In a recent development, Members of Parliament (MPs) from various political backgrounds have united to address the concerns arising from a federal court ruling that deemed the use of the Emergencies Act (EA) as a violation of Charter rights. This move comes in the wake of the court’s decision that the invocation of the EA to disband the 2022 Freedom Convoy was deemed “not justified.”

MPs Demand Accountability
On January 24, six MPs, spanning different party affiliations, jointly sought clarification from the Special Joint Committee on the Declaration of Emergency. The committee, responsible for reviewing the justifiability of Prime Minister Trudeau’s use of the EA, faced calls for an immediate response in light of the recent court ruling.

Conservatives Call for Urgent Committee Recall
THe Conservative party, in response to the court’s decision, is urging an immediate recall of the committee to scrutinize what they term as Trudeau’s “illegal and unconstitutional” implementation of the Emergencies Act. The question posed is whether the NDP and Bloc will stand up for rights and freedoms or align with Trudeau’s controversial actions.

Seeking Answers Post-Court Ruling
The MPs expressed the need for transparency in the decision-making process leading to the use of the Emergencies Act, especially considering the recent court ruling. The statement emphasized the urgency of the matter, invoking Standing Order 106( 4) to demand the immediate recall of the committee.

Signatures in Solidarity
Published on social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter), the letter bears the signatures of notable MPs such as Larry Brock, Rob Moore, Tako van Popta, Frank Caputo, Randall Garrison, and Rhéal Éloi Fortin. This collective effort highlights the gravity of the situation and underscores the bipartisan concern regarding the EA’s application.

Court’s Stance on Emergencies Act
The Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley, in his ruling, declared that Trudeau’s decision to invoke the EA lacked reasonableness, justification, transparency, and intelligibility. The court emphasized that the Emergencies Act should only be a last resort after exhausting all other measures. It also pointed out alternative means, such as provisions in the Criminal Code, which could have been employed to address the protest.

EA’s Controversial Use in 2022
The Emergencies Act was enforced on February 14, 2022, to disband the Freedom Convoy protest in Ottawa. THe demonstration, which drew thousands opposing COVID mandates, involved measures liek freezing the bank accounts of protest supporters. Trudeau’s characterization of dissenting Canadians as a “small, fringe minority” with “unacceptable views” further fueled controversy.

Legal Challenges and Public Reaction
The EA faced legal challenges from various organizations, including the Canadian Civil Liberties Foundation, the CCF, the Canadian Frontline Nurses, private applicants, and the Alberta Government’s legal team. The recent court ruling, celebrated widely on social media, marked a significant victory for those opposing the EA’s implementation.

Political Responses and Calls for Change
Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre called for Trudeau’s dismissal, asserting that the Prime Minister had caused the crisis by dividing people and then violated Charter rights to suppress citizens. Conversely, Liberal politicians, with few exceptions, remained relatively silent on the ruling that criticized their actions.

Legal Battle Continues
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland annouced the Trudeau government’s intention to take the matter to the Federal Court of Appeals, where 10 of the 15 justices are appointed by Trudeau. This move sets the stage for a continued legal battle over the controversial use of the Emergencies Act.

In conclusion, the recent court ruling has ignited a bipartisan call for accountability, prompting MPs to demand swift action from the Emergencies Act committee. The fallout from the EA’s controversial use in 2022 continues to shape the political landscape, with legal battles and public discourse playing a pivotal role in the ongoing narrative.

SHARE this Post with a Friend!

2 thoughts on “Exploring the Federal Court Ruling: Emergencies Act Committee Urged to Respond by MPs”
  1. From Paul Kincaid at presscore.ca

    Serving, protecting and defending Canada includes protecting Canadians’ Rights and Freedoms and Canada’s sovereignty
    Forcing Canadians to be vaccinated – a medical treatment, under threat of prosecution blatantly violates Canada’s supreme law. Quebec, Alberta, New Brunswick, Ontario and other provincial governments who are requiring vaccine passports are violating Canada’s supreme law and Canadians’ constitutional right to refuse medical treatment & the right to make “reasonable medical choices” without threat of criminal prosecution.

    Threatening to prosecute any person in Canada for not having a vaccine passport at public places (grocery store, bank, restaurant, … ) amounts to the governments depriving Canadians of their constitutional rights to refuse medical treatment.

    Section 52(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 states that any federal or provincial law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is of no force or effect. Statutes which conflict with the Constitution are invalid in the most radical sense; they do not become law.

    Section 7 of the Constitution of Canada includes the right to refuse medical treatment & the right to make “reasonable medical choices” without threat of criminal prosecution.

    1. Everyone

    “All individuals physically present in Canada will benefit from the protection of section 7 (Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 177 at page 202; Charkaoui (2007), supra, at paragraphs 17-18).”

    2. Life, liberty and security of the person
    (ii) Right to liberty

    “Section 7 protects a sphere of personal autonomy involving “inherently private choices” that go to the “core of what it means to enjoy individual dignity and independence” (Godbout v. Longueuil (City), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 844 at paragraph 66; Association of Justice Counsel v. Canada (Attorney General), 2017 SCC 55 at paragraph 49). Where state compulsions or prohibitions affect such choices, s. 7 may be engaged (A.C. v. Manitoba (Director of Child and Family Services), 2009 SCC 30, at paragraphs 100-102; Blencoe, supra at paragraphs 49-54; Siemens v. Manitoba (Attorney General), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 6 at paragraph 45) This aspect of liberty includes the right to refuse medical treatment (A.C., supra, at paragraphs 100-102, 136) and the right to make “reasonable medical choices” without threat of criminal prosecution (e.g. fines): R. v. Smith, 2015 SCC 34 at paragraph 18. It may also include the ability to choose where one intends to live (Godbout, supra), as well as a protected sphere of parental decision-making for parents to ensure their children’s well-being, e.g., a right to make decisions concerning a child’s education and health (B.(R.), supra, at paragraph 80).” Canada’s Department of Justice

  2. If people in government could read and understand, we would not have had this problem, along with treason and genocide, however, puppets can’t read, and can only pretend to read, neither can robots, as it takes real intelligence, not fraudulent elections by people engaged in anti nation state activities, only the work of real citizens, patriots and nationalists. What is really interesting, is that the government traitors do not want to yield to the supremacy of the Canadian constitution, as it is written by so called white supremacists, as if anyone else could conceive of or even write what is right, the Americans have the same problem, part of the dumbing down curriculum of imbeciles and race traitors and related usurpers of the goblin new world order.

    Obviously better to not have your kids in school to be subject to mind control, vaccine genocide bio-weapons and endless sexual perversion and victims of related cultural genocide, and some drag pedo in public that should be executed and dropped into a volcano. Along with the Hindu ministers of defence who have been engaged in genocide and bio terrorism, treason and high treason, along with the PM and deputy PM etc et all, more people who can’t read, and only dream of killing whitey along with the rest of the global population and wildlife, and if they were so concerned about diversity, why engage in multiple species extinction, Eh, Huhn? Look, the keys to midnight and the elevator, are mine…I don’t bother with hard to understand endless speculation and personal interpretation of cryptic messages of PsyOps that you may be accustomed to, of which we have not time for bullshit, you will have to deal with it, like a deck of cards, only with the cosmic joker outranks everything you can imagine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *