Juno News - Lawyer challenging mandates says government must be held accountable

00:00:00.000 In a moment, we'll talk to lawyer extraordinaire Keith Wilson, but I just want to set the stage

00:00:14.760 here because the way the Liberals were talking about it yesterday, it's great news. They have

00:00:19.440 great news to bring us, some freedom for the peasants. Let's take a look at Omar Al-Ghabra's 0.95

00:00:24.340 comments yesterday. This is thanks to the millions of Canadians who rolled up their sleeves and got

00:00:30.720 vaccinated. That's why today's announcement is possible. And I'm pleased to announce that on

00:00:38.120 June 20th, our government will suspend the requirement to be vaccinated in order to board

00:00:44.140 a plane or train in Canada.

00:00:46.440 Okay. He was saying it was great news and we've earned it thanks to the vaccination rates. That

00:00:56.760 sounds good. That sounds nice. What they've done is made it so that as of June 20th, you don't have

00:01:03.220 to be vaccinated to board an airplane or a train in Canada. They've also suspended the vaccine mandate

00:01:09.280 for workers in those sectors and for federal employees. So you could, if you're unvaccinated

00:01:13.960 and you were laid off, theoretically go back to work. Now, here's the thing. It still is in place.

00:01:19.540 This arrive can app. You still have to be vaccinated. If you want to get out of things like quarantine

00:01:24.200 and testing. If you want a friend to come visit you, who's not vaccinated, they, they can't come

00:01:29.060 into the country. It's that simple. The air travel mandate hasn't even been thrown completely into the

00:01:35.040 scrap in where it belongs. It's been suspended. It's been suspended. If you look at the government's

00:01:40.640 messaging, they're saying that they have to be wary of potential new variants. So this could just be a

00:01:46.360 temporary reprieve, a little temporary taste of liberty before the winter comes around and we get

00:01:51.280 thrust right back into it. And obviously the airport situation right now, especially in Toronto, is

00:01:57.060 driving this more than science because you can't defend the indefensible. And one gentleman who knows

00:02:02.380 this all too well is the lead lawyer for a very significant piece of litigation against the

00:02:08.940 government on this that we have started with former Newfoundland Premier Brian Peckford, who is denied

00:02:14.860 the right to travel the country by commercial air because he's not vaccinated. And in doing so,

00:02:20.560 it's a large country. He, he, he got to Ottawa during the convoy. So you can get around it, but generally

00:02:25.720 speaking, this is not conducive to living in a country that supposedly has mobility rights within it.

00:02:31.400 Keith Wilson joins me on the line now. And I should just say, right before we get into it, Keith,

00:02:36.420 in the background there, I have my upcoming book, The Freedom Convoy. I spoke to you for that and you

00:02:41.600 gave tremendous insights as you always do, but it's good to have you on the show again.

00:02:46.160 I just ordered three copies. I was hoping you might sign them, but I don't think Amazon facilitates that.

00:02:51.240 So, hey, well, we'll have to, we'll have to meet up in person. I would, it would be my honor. And thank

00:02:54.820 you very much for that, Keith. Let's start right out of the gate here. The mandate is, let's just say it's gone.

00:03:00.740 Let's be charitable and say that the suspension will be permanent. Your lawsuit is continuing,

00:03:06.080 correct? Yeah. And, and, you know, we're going to talk about the fact that it's not gone.

00:03:10.980 I appreciated your intro and that you've picked up on the sleight of hand here by the federal

00:03:15.740 government. But so I can update you hot off the press here, so to speak. This morning,

00:03:22.700 we were in emergency application before the federal court brought by the federal government

00:03:27.360 lawyers. They are requesting that the Peckford lawsuit, and it's not just a former premier Brian

00:03:36.700 Peckford. It's also a number of other five other applicants, Canadians that we represent

00:03:41.260 with my legal team through the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, as well as a couple of other

00:03:46.580 lawsuits brought by from some very capable counsel, the Carl Harrison case. And we're all consolidated

00:03:54.800 into one case before the court. So this morning, well, last night, we had a fight with the lawyers

00:04:02.460 from Justice Canada saying, well, you guys should be happy and fold your tent. And we said, no,

00:04:07.900 we're not folding our tent. Nowhere near. Even then, it was less clear than it is this morning as to what

00:04:14.800 exactly the government's proposing. But the position we took yesterday was, even if all of the mandates are

00:04:22.800 gone, to give your scenario, life, Andrew, we're still bringing this to court, because Canadians need

00:04:29.580 to know whether their charter rights mean anything. This government has completely stomped on millions

00:04:36.800 of Canadians' fundamental rights, not just with respect to mobility, the obvious ones, but having freedom to

00:04:45.840 decide what the government can force you to put into your body, religious freedoms and other freedoms.

