Emergencies Act

They parked massive trucks in the downtown core.

It led the government to implement the Emergencies Act, which it had not done ever.

The predecessor to that law, just as a caveat, had been invoked, but only to do with Quebec separatism and very serious terrorists of threats associated with that.

So when I say that the government invoked the Emergencies Act, that's a very significant move, and it rocked the country's politics for months on end.

The point I'm making here, though, is that that repertoire of convoy and protesting emerged first through this extractive populist pro-oil and gas movement in Canada.

And the same sort of networks that were involved in that essentially just gained a massive boon from the pandemic, more and more types of people joining their protest cycle.

god so you know it's uh but i i i think that um a big part of the problem is that there's no deterrent for a lot of these criminals anymore i mean unless you're charged with mischief in canada now you can basically um get away with just about anything

speaking of getting away with just about anything the co-lead counsel of the emergencies act inquiry is now an ontario superior court judge um oh this is of the inquiry sorry Yeah, of course.

I don't know if I can pronounce her name.

Shantona Shadhuri helped lead the inquiry that found the threshold for invoking the Emergencies Act was met, which the courts so far have said shouldn't have happened.

Justice Minister Sean Fraser has now made her a superior court judge.

We see this over and over.

They do have to hear it because it's in the public interest.

This is a very important case.

But at the same time, where that line is and how far some governments have pushed that line, I think needs to be litigated through the system.

And in fact, the Supreme Court is now going to hear the Emergency Act case, which I think is an important case about the invocation of the Emergencies Act.

We're hoping more cases will get heard by the Supreme Court in the context

of charter violations.

And then, you know, we can have this broader conversation of is it enough or do we need more protections?

Mm-hmm.

Do you think it's a good thing that that's getting opened up again, the Emergencies Act? I know right now Mark Carney is trying to get the Supreme Court basically to make a decision saying, yes, actually, this was justified.

What are your thoughts? What do you think the Supreme Court's decision is going to be on this one?

RSS for the win, yo! Before throwing up a series of increasingly baffling gang signs.

Finally this week, the Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear the Canadian government's appeal of two lower courts' rulings that its use of the Emergencies Act in February 2022 to deal with the Freedom Convoy protests was not justified.

The case revolves around the Canadian government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act, a statute granting extraordinary temporary measures to the government to wield emergency powers during times of insurrection or invasion, to combat a group of peaceful protesters who had gathered in Ottawa to honk their horns, sing O Canada, and let their children play in bouncy castles.

In January 2024, a federal court ruled that the invocation of the Emergencies Act was not justified, a decision that was upheld by a federal appeals court earlier this year.

The extraordinary measures were used to target peaceful Canadian citizens engaged in peaceful protest of the Canadian government's draconian and coercive COVID vaccination mandates.

As Reclaim the Net notes, the Federal Appeals Court noted the egregious nature of the government's actions, including its order to freeze the bank account of those participating in the protest.

RSS for the win, yo! Before throwing up a series of increasingly baffling gang signs.

Finally this week, the Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear the Canadian government's appeal of two lower courts' rulings that its use of the Emergencies Act in February 2022 to deal with the Freedom Convoy protests was not justified.

The case revolves around the Canadian government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act, a statute granting extraordinary temporary measures to the government to wield emergency powers during times of insurrection or invasion, to combat a group of peaceful protesters who had gathered in Ottawa to honk their horns, sing O Canada, and let their children play in bouncy castles.

In January 2024, a federal court ruled that the invocation of the Emergencies Act was not justified, a decision that was upheld by a federal appeals court earlier this year.

The extraordinary measures were used to target peaceful Canadian citizens engaged in peaceful protest of the Canadian government's draconian and coercive COVID vaccination mandates.

As Reclaim the Net notes, the Federal Appeals Court noted the egregious nature of the government's actions, including its order to freeze the bank account of those participating in the protest.

You know, a cynic might look at some of the communication and rhetoric that we saw during COVID based on the overwhelming public support there were for the COVID measures, including a majority of...

I think it was 60-plus percent of Canadians agreed with the Emergencies Act being invoked.

Now, whether or not that was lawful is still an open question that's being grappled with by the courts, so I don't want to weigh in on that.

But, like...

I mean, one thing I do want to mention is, you know, freedom of speech can go micro and it can go And we're seeing that.

I mean, CCF obviously lead challenger on the Emergencies Act challenge, which we heard this week is going to or just last week going to the Supreme Court.

Obviously, that's been a very high profile and very important fight for the CCF.

There are smaller and bigger challenges.