Facts don't matter in Canadian courts

General
1

Facts don’t matter in Canadian courts

Unfortunately, Canadian courts have devolved to the point where facts do not matter. Do COVID vaccines prevent transmission? In 2022, courts took opposite positions.

  • In M.P.D.S. v. J.M.S., the judge accepted that COVID vaccines prevent transmission. The judge forced the father to spend less time with his child because he was unvaccinated and posed a ‘greater’ risk of giving his child COVID.
  • In Dyquiangco Jr. v. Tipay, the judge accepted that vaccines do not prevent transmission.

image
image882×832 80.6 KB

Judges are increasingly willing to ignore facts so that they can arrive at a politically desirable decision. In both cases, the judges had a pro-vaccine bias and punished the party that opposed vaccination.

The persecution of licensed professionals and others

Courts have consistently allowed licensing colleges to persecute those that they do not like. They have ruled in favour of the licensing colleges in these three areas:

  • COVID and pandemic views on vaccines, vaccine exemptions, repurposed drugs (ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine), mask exemptions, lockdowns, etc. These cases extend beyond patient care and include the persecution of professionals over social media posts.
  • Alternative medicine and/or exposing the CPSO (Ontario college that licenses doctors). This is specific to the Akbar Khan case.
  • Criticism of woke social justice / culture wars. Jordan Peterson has often criticized the DIE ideology… e.g. Diversity without diversity of though, Inclusion that results in exclusion, and Equity that does not lead to equality.

Various parties have tried to fight the colleges on various legal grounds but so far nearly all of the attempts have failed. The main issues raised in these battles are discussed below.

Standards of practice

The laws generally did not grant the licensing bodies the power to dictate how doctors and other professionals should practice. However, the courts have largely been deferential to the colleges in letting them decide what their members can and can’t do.

In Akbar Khan’s case, the decision implied that the colleges can set the standard of care through documents posted on its website:

The use of treatments that are not part of generally accepted or “conventional” therapies or the use of “conventional medications” in an unconventional or “off-label” manner is governed by Policy Statement #3-11 issued by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario entitled “Complementary/Alternative Medicine.”

This is the same CPSO that recommends treating vaccine hesitancy (“anxieties related to the vaccines”) with psych drugs and/or psychotherapy.

In the Jordan Peterson case, courts have so far ruled that his licensing college (CPO) can dictate social media behaviour. Peterson will be appealing his case.

Patients’ privacy

In the Sonja Kustka and Rochagne Kilian cases, patients sought to intervene in these cases so that their private medical records would be protected and would not be disclosed to the licensing college (CPSO) persecuting these doctors. Courts have consistently ruled against the patients so far, forcing them to pay costs associated with their failed legal attempts.

In the Celeste Jean Thirlwell case, the court did not have a problem with the CPSO searching through random patient records and computer files without a warrant.

Charter rights

Before COVID, Trinity Western University was involved in a landmark case as the Law Society of Upper Canada did not want to accredit the university’s law program due to the university’s “Community Covenant”, which required the students’ sexual intimacy to be reserved for the traditional marriage of one man and one woman. In other words: no homosexual intimacy.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms clearly states that everyone has the “freedom of conscience and religion”. Therefore, Trinity Western should be allowed to operate its university following their religious beliefs. However, the Supreme Court of Canada argued that there are “Charter values” not written anywhere in the Charter and that those Charter values override the Charter’s text regarding freedom of religion. This Supreme Court of Canada decision was in 2018. There has been an ongoing erosion of Charter rights since 2018 and not all of it can be attributed to COVID or the culture wars.

For a longer discussion of how the Charter and the Canadian legal system is supposed to work, see Bruce Pardy’s article:

The courts have also ruled:

  • Against cases challenging COVID lockdowns.
  • Against parents talking to their children about COVID and COVID vaccines. Parents were silenced in these cases: Saint-Phard v. Saint-Phard, 2021, TRB v KWPB, 2021, M.P.D.S. v. J.M.S., etc.
  • Against minors who do not wish to be vaccinated. At a certain age, they can get vaccinated without parental consent but apparently they aren’t old enough to refuse vaccination whenever a family court judge decides to be their parent. See Saint-Phard v. Saint-Phard, 2021.
  • Against people who deserve a vaccine exemption but did not get one. See the Kassian court decision. This case is ongoing; see the CCF’s coverage on their website and Youtube.
  • Against Artur Pawlowski for his speech to those involved in the Coutts border crossing during the trucker convoy. Not only was Pawlowski detailed without bail (in effect making him a political prisoner), he was jailed 60 days for his speech.
  • Against Anette Lewis, who was denied an organ transplant because she was unvaccinated.

Chilling effects for licensed professionals

Fighting the licensing colleges head-on will usually be an unfair fight. For most, cost will be a major obstacle:

  • Legal battles are incredibly expensive. Because the colleges have deep pockets, they can afford to litigate for years and to pursue every appeal.
  • Simply being investigated by the college is expensive due to time, stress, and the cost of a lawyer.
  • The colleges can revoke a professional’s license, causing a significant loss of income. If the college temporarily revokes a license, the professional will suffer significant financial damage even if they ‘win’ in court.

Fighting back

One reason why the courts are becoming politicized is because mainstream media is no longer holding them accountable. One potential way to fight back is to nurture the growth of independent media so that ordinary citizens will find out about what’s happening in Canada. Independent media is clearly the future as currently Joe Rogan is the largest platform in the world (bigger than the most popular cable news show). ‘Lawtube’ (Youtubers talking about law) is helping ordinary people understand the legal system and how it’s supposed to work. This road will be a long one but this is change worth fighting for.

Another way to fight back is to donate to organizations that are fighting for civil liberties. There are various pro-freedom non-profits that have intervened in the Jordan Peterson case:

  • Canadian Constitution Foundation - Canadian Constitution Foundation - Advocates for civil rights but without the “freedom movement” vibes of JCCF. Multi-million dollar budget.
  • AARPO - a small recently formed group intervening for the first time. Their goal is to advocate for licensed professionals.
  • CCLA - This organization advocates for civil liberties as its name suggests. However, they are also fighting for the ‘social justice’ side regarding SOGI education in Saskatchewan and New Brunswick, which may result in restrictions of freedoms for those who oppose social justice ideology. Multi-million dollar budget.

Other organizations engaged in these issues include:

One problem with fighting in courts (as most of the organizations above do) is that the overall conflict is a political one. As the courts are increasingly working for the government (legislature and executive branch), the fight is effect political change. Without it, the regulatory colleges will have free reign to impose their ideologies and politics onto their members, bullying them with the threat of taking away their livelihoods. As somebody who was injured by the Pfizer COVID vaccine, I am one of the victims of the politicization of medicine. The CPSO persecuted doctors in my province for treating vaccine injury. I became my own doctor and imported drugs without a prescription; this is not what healthcare should look like in a just and empathetic society.

Additional resources

List of relevant court cases with short summaries