Freedom's Defence Team
Constitutional lawyers say the Emergencies Act was illegal.
The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) calls itself “Freedom’s Defence Team.” It participated in the Emergencies Act hearings, and has since filed a two-part closing submission (see here and here.)
Together, these documents should chill the blood of anyone who believes Canadians have rights that governments must never trample. Part 1 tells us the Emergencies Act is “dangerous legislation” and that it’s invocation last February “was illegal.”
Lawyers Sujit Choudhry and Janani Shanmuganathan explain that the Emergencies Act allows a small group of people - the federal Cabinet, with the Prime Minister in charge - “to create new criminal offences and police powers” without advance notice, public debate, or any discussion in Parliament.
It allows these same people to interfere in areas normally managed by provincial governments - without the bother of even consulting the provinces, never mind obtaining their consent.
Here are some of the other issues highlighted by the CCF lawyers (all bolding added by me):
Prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act “there had been no rioting and…Not one person had been seriously injured.”
“the protests were not even close to the sort of national crisis Parliament had in mind when it passed the Emergencies Act.”
During the Emergencies Act hearings in November - 10 months after the fact - Justin Trudeau’s government “for the very first time” said it had relied on a new and novel interpretation of what constitutes a national security threat (italics by the lawyers).
When asked to explain this interpretation, the government said the legal opinion on which it relied is a secret.
Something horrifying happened in Canada last year. Peaceful protesters were violently shut down by an outrageous government overreaction. Since then, those responsible have offered shockingly lame, shockingly thin explanations for their behaviour.
So here’s a question: Why aren’t members of other political parties hollering about this at every opportunity? Why aren’t they insisting, day after day in Parliament, that the government come clean - that it release its secret legal reasoning?
This is a scandal. This is a historic blot on Canada’s record that will shame us for generations. Yet members of our political class are remarkably uninterested in talking about it.
The old saying about the corrupting quality of power is proven once again. Acknowledging these abuses is only the first step to controlling them in the future. Accountability for unconstitutional actions is required as well. Some of the police refused the orders as unconstitutional. Many of the bloggers opined that the invocation of the Emergencies Act was unconstitutional. In that they got it right and it took a secret legal opinion to come to an alternate conclusion, the siren call of power is clearly demonstrated. It will not get better without effort. It needs to be put back in a stronger box.
When I look at Justin Trudeau a. nd his team of criminal Cabinet Minster PUPPETS - all I can do is shake my head in disbelief ! If Jody Waybould Wilson had not been replaced her her joke of a replacement, does anyone think that J.T. would have gotten co-operation and approval from his Justice Ministry? Regarding the stated new and novel interpretation of what constitutes a National Security Threat- when asked to explain this interpretation, the Government said the legal opinion on which it used replied was a secret! With the important goal of investigating the invocation of the EMA - why didn’t Justice Paul Rouleau force or demand revealing of this secret novel interpretation- that was his duty to this Country and All CANADIANS!