Lawlessness is a prevalent feature of our day. Regardless of whether they sit on the Family, Provincial, Superior, Appellate, or Supreme Courts of Canada, our justices appear determined to disobey the foundations of the legal system and the corpus of precedents that spans centuries. The Supreme Court of Canada has acknowledged the freedom to refuse medical treatment as a basic right under the Charter; yet, in the context of COVID-19, this right is being specifically violated and disregarded.
We’ve seen how various countries have reacted to COVID regulations during the last three years. The Canadian Supreme Court decided not to grant a case in which a patient had been denied a life-saving organ transplant because they had used their constitutional right to refuse the Covid-19 vaccination. Unlike in the past, judges today often uphold government decrees without requiring evidence to support why these measures are appropriate given that they infringe upon fundamental rights and liberties of Canadians. In situations where established facts don’t need to be validated or verified in court, this standard answer is known as “judicial notice.” This is contrary to Section 1 of the Charter, which states that the state must provide evidence for its activities. However, our courts are already accepting, without sufficient evidence, anything the government claims is required for COVID-19.
In Canada, the courts don’t seem fair now. The judges are not protecting our rights like they should. We’re having a tough time fighting against the government. Vaccine Choice Canada went to court two times because the government was doing things it shouldn’t and breaking our basic rights. In 2019, we sued the Ontario government because they wanted to take away parents’ right to decide not to vaccinate their kids in public schools. The government was scaring and pressuring parents who wanted to choose for themselves about their kids’ shots. The case is called Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC), et. Al. (and others) v. Her Majesty the Queen, et al. (and others) Ontario Superior Court. If you really want to know more about this you can visit the link shared below :- https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/wp-content/uploads/vcc-soc-ontario-redacted-october-24-2019.pdf.
The length of the court document in this case was perceived by some as excessive. To be clear, that was done on purpose. We aimed to demonstrate in a public way how international organisations, aided by Canadian governments, collaborate to violate human rights across the globe. What was formerly thought to be a conspiracy theory has been shown to be accurate. The length of time it took to take these matters to court has also drawn criticism. The length of time it takes to schedule a legal motion in Ontario is one of the reasons for the delay; other reasons include concerns about the way Canadian courts have historically handled cases involving the law.
Our courts are not reaching unbiased decisions grounded in evidence. Instead, they appear to be swayed by opinions, beliefs, and political considerations. Over the last three years, our legal system, designed to oversee and hold the government accountable, has become less effective. Groups like Vaccine Choice Canada, pursuing legal action, confront a difficult decision. Should we proceed quickly, risking a potential loss due to the courts’ lack of impartiality? If we do lose, it might establish a negative precedent for future cases. Similar to how politics mirrors culture, our judges may be impacted by the same influences.
There’s strong proof that our judges, especially those in the Supreme Court of Canada, have not stayed independent from the government. Instead, they actively worked with the government to decide on COVID-related rules. This makes recent court actions seem like the courts aren’t truly independent.
But there’s hope. Many Canadians are now realizing that the government and health agencies might be deceiving us under the name of COVID-19. This growing awareness is changing our culture. People are losing trust in the government and the groups that regulate things. People are now asking tough questions and want answers and accountability. We’re hopeful this change in culture will also affect our judges.
