Connect with us

COVID-19

Canadian AG asks court to dismiss lawsuit against gov’t for imposing COVID jab travel mandate

Published

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Businessmen Karl Harrison and Shaun Rickard are seeking damages of $1 million each, claiming that their charter rights were violated.

The Canadian attorney general’s office is looking to dismiss a lawsuit filed against the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau by two men who said their mobility “charter rights” were violated because of COVID jab travel mandates.

On July 2, as per an Epoch Times report, the attorney general filed a motion in Canada’s Federal Court to have the $2 million lawsuit filed by businessmen Karl Harrison and Shaun Rickard dismissed because it has argued some of the men’s charter rights were not violated.

Harrison and Rickard are both seeking damages of $1 million each in their second lawsuit against Canada’s minister of transportation and attorney general that was filed in November 2023.

According to Harrison and Rickard, their charter rights were violated “as a result of government decision-making and conduct that was rooted in negligence, bad faith and willfully blind to the absence of scientific evidence or disconfirming scientific evidence regarding the role, and, in particular, the unknown efficacy, of Covid-19 vaccination in reducing the risk of Covid-19 transmission and infection within the transportation sector.”

In October 2021, Trudeau announced unprecedented COVID-19 jab mandates for all federal workers and those in the transportation sector and said the unjabbed would no longer be able to travel by air, boat, or train both domestically and internationally.

This policy resulted in thousands losing their jobs or being placed on leave for non-compliance. It also trapped “unvaccinated” Canadians in the country.

In November 2021, the Trudeau government initiated the COVID jab travel mandates that remained in place until June 2022.

Despite the attorney general’s motion to stop the lawsuit, lawyers for the Trudeau government have said that they would let Harrison and Rickard make changes to their statement of claim to show whether they are Canadian citizens so that Section 6 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms might apply.

Section 6 focuses on mobility rights and notes under point 6(1) that “every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada.”

Lawyers claim one’s COVID jab status not grounds for discrimination under Charter of Rights

The attorney general’s motion also claims that the COVID jab travel mandate did not violate any rights that are protected in Sections 7 and 15 of the Charter of Rights.

Section 7 of Canada’s Charter of Rights concerns the right of a person to “life, liberty and security of the person.” Section 15 offers protection against discrimination relating to race and sex.

According to the attorney general, Section 7 “does not confer protection for the ability to travel by federally regulated means of transportation.”

Government lawyers said that a person’s vaccination status is not enough to be seen as grounds for discrimination under Section 15.

“It is not contrary to section 15 of the Charter for individuals to be treated differently based on their choice whether or not to be vaccinated,” the lawyers wrote.

Harrison and Rickard’s second lawsuit come after they lost at the Federal Court of Appeal in their initial lawsuit against the COVID jab travel mandate, which was heard jointly with another similar one from People’s Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier and former Newfoundland Premier Brian Peckford.

In this lawsuit, the Canadian Federal Court of Appeal dismissed as “moot” their legal challenge initiated against the federal government over COVID jab mandates that banned the vaccine free from travel.

Bernier and Peckford have since appealed to the Supreme Court.

COVID vaccine mandates, which came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The mRNA shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.

In 2021, Trudeau said Canadians “vehemently opposed to vaccination” do “not believe in science,” are “often misogynists, often racists,” and even questioned whether Canada should “tolerate these people.”

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

2025 Federal Election

Mark Carney refuses to clarify 2022 remarks accusing the Freedom Convoy of ‘sedition’

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Mark Carney described the Freedom Convoy as an act of ‘sedition’ and advocated for the government to use its power to crush the non-violent protest movement.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney refused to elaborate on comments he made in 2022 referring to the anti-mandate Freedom Convoy protest as an act of “sedition” and advocating for the government to put an end to the movement.

“Well, look, I haven’t been a politician,” Carney said when a reporter in Windsor, Ontario, where a Freedom Convoy-linked border blockade took place in 2022, asked, “What do you say to Canadians who lost trust in the Liberal government back then and do not have trust in you now?”

“I became a politician a little more than two months ago, two and a half months ago,” he said. “I came in because I thought this country needed big change. We needed big change in the economy.”

Carney’s lack of an answer seems to be in stark contrast to the strong opinion he voiced in a February 7, 2022, column published in the Globe & Mail at the time of the convoy titled, “It’s Time To End The Sedition In Ottawa.”

In that piece, Carney wrote that the Freedom Convoy was a movement of “sedition,” adding, “That’s a word I never thought I’d use in Canada. It means incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”

Carney went on to claim in the piece that if “left unchecked” by government authorities, the Freedom Convoy would “achieve” its “goal of undermining our democracy.”

Carney even targeted “[a]nyone sending money to the Convoy,” accusing them of “funding sedition.”

Internal emails from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) eventually showed that his definition of sedition were not in conformity with the definition under Canada’s Criminal Code, which explicitly lists the “use of force” as a necessary aspect of sedition.

“The key bit is ‘use of force,’” one RCMP officer noted in the emails. “I’m all about a resolution to this and a forceful one with us victorious but, from the facts on the ground, I don’t know we’re there except in a small number of cases.”

The reality is that the Freedom Convoy was a peaceful event of public protest against COVID mandates, and not one protestor was charged with sedition. However, the Liberal government, then under Justin Trudeau, did take an approach similar to the one advocated for by Carney, invoking the Emergencies Act to clear-out protesters. Since then, a federal judge has ruled that such action was “not justified.”

Despite this, the two most prominent leaders of the Freedom Convoy, Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, still face a possible 10-year prison sentence for their role in the non-violent assembly. LifeSiteNews has reported extensively on their trial.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

17-year-old died after taking COVID shot, but Ontario judge denies his family’s liability claim

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

An Ontario judge dismissed a liability claim from a family of a high schooler who died weeks after taking the COVID shot.

According to a published report on March 26 by Blacklock’s Reporter, Ontario Superior Court Justice Sandra Antoniani ruled that the Department of Health had no “duty of care” to a Canadian teenager who died after receiving a COVID vaccine.

“The plaintiff’s tragedy is real, but there is no private law duty of care made out,” Antoniani said.

“There is no private law duty of care to individual members of the public injured by government core policy decisions in the handling of health emergencies which impact the general population,” she continued.

In September 2021, 17-year-old Sean Hartman of Beeton, Ontario, passed away just three weeks after receiving a Pfizer-BioNtech COVID shot.

After his death, his family questioned if health officials had warned Canadians “that a possible side effect of receiving a Covid-19 vaccine was death.” The family took this petition to court but has been denied a hearing.

Antoniani alleged that “the defendants’ actions were aimed at mitigating the health impact of a global pandemic on the Canadian public. The defendants deemed that urgent action was necessary.”

“Imposition of a private duty of care would have a negative impact on the ability of the defendants to prioritize the interests of the entire public, with the distraction of fear over the possibility of harm to individual members of the public, and the risk of litigation and unlimited liability,” she ruled.

As LifeSiteNews previously reported, Dan Hartman, Sean’s father, filed a $35.6 million lawsuit against Pfizer after his son’s death.

However, only 103 claims of 1,859 have been approved to date, “where it has been determined by the Medical Review Board that there is a probable link between the injury and the vaccine, and that the injury is serious and permanent.”

Thus far, VISP has paid over $6 million to those injured by COVID injections, with some 2,000 claims remaining to be settled.

According to studies, post-vaccination heart conditions such as myocarditis are well documented in those, especially young males who have received the Pfizer jab.

Additionally, a recent study done by researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest showed that 17 countries have found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots as well as boosters.

Continue Reading

Trending

X