A Canadian Federal Court judge has recently ruled that the Canadian government overstepped its authority and violated protesters’ constitutional rights by invoking the federal Emergencies Act in response to the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests, a series of demonstrations that created a standstill in Canada’s capital for three weeks.
This court decision sharply contrasts with the conclusion drawn by a 2022 public inquiry, which earlier found that the government’s use of the Emergencies Act was justified.
The Emergencies Act is a federal law that enables the Canadian government to ban specific public demonstrations and travel to/from particular areas if it believes that a ‘public order emergency’ exists, based on reasonable grounds. According to Justice Richard Mosley, the convocation of Freedom Convoy protests to oppose COVID-19 vaccination requirements did not qualify as such an emergency.
Furthermore, Justice Mosley has stated that the proclamation of a public order emergency across Canada was mistaken. The Emergencies Act stipulates that crises are situations beyond the provinces’ capacity to manage and that they cannot be accommodated by any other extant Canadian laws. Mosley used the example of the Coutts blockade in Alberta, which was dismantled without the use of the Emergencies Act. His point was that other Canadian laws were sufficient to handle protest-related disruptions, and the situation in Ottawa alone exceeded provincial capabilities.
According to the ruling, the federal government also breached the protesters’ freedom of expression and the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, as protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Regulations produced as a result of the Emergencies Act criminalised participation in a public assembly likely to cause a breach of peace. This decision affected the free expression rights of nonviolent and unobtrusive protesters.
Further scrutiny of the decision reveals that the government overstepped its authority by freezing the bank accounts of convoy participants, which Mosley considered an unreasonable search and seizure. The information obtained by the RCMP about the blockade participants constituted a “search”, and the freezing of their accounts constituted a “seizure”. Neither action met the necessary “objective standard”.
Justice Mosley dismissed the challenges against the federal government’s actions under Sections 2(c) and 2(d) of the Charter, which protect the freedom of peaceful assembly and association, respectively. Neither did he find a violation of Section 7’s protection of life, liberty, and security of the person. The Canadian Bill of Rights was also not violated, according to his findings.
In the aftermath of this ruling, the Canadian government has announced that it will appeal the Federal Court’s decision. This ongoing clash between public dissent and federal authority in Canada is sure to invite additional scrutiny in the coming months. It remains to be seen whether this appeal will amend, affirm, or complicate the current legal perspectives on governmental power and citizens’ freedom of expression.