00:04:52.620 So we made it clear and I made it forcefully clear to the lead counsel for the Attorney General, that no matter

00:05:01.160 what, this case must proceed. Canadians need to know one way or another whether the charter means anything, and

00:05:07.620 whether governments can do this, because as we all know, the number of times yesterday, the minister said,

00:05:14.400 it's suspended. We won't hesitate to bring them back in September. As Dr. Tam said, the next wave is coming

00:05:22.400 in September. It's like, yeah, you mean seasonality of flus? Yeah, I thought we knew about that. So that gives you

00:05:28.400 some context. We're going to move ahead regardless. We're going to have a fight about it, because they're going to bring an application to have our lawsuit struck out.

00:05:34.620 This morning, they were trying to stop the cross-examinations that are ongoing that I'd like to talk about later in our interview.

00:05:46.300 They wanted to stop those because they're occurring as we speak, and we were successful in getting the court to agree with us

00:05:52.740 that in the meantime, we carry on and the government can bring its application at a later date to try and knock us out.

00:05:58.780 Yeah, I want to talk about that cross-examination in a moment. But the first thing I would share with people,

00:06:04.040 when the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms was representing True North in our fight against the Leaders Debates Commission,

00:06:11.920 after we were excluded from covering the debate in 2019, the government had that action thrown out on the grounds of mootness.

00:06:21.020 We got the injunction. We were allowed to cover the debate. We wanted to carry forward as well to get this on the record.

00:06:26.440 And the government said, no, no, no, it's moot. The debate's done.

00:06:29.100 And then what happened in 2021, the Debates Commission again banned, not us, but Rebel News from covering,

00:06:35.880 and they were right back to square one. So, I mean, that's just one example.

00:06:39.740 And there are many more of why you can't just say or you shouldn't just say, oh, well, the policy's done.

00:06:45.320 You have no grievance because that's a very convenient way for government to not have a judgment against them in court

00:06:51.000 if they just keep putting these things forward, taking them back, putting them forward, taking them back.

00:06:56.040 Well, and to add some color to that, first of all, when is it that we are scheduled on this expedited process?

00:07:02.520 And we are working flat out, like we're in six weeks of back-to-back daily cross-examinations,

00:07:11.380 most of which are highly technical experts or government officials with technical expertise.

00:07:18.280 So we're working every day, six days a week, day and night to move this thing forward and get it to the court as quickly as possible.

00:07:25.520 Even with that accelerated timeline, when are we supposed to be in court?

00:07:29.660 You know, the week of September 19th, I believe it is off the top of my head.

00:07:33.800 So when is the government talking about bringing back the mandates? September.

00:07:39.640 So that's one sleight of hand. But the other is, you're right, they've already said mootness, mootness, mootness,

00:07:47.260 meaning for those who aren't legal geeks, mootness means there's no point in the court deciding 0.53

00:07:53.760 because the issue's resolved, right? The mandate's gone.

00:07:57.560 However, it is not uncommon in constitutional or charter matters to do a retrospective analysis.

00:08:04.860 It happens all the time in a criminal setting.

00:08:07.560 Something happened six months ago, someone got pulled over, the police did X, they didn't warn.

00:08:13.360 Was it a violation of someone's charter rights against unreasonable search and seizure?

00:08:18.140 So it's not unusual for the court to not, what's unusual is to have an ongoing reoccurring breach of charter rights

00:08:27.040 affecting six million Canadians, reoccurring every single day.

00:08:31.140 That's what's unusual.

00:08:33.240 So anyway, as you can tell, we're going to make an aggressive argument that this case has to be heard.

00:08:38.700 You know, I never like to get too conspiratorial and it may be impossible to deduce motives from government,

00:08:44.180 but do you think in some level they don't want the information that you're getting from this cross-examination process,

00:08:52.480 which I'm assuming is supporting the idea that there is no scientific basis for this mandate.

00:08:57.540 Do you think it's that they don't want that and that's why the timing is happening right now?

00:09:01.980 That's why they're ending the mandates now and then trying to get, or suspending the mandates and then trying to get this case dismissed?

00:09:07.160 Well, the legal team and I have talked about that and all we can do is speculate.

00:09:15.760 We don't think the cross-examinations have been going particularly well for the government witnesses.

