Many people are angry that the government of François Legault allowed 20 people for Christmas parties and that he subsequently reversed his decision by reducing them to 10 people. Why does he have us given false hope? Couldn’t he have left that to 10 since he knew there was a risk of outbreaks? However, did you know that in terms of deprivation of rights and freedoms that he has no choice to do that?
When we talk about a state of health emergency and a law on public health which diminishes our rights and freedoms for the protection of the health of the population, we have no choice to play yoyo.
Indeed, our rights and freedoms are fundamental and the only reason the government can take them away from us right now is to protect us. The rights of some end or those of others begin. It’s still unheard of what is happening at the moment. Who would have thought that the government could tell us how to act in our daily lives and in our homes. The government is in our bedroom, as the expression puts it. Who would have thought the government would tell us how to celebrate Christmas two years in a row. Well, if he can do it according to the law, there are still rules to follow so that there is no abuse.
To be able to have this kind of power and deprive us of our rights, conversely the rule dictates that as soon as it can, the government must give us back these precious rights that it has taken away from us even if it means taking them back later. if the situation worsens again and protection is still needed.
In fact, in a state of health emergency the government cannot act in prevention or “in case it gets worse”. He must withdraw our rights only when he has no other solution and he must give them back to us at the minute or he can. In the opposite case, if he takes pleasure in leaving in place measures of deprivation of individual rights when they are no longer absolutely necessary, he runs the risk of the courts sanctioning these rules or the way he has acted. .
In this case, that is what he did. People wanted to plan their Christmas parties. The government had some pressure not to be too last minute. At the time of the decision, the epidemiological situation allowed it and they authorized more people. Now with the outbreak of cases and the omicron variant, they have to tighten up further. Although it was disappointing, it would not have been legal to stay sober and not allow 20 people when possible so as not to disappoint the population if they had to reverse their decision.
So be indulgent. We would not like to see a government not give us our rights back when possible, only so that we are not disappointed afterwards. This way of doing things would be much more serious.