Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

COVID-19

Terminally Ill Woman in Need of an Organ Transplant Asks Supreme Court of Canada to Decide Constitutionality of Covid-19 Vaccine Requirement

Published

4 minute read

From the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

Ottawa – An unvaccinated transplant candidate filed a court application this week asking the Supreme Court of Canada to hear her case against Alberta Health Services (“AHS”) and six doctors who removed her from a high priority organ transplant waiting list because she refused to take the Covid-19 vaccine.

Sheila Annette Lewis is dying of a terminal illness. She has been challenging the constitutionality of Covid-19 vaccine requirements for transplant candidates put in place by AHS, an Alberta Hospital, and six transplant doctors, for more than a year. She was unsuccessful at both the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench and the Alberta Court of Appeal in 2022, with both levels of court finding that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”) does not apply to the Covid-19 vaccine policies of AHS, the Alberta Hospital where she would receive her transplant, or her transplant doctors. Both courts also dismissed her claims under The Alberta Bill of Rights.

Ms. Lewis’ Supreme Court of Canada Leave Application focuses on the national importance of her case. She hopes to convince the highest court in Canada to hear her case and make definitive findings on:

  1. Whether doctors working within a provincial government transplant program are immune from scrutiny under the Charterand provincial bills of rights legislation;
  2. Whether government health care providers such as AHS can avoid Charter scrutiny of their policies which are similar to doctors’ policies for transplant candidates; and,
  3. Whether it is constitutional to remove a dying person’s chance at life-saving surgery when she does not agree to take a novel drug still in clinical trials.

She asks the Supreme Court of Canada to clarify provincial health care providers’ obligations under the Charter to patients within their provincial health care programs, the role of the Charter and provincial bills of rights legislation in the health care sphere, and whether the Charter protects dying Canadians’ rights to life without a condition of taking an experimental drug that has caused injury and death.Ms. Lewis had renewed hope for her survival when Premier Danielle Smith announced on November 29, 2022 that she was seeking a second medical opinion in respect of the Covid-19 vaccine policy for transplant candidates. After that announcement, the transplant team contacted Ms. Lewis and told her she had 10 days to get the Covid-19 vaccines before they removed her from the transplant program entirely, which would likely render her ineligible for a transplant even if Premier Smith removed the Covid-19 vaccine policy for transplant candidates, without having to start over and re-apply to the transplant program. Ms. Lewis does not have time to waste; her health is deteriorating by the day.

This case is under a publication ban. Due to a Court Order, the Justice Centre may not reveal the names of the doctors, the hospital, the city where the transplant program is located, or the name of the organ that Ms. Lewis needs for life-saving surgery.

There is no guarantee that the Supreme Court of Canada will agree to hear her case. Each year the Supreme Court considers an average of between 500 to 600 applications for leave to appeal and hears 65 to 80 appeals.

“Ms. Lewis is nearing the end of the legal road,” states Ms. Allison Pejovic, legal counsel for Ms. Lewis. “She has made the difficult choice to stand against an unethical and unscientific vaccine mandate which has come between her and her chance to survive. We hope the Supreme Court of Canada is interested in hearing this very important case.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Chris Barber asks Court to stay proceedings against him

Published on

Chris Barber leaves the courthouse in Ottawa after the verdict was delivered in his trial with fellow Freedom Convoy organizer Tamara Lich, on Thursday, April 3, 2025. (Photo credit: THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang)

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

“Chris Barber consistently followed the legal advice that he received from police officers, lawyers, and a Superior Court judge.”

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that Chris Barber has asked the Ontario Court of Justice for a stay of proceedings against him. He argues that the legal advice given to him by police officers, lawyers, and a Superior Court judge during the Freedom Convoy was erroneous and that, as a result, the Crown is not entitled to convict him.

On April 3, 2025, Justice Heather Perkins-McVey of the Ontario Court of Justice found Mr. Barber guilty of mischief and of counselling others to breach a court order. That decision followed upon a lengthy 45-day trial stretching from September 2023 to September 2024.

Diane Magas, Chris Barber’s lawyer, filed a Stay of Proceedings Application with the Court on April 16, 2025. In that Application, Mr. Barber and his legal team argue that he did, in fact, seek legal advice regarding his actions during the Freedom Convoy protest.

For example, he followed Ottawa Police Services directions on where to park trucks in downtown Ottawa. When an officer asked him to move his truck, “Big Red,” from downtown Ottawa, he moved it. On February 7 and 16, 2022, his lawyer at the time advised him that Justice Maclean of the Superior Court had confirmed that the protest could continue so long as it continued to be peaceful and safe.

In essence, Chris Barber and his legal team are now arguing that he followed all legal advice that was given to him in 2022, but that some of the legal advice he was given turned out to be erroneous.

His Application argues for a stay of proceedings against him on the grounds that “he sought advice from lawyers, police officers, and a Superior Court Judge on the legality of the protest he was involved in.”

This Application was filed one day after Chris Barber was informed that the Crown was pursuing a two-year prison sentence against him. In an April 15 Facebook post, Mr. Barber wrote, “My family got bad news today. The Crown prosecutor wants to lock Tamara Lich and me in prison for two years-for standing up for freedom. They also want to [seize] my truck, Big Red, and crush her like she’s just scrap metal or sell it at auction.”

If the Application is successful, Mr. Barber would not see prison time, nor would his truck be seized.

“Throughout the peaceful Freedom Convoy, Chris Barber did what any law-abiding Canadian would do: seeking out and acting upon the best legal advice available to him,” stated John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre. “Chris Barber consistently followed the legal advice that he received from police officers, lawyers, and a Superior Court judge.”

“To hold a well-meaning man behind bars for two years and to confiscate his property, as is now demanded by the Crown, would bring the administration of justice into disrepute,” Mr. Carpay continued. “Crown prosecutors are painting a portrait of a dangerous criminal, even while Chris Barber sought out and followed legal advice when participating in the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa in 2022. Chris worked within the law when peacefully exercising his Charter freedoms of expression, assembly and association.”

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Tamara Lich and Chris Barber trial update: The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues..

Published on

Here are the last two posts on Tamara Lich’s Substack posted April 16 and April 17:

April 17: 

We weren’t able to secure a date yesterday for the sentencing hearing and instead another ‘speak to’ was set for April 28. In addition to time needed to enter numerous impact statements (coincidentally and conveniently comprised of individuals suing us for $300,000,000.00), the Crown has added a forfeiture order to seize Big Red which will add significant time to argue. Therefore I suspect all parties will need to find 4-5 days in their schedules for the sentencing hearing.

The Crown is also seeking two years in federal prison for each of us.

Three days were tentatively set aside at the end of May for a Stay of Proceedings application put forth yesterday by Ms. Magus on Chris’ behalf.

And so The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues to plod along, still no end in sight.

 

April 16:

In our trial, the longest mischief trial of all time, we set hearing dates to set hearing dates.

There will be a ‘speak to’ this afternoon to set a date for the sentencing hearing which we think will take 3-4 days. Following that hearing, Chris and I will return to Ottawa again for the actual sentence.

The Crown is seeking 2 years in a federal penitentiary for both of us, plus they have decided to file an application to confiscate Big Red. Funny, there hasn’t been a single other convoy case in which the Crown demanded that persons property or vehicle, yet they seem to want Big Red. You need to ask yourself why.

Chris raised his children in that truck, changed their diapers in that truck, had his old dog, Buddy, put to sleep in the passenger seat when his time came because that was Buddy’s favourite place in the world.

This is not about the rule of law.

It’s about crushing a Canadian symbol of Hope, Pride & Unity

Continue Reading

Trending

X