The beginnings of Justin Trudeau’s year follow one another and are similar. The Prime Minister is struggling to defend his luxurious vacation in the sun, with wealthy friends of his family. And back home, he must deal with the repercussions of his omnipotent response to the trucker convoy protests. The verdict, however, this time proved to be quite different from the assent granted – “reluctantly”, that is – by Judge Paul Rouleau at the end of his commission of inquiry last year.
The Federal Court’s reprimand is severe: the Trudeau government’s use of the Emergency Measures Act to disperse, two years ago almost to the day, the occupation of Ottawa and border blockades was “unreasonable” and contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
This exceptional law only constitutes a “solution of last resort”, Judge Richard Mosley judiciously reminds. And any federal government cannot simply resort to it “because it is convenient to do so or […] more effective than the other tools available to the provinces.” However, throughout his decision of more than 200 pages, this is precisely what Judge Mosley criticizes Justin Trudeau’s council of ministers.
The magistrate does not dispute the state of crisis which paralyzed the capital of a G7 country for three weeks, the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, which alone sees a quarter of the trade between Canada and the United States pass through, or the Coutts border crossing, Alberta, where two pipe bombs and 36,000 rounds of ammunition were discovered during the siege. Judge Mosley confesses that he himself might have invoked the Emergency Measures Act for the very first time to respond.
But if the emotional and political threshold undoubtedly seemed to be reached, the legal threshold of a real threat to national security was not crossed. The ultimate test which should have guided the Trudeau government, even in an emergency.
Judge Mosley cuts into pieces the Liberals’ argument, reiterated this week to announce, as soon as the decision is made, that they will appeal it. The crisis was not national, since the Coutts dam was beginning to run out of steam with the intervention of the RCMP, and the Sûreté du Québec had been able to prevent the cantonment of truckers on its own territory. It was rather Ontario, the government of Doug Ford refusing to get involved in it for electoral preservation. And especially Ottawa, the magistrate in turn reproaching the municipal and police authorities for their “incapacity” to intervene. It is therefore to respond to this local incompetence that Justin Trudeau has given himself absolute powers on a pan-Canadian scale. Which violated the rights and freedoms of peaceful demonstrators. The seizure of bank accounts of less innocent participants is also considered contrary to the Charter.
Few voters (apart from conservatives) are likely to hold it against him. The chaos of these trucker camps, rooted and determined to stay there, was such that the invocation of the Emergencies Act earned the support of a majority of Canadians. But the unpopularity of a cause and its activists, or the desire of a government accused of inaction to protect its own reputation, do not justify the use of a whole heavy arsenal of unprecedented emergency measures. A happy call to order from the Federal Court, which will, we hope, be able to guide any future use of this law which must remain an exception.
Justice Mosley also invites, like Justice Rouleau, the federal Parliament to review the definition of “threat to national security” and “serious violence” provided for in its laws. Economic instability, at the heart of the liberal justification, does not appear there. An update on possible perils in the 21st centurye century, without necessarily including this Canadian financial security, would not be superfluous. And above all would allow, here again, to mark out any other possible recourse to this law.
Justin Trudeau would certainly have done without this legal decision. A new tile has come to derail his political comeback, which was banking on a tightening of temporary student immigration and the specter of a return of Donald Trump to regain a little ascendancy over his most popular rival Pierre Poilievre.
Just as he would have dispensed with the exit – quickly changed – of his backbencher from Newfoundland and Labrador, Ken McDonald, having questioned for the first time publicly the leadership of the Liberal leader. And who, incidentally, had not closed the door last fall to making the leap into provincial politics.
Mr. Trudeau insists that he will not take a walk in the snow to reflect anytime soon, like his father on his political exit. However, he must already be bored of his walks in the sand of Jamaica. The year 2024 will obviously not be kinder to him.