The Emergencies Act was unreasonably used by the Liberal government to disperse the convoy protests that caused major disruptions in the capital city and at border points almost four years ago, according to a ruling by the Federal Court of Appeal on Friday. The court upheld a 2024 decision that found former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s invocation of the law to be unlawful and a violation of protesters’ Charter rights. The three judges on the appeal court stated that despite the disruptive nature of the blockades and protests in Ottawa, they did not pose a national security threat.
The Federal Court initially reviewed the government’s declaration of a public order emergency following a challenge by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) and other organizations. In the 2024 ruling by Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley, the government’s decision was criticized for lacking justification and transparency.
During a hearing last February, the government’s lawyers argued that the protests posed a security threat and defended their actions under the Emergencies Act as necessary and temporary. However, the appeal court concurred with Mosley’s finding that the government did not have reasonable grounds to believe there was a threat to national security warranting the use of the act.
Howard Sapers, the executive director of the CCLA, hailed the court’s decision as a significant victory for the rule of law and the rights of Canadians. He emphasized the importance of balancing emergency powers with protecting democracy and the rule of law.
The government is currently reviewing the ruling and considering potential next steps, which may include appealing to the Supreme Court. Minister of Public Safety Simon Lafortune reiterated the government’s commitment to safeguarding public safety and national security in the face of threats.
The convoy protests initially targeted vaccine requirements but evolved into a broader demonstration with various grievances against the government. The invocation of the Emergencies Act in February 2022 granted authorities broad powers to remove and arrest protesters, marking the first time the law had been used since its inception in 1988.
The legal challenges and public inquiries surrounding the government’s use of the Emergencies Act have raised questions about the definition of national emergencies and threats to security. The court’s decision highlighted concerns about the government’s interpretation of the law and the potential impact on civil liberties.
Despite a public inquiry concluding that the government met the threshold to invoke the Emergencies Act, the Federal Court of Appeal’s ruling contradicted this assessment. The legal battles and inquiries underscore the complex issues surrounding emergency powers and the need to uphold fundamental rights and freedoms.