Liberal appeal to Emergency Act ruling comes on Friday Jan. 16

[Goddess]

In February 2024 the Federal court ruled that the invocation of the Emergency Act by Trudeau, following the Convoy, was illegal and "does not bear the hallmarks of reasonableness" and infringed on Charter rights, violating 2 sections.  In particular, the ruling discussed the decision to freeze bank accounts as being unconstitutional.

The ruling was 190 pages long, but the Liberal party held a press conference less than an hour later to announce they would appeal it.  Using your tax dollars, of course.

That appeal ruling will come down on Friday.

Here is the email I received from the CCF to update about the status of the case:

 

 

We know many of you have closely followed our Emergencies Act case, and we’re grateful for your support. Thank you for staying engaged – and I have an important update to share.

This Friday, the Federal Court of Appeal will release its decision in the Trudeau government’s appeal of the Federal Court ruling that found the invocation of the Emergencies Act unlawful in response to the 2022 Freedom Convoy.

This case is one of the most significant for civil liberties in modern Canadian history. At stake is whether the Emergencies Act contains meaningful legal limits, or whether the government can treat the Act as a tool of convenience when a protest is politically challenging.

The outcome will shape how far future governments can go in curtailing peaceful protest and using extraordinary emergency powers against peaceful Canadians.

We will be reviewing the decision as soon as it is released on Friday, and will share it with you as quickly as possible once it’s out.

Thank you, as always, for following this case and for supporting the work of the CCF.

With determination,

Joanna Baron | Executive Director
Canadian Constitution Foundation
theCCF.ca

 

 

If you're interested in the materials the CCF filed for the appeal, they can be read here:

A-30-23-A-73-24-Lead-Appeal-AGC-v-CCF-Respondents-MFL-MFL-on-Cross-Appeal.pdf

 

One focus of the CCF’s appeal materials is the fact that the definition of “threats to the security of Canada”, which the Emergencies Act makes clear means the same thing that it means under the CSIS Act, was not met. CSIS Director David Vigneault had informed the government that the definition was not met, and Cabinet failed to wait for an alternative assessment of the facts before invoking the Act. Another focus of the appeal is the level of deference owed to Cabinet in their decision to invoke the Act. The government is claiming that Cabinet essentially has unfettered discretion. This goes against the actual text of the Emergencies Act as well as the history and context of the legislation, which was enacted to ensure there were proper guardrails on the legislation so it could not be abused like its predecessor, the War Measures Act. 

 

CCF Litigation Director Christine Van Geyn called the Trudeau government’s unprecedented use of the act, “the most severe example of overreach and violations of civil liberties we have seen in a generation.”

“This case will set one of the most important precedents in Canada and internationally on the use of emergency legislation, and it has the potential to restrain it from being abused in the future,” she added “The Emergencies Act contains a last resort clause: it can only be used when there is a national emergency and there are no other laws at the federal, provincial and/or municipal levels which can address the situation. Parliament cannot use the Emergencies Act as a tool of convenience, as it did in this case. We look forward to the appeal hearing.”

CCF files materials in appeal of decision that found use of Emergencies Act against truckers unlawful - Canadian Constitution Foundation

[Goddess]

WE WON!!

Federal government loses Emergencies Act appeal, court says use during convoy protest was unreasonable

 

Paragraph 84:  "Reports of violent incidents and threats of violence and arrest were "vague and unspecified."

TRUDEAU AND THE MEDIA LIED TO YOU.

 

Paragraph 88:  "With respect to paragraph 2(b) of the Charter, the Federal Court found that the Regulations were overboard to the extent that they criminalized the entire protest and limited the right to expression of protesters who wanted to convey dissatisfaction with government policies.  Accordingly, it determined that the freedom of expression of peaceful protesters who did not participate in the actions of those disrupting the peace was infringed."

THIS PARAGRAPH IS VERY IMPORTANT BECUASE IT DESTROYS THE GOVERNMENT AND MEDIA NARRATIVE THAT THE CONVOY WAS TRYING TO "OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT".

THIS WAS A PEACEFUL PROTEST.

CASE CLOSED.

 

Paragraph 93:  "The Federal court found that these searches and seizures ( the freezing of bank accounts ) were unreasonable for the purpose of Section 8 of the Charter because the Economic Order failed to require reasonable grounds before a search was conducted.  The RCMP superintendent who oversaw the implementation of the Economic Order confirmed on cross-examination that the RCMP required only bare belief before freezing accounts and accessing the underlying financial information.  For the Federal Court, this failure to require some kind of objective standard breached Section 8."

SO TRUDEAU AND FREELAND UNLAWFULLY USED THE RCMP TO CARRY OUT ILLEGAL SEIZURES AGAINST CANADIAN CITIZENS.

IS IT ANY WONDER CANADIANS ARE DISTRUSTFUL OF THE RCMP AND THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION WAS RIGHT IN CALLING THE LEADERSHIP CORRUPT AND AN ARM OF THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT.

 

Paragraph 506:  "In light of the above reasons (500 of them), we are of the opinion that the appeals by the AGC in ....listing of other appeals files the government wants to continue this fight..... should be dismissed...."

THEY ARE WARNING THE GOVERNMENT TO STOP LITIGATING THIS ISSUE.

ALL 3 JUDGES AGREED ON THIS RULING. 

IT WASN'T EVEN CLOSE.