The Federal Court of Appeal ruled on Friday that the Liberal government’s use of the Emergencies Act to disperse the convoy protests in Ottawa and at border points nearly four years ago was deemed unreasonable. The court upheld a 2024 ruling that found former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to invoke the legislation unlawful and a violation of protesters’ Charter rights.
In the appeal court’s decision, the judges stated that despite the disruptive nature of the blockades and convoy protests, they did not pose a significant threat to national security. The court’s ruling came after the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) and other groups challenged the government’s declaration of a public order emergency.
During the initial Federal Court review, Justice Richard Mosley criticized the government for lacking justification, transparency, and intelligibility in its decision to use the Emergencies Act. The government’s argument that the protests posed a security threat and warranted the extraordinary measures under the act was not deemed sufficient by the court.
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. While acknowledging the potential need for the Emergencies Act in extreme circumstances, Sapers cautioned against its misuse that could undermine democracy.
The government is currently reviewing the ruling and considering potential next steps, including a possible appeal to the Supreme Court. Minister of Public Safety, Simon Lafortune, emphasized the government’s commitment to safeguarding the safety and security of Canadians in the face of public safety threats.
The convoy protests initially targeted vaccine requirements and drew thousands of participants to Ottawa, resulting in disruptions and complaints from residents. The government’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act in February 2022 marked the first time the law had been used since its inception in 1988.
The court of appeal also highlighted concerns about the government’s freezing of protesters’ finances and the lack of precision in identifying affected individuals. The legal challenge raised questions about the definition of a national emergency and the threshold for invoking the Emergencies Act, with the court emphasizing the need for a rigorous assessment of security threats.
Despite a public inquiry concluding that the government met the threshold to invoke the Emergencies Act, the Federal Court of Appeal’s ruling reaffirmed the earlier findings that the government’s response to the convoy protests was disproportionate and infringed on protesters’ rights.