00:09:22.040 And we think it's a factor.

00:09:25.640 What level of factor it is, because as we know, even his caucus has started to turn on him.

00:09:30.920 The fact that, you know, one of the things that I've walked the government witnesses through,

00:09:40.460 if I just might, because it's serious, but it's a little bit funny and I do it with a completely straight face.

00:09:47.820 And I say to like the epidemiologist or the person from Health Canada who approved the vaccines,

00:09:54.200 both of whom I've cross-examined, and I put to them, I say, all right,

00:10:01.880 are you aware of any studies or medical evidence that suggests cell biology and physiology

00:10:10.240 of humans who live in the United Kingdom, Europe, is different than the cell biology

00:10:17.200 and physiology of Canadians in this geopolitical boundary called Canada?

00:10:23.120 And they kind of look like, wow, this lawyer is not very sharp.

00:10:26.100 And they go, no, you know, human biology is human biology.

00:10:30.320 And I go, oh, okay, thank you.

00:10:32.000 And are you aware of the SARS-CoV-2 virus behaving differently in the geopolitical boundaries of the United Kingdom

00:10:45.320 and Europe, for example, relative to the geopolitical boundaries of Canada? 0.97

00:10:50.820 And then they look at me like I'm really stupid and say, no. 0.96

00:10:54.020 And then I go, okay, are you aware from your life experience and your review of the literature 0.96

00:11:01.420 with respect to disease transmission risk in air travel, whether there is something fundamentally different

00:11:08.040 and unique about the aircraft that are used to transport people in Canada relative to the aircraft

00:11:15.600 that are used to transport people in the UK and Europe?

00:11:19.100 You see what I've just established?

00:11:20.880 Yes.

00:11:21.080 There's no reason for a different policy.

00:11:23.140 Are you aware of any scientific information that you believe your colleagues

00:11:28.540 in the international health communities in other countries are aware of?

00:11:33.440 No.

00:11:34.740 Okay.

00:11:35.600 Well, I think we've just established this is political.

00:11:38.880 So, and I don't get to say that last part.

00:11:41.020 That's for the judge.

00:11:42.580 Now, I think that's brilliant.

00:11:44.560 And I think it points to an issue that a lot of people have raised.

00:11:47.660 Why is the science that we're supposed to be following so much different in Canada than anywhere else?

00:11:52.640 Why are our doctors so much more enlightened than everywhere else?

00:11:55.840 Or are our doctors, quite frankly, not?

00:11:57.960 And are politicians not?

00:11:59.360 And people can draw their own conclusions from that.

00:12:01.500 But I will say, when you bring up that question, that line of questioning,

00:12:06.080 and we look at some of the other court rulings that have taken place, not at the Supreme Court,

00:12:11.020 but on other things related to lockdowns and other restrictions, courts, it seems like,

00:12:15.520 have been very deferential to government.

00:12:18.280 And even when they've said, yes, a breach has occurred, they've saved that under Section

00:12:22.000 One by saying it's a reasonable limit.

00:12:23.980 And I guess the, I mean, I would assume on this case, and you can correct me if I'm wrong,

00:12:27.740 that it's ultimately going to come down to that Section One analysis, to whether it's

00:12:30.880 a reasonable limit.

00:12:32.420 But do you think that on this issue, that latitude and deference that we've seen is still going

00:12:38.720 to be a factor?

00:12:39.360 I don't know.

00:12:43.000 We're assuming it is.

00:12:44.960 And that's why we've adopted a strategy that I'm going to be careful not to say out loud.

00:12:50.860 And that's partly why I've not been doing media interviews lately.

00:12:53.980 So I'm worried I'm going to reveal the strategy.

00:12:56.340 We're very alive to that dynamic.

00:12:58.280 And I believe we have a very powerful strategy to neutralize it lawfully.

00:13:05.520 So it's a dynamic for sure.

00:13:07.400 And remember, there are some key differences, of course.

00:13:12.480 The early cases went when we were in the early phases of our whole COVID nightmare.

00:13:18.980 And by the nightmare, I more mean the government response than the disease itself.

00:13:25.160 So little was known.

00:13:27.520 The data was all muddled up.

00:13:29.700 You know, some guy's riding a motorcycle, pulls out to pass, it becomes a grill ornament

00:13:34.880 of a cement truck.

00:13:37.400 They bring him in, what's left of him.

00:13:39.160 They test him, always positive for COVID.

00:13:40.880 Oh, there's another COVID desk.

00:13:42.380 Are you kidding me?

