec had also taken care of the demonstrations on its territory . Only in Ottawa were the local police incapable of handling the situation.

Judge Richard Mosley recognizes that these demonstrations harmed the Canadian economy, but adds that this did not constitute “a threat or the use of serious violence against people or property”.

According to the law, activities that pose a threat to national security include, for example, espionage or sabotage, foreign interference, the use of serious violence, or actions aimed at overthrowing the government. It is specified that this definition does not apply to lawful demonstrations.

The magistrate also considers that the government contravened the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression and the right to protection against abusive seizures guaranteed by the Charter by allowing the freezing of the bank accounts of the demonstrators at the size of the country without judicial authorization when he could have taken less invasive measures. They could, for example, “be limited to Ontario which was facing the most difficult situation”.

Senator Claude Carignan, who is part of the joint committee of the House of Commons and the Senate set up to evaluate the use of Emergency Measures Act, is not surprised. “It was obvious to me that this did not meet the criteria to trigger the Emergency Measures Act, he commented in an interview. We saw it from the start. »

Always convinced

“We made a difficult decision. We made a serious, serious decision, but we were convinced at the time that we were making the right decision,” responded Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Chrystia Freeland, shortly after the judgment was made public.

Downtown Ottawa, near parliament, was paralyzed by hundreds and sometimes thousands of trucks for almost three weeks without the municipal police intervening. Other trucks also blocked the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor and border crossings elsewhere in the country, including Coutts, Alberta. The demonstrators were opposed to mandatory vaccination for truckers and other health measures imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“We remember our discussions with the American administration regarding national and economic security which was threatened,” mentioned the Minister of Public Security, Dominic LeBlanc, during a press scrum on the sidelines of the Council of ministers.

“And I remember very well when the intelligence and police services informed us that in Coutts, Alberta, they had discovered two homemade bombs, 36,000 rounds of ammunition; and at the same time, they filed charges as serious as conspiracy to murder,” he added.

However, Judge Richard Mosley writes that the potential for a serious act of violence to be committed was not high enough for recourse to the Emergency Measures Act. He notes that there “was no evidence of a similar ‘hardened cell’ elsewhere in the country, only speculation”, and that “the situation in Coutts was resolved without violence”.

The demonstrators had begun to leave the scene after the intervention of the RCMP the day before the decree allowing recourse to the law.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said at the time that he had an obligation to use this “exceptional measure” to restore order, preserve Canadians’ confidence in their institutions and protect Canada’s reputation among its allies as a countries where the rule of law is respected.

With the collaboration of Joël-Denis Bellavance, The Press