Gurski: Emergencies Act ruling a reminder about free speech

Article content material

A quote apparently misattributed to Voltaire goes as follows: “I disapprove of what you say, however I’ll defend to the loss of life your proper to say it.” It’s a basis of our idea of freedom of speech.

This week’s Federal Courtroom resolution that the federal government illegally invoked the Emergencies Act in response to the “Freedom Convoy’s” shenanigans in 2022 might strike some as a bombshell however the truth is it’s a welcome reminder that the legislation is the legislation and and that we now have elementary rights as enshrined within the Constitution.

Article content material

Article content material

Allow us to assessment the information. A bunch of unruly yahoos parked 18-wheelers on Wellington Avenue, let off their horns incessantly, marched round with banners and flags, barbecued on the street, urinated in public, made a bloody disturbance of themselves and sure gave some Ottawa residents the center finger.

What they did NOT do as a gaggle is interact in acts of great violence; threaten to kill folks; or pose any actual hazard to the great folks of the nation’s capital or throughout our nice land.  This was most actually NOT a menace to nationwide safety and our personal spies on the Canadian Safety Intelligence Service (CSIS) even mentioned so brazenly.

And but within the midst of this maelstrom of impoliteness and inconvenience, one which native legislation enforcement in some way appeared powerless to disperse, the federal authorities introduced within the Emergencies Act to save lots of us all from annihilation by the hands of a canine’s breakfast of vaccine doubters, COVID deniers, Trudeau-haters and diverse hangers-on. The general public, bored with the entire shebang, welcomed a swift finish to the chaos.

Besides that the Canadian authorities can solely resort to this software if there’s a clear and current hazard to nationwide safety (Part 16 of the Act). That hazard occurs to coincide with the definition of a menace to nationwide safety as decided by CSIS, which, as already famous, mentioned there was none. So what offers?

Article content material

The Liberals now discover themselves in a large number of their very own making. They instantly introduced their intention to enchantment the Federal Courtroom ruling and have additionally said beforehand that the Act is in want of revision. The underside line, nonetheless, is that the ruling says the federal government has trampled on Canadians’ rights to free speech underneath the Constitution. We have now a authorized resolution that the federal government broke the legislation.

Curiously, in his ruling Justice Richard Mosley didn’t disagree with the CSIS evaluation however added that the cupboard might have had different causes to invoke the Emergencies Act. What might these be? Intelligence from one other supply? (Um, that could be a CSIS matter, not a cupboard one; extra on that in a bit.) Political expediency?  Embarrassment? A need to finish what many Ottawans had grown bored with?

Extra importantly, the federal government has to make use of the legislation because it stands now, not because it needs it to be. We draft revisions to laws on a regular basis, however no authorities can determine to make use of these revisions earlier than the legislation is formally ratified.

The truth that CSIS took the weird step of going public with its view that the convoy posed no menace to public security is a vital level. My expertise at CSIS in counter-terrorism for 15 years tells me that the service would have carried out its due diligence; investigated people it suspected would possibly represent a menace to nationwide safety as outlined by part 2 of the CSIS Act; collected intelligence; corroborated it; assessed it; and concluded ultimately that there was no menace. Therefore no grounds to make use of the draconian Emergencies Act hammer. Will we not need CSIS to weigh in on threats moderately than unqualified politicians?

Article content material

Appeals apart, this ruling is essential. What paralyzed Ottawa within the first few months of 2022 might have been unwelcome and unpopular with its inhabitants, and the messages blasted advert nauseam incongruous and flat-out misinformation, however these selling them had a Constitution proper to take action. They need to solely have been forcibly stopped if a veritable menace to nationwide safety was looming: it was not, as CSIS helpfully advised the federal government. We’re not speaking a couple of scenario analogous to the October Disaster of 1970, the final time the necessity to use extraordinary powers was evident.

The lesson in all this? Possibly it’s time for our leaders to brush up on their understanding of rights and democracy. And take heed to Voltaire.

Phil Gurski is President/CEO of Borealis Menace and Danger Consulting, and a former senior strategic analyst at CSIS. 

Article content material