00:13:43.300 He was on a motorcycle at a head-on collision with a cement truck.

00:13:46.480 Anyhow, so I could go on.

00:13:49.580 We believe that this vaccine was going to be like a vaccine.

00:13:55.200 In other words, stop you.

00:13:57.000 You get the polio vaccine, you don't get polio.

00:13:59.640 You get the pneumonia vaccine, you don't get pneumonia.

00:14:02.200 You get the shingles vaccine, you don't get shingles.

00:14:04.320 Yeah, our triple vaxed prime minister just got COVID for the second time in four months.

00:14:08.140 Yeah, well, and what's alarming too, not to digress, but just as a footnote, one of the

00:14:12.920 things that's really coming out is the people who are filling up the hospitals now, to the

00:14:17.460 extent there is any filling occurring, because even that's an overstatement.

00:14:22.080 But the ones that the group that is the largest group in hospital is the triple vaxed. 0.91

00:14:26.760 Those are the ones that seem to have the weakest immune systems, given the actual data

00:14:31.920 and the opinion of the experts that we've presented.

00:14:35.940 So when we look at this mandate, and I think politically, we could all see it for what it

00:14:41.100 is.

00:14:41.360 It's punitive, it's wedge politics.

00:14:43.760 I think it ultimately was prolonged after the convoy when Justin Trudeau wanted to get

00:14:48.000 back at these truckers that embarrassed him.

00:14:50.840 Your view is that this is not just one of the many policy options available to government.

00:14:56.820 This is strictly unconstitutional.

00:14:59.300 No government should have the right to do this, correct?

00:15:01.920 I don't think, yeah, I think it's a clear violation of fundamental charter rights.

00:15:08.220 I think it's a clear example of government overreach on steroids.

00:15:13.260 Yeah, that's our position.

00:15:15.160 And we're, you know, because there, as you point out to your listeners, that we're going

00:15:23.300 to establish a charter breach.

00:15:24.500 It's just a question of how many.

00:15:25.780 I mean, mobility for sure.

00:15:26.940 So then we're going to be into this section one fight.

00:15:31.280 Well, what does that mean?

00:15:32.160 Well, that means you're into the Oaks test.

00:15:33.740 And that is, is the infringement of charter rights demonstrably justified in a free and

00:15:38.300 democratic society?

00:15:39.420 Uh, uh, uh, uh, was there a lesser measure available to the government?

00:15:43.320 Is there a rational connection between the restrictions and the harm they're seeking

00:15:48.600 to avoid?

00:15:49.500 Well, the air travel one fails on that in spades.

00:15:54.560 Um, uh, and then is there proportionality?

00:15:58.960 Is there proportionality between the impact of the violation of rights and the good that

00:16:05.280 comes from it?

00:16:05.960 And we're, we're smoking them on that too.

00:16:08.460 And the interesting thing is it's really legally important.

00:16:12.240 People may not pick up on this legal nuance, but as soon as, so we have the onus to prove

00:16:17.340 the charter breach.

00:16:18.180 Um, we have to bring concrete evidence to show it once we establish it in real time, this

00:16:27.000 is very rare in law.

00:16:28.140 There's a onus shift.

00:16:29.640 It flips immediately over to the government where they have to present the evidence to

00:16:34.400 prove they meet the Oaks test.

00:16:35.980 So, um, uh, we're confident that we have sufficient evidence so far and we're only, we still have

00:16:44.220 cross-examination scheduled for every day, um, uh, from now they started in mid-May and

00:16:50.480 they're, they go up to, uh, June 30th.

00:16:52.580 And then we start our, our court brief and our factum writing process.

00:16:56.140 And as to whether there was a lesser means available, now I wouldn't support this because

00:16:59.860 I think it's, again, incredibly intrusive, but, but even if the government, because when

00:17:03.620 the government first introduced the vaccine mandate, they had a testing alternative that

00:17:07.820 you could use for the first month to theoretically give people time to get vaccinated.

00:17:11.700 And that was something that, again, it would have been a useless bottleneck, was quite

00:17:16.360 meaningless.

00:17:16.960 There are lots of people that test positive and would have no idea they're sick because

00:17:20.740 it's a false positive or because they're asymptomatic, but, but that would at least

00:17:24.620 not close off air and rail travel to 6 million Canadians like this.

00:17:29.140 So, I mean, that right there to me is a less intrusive means that the government didn't

00:17:33.560 even seem like considered beyond that first month.

00:17:36.540 Uh, you're, you're officially on the legal team as of right now.

00:17:39.240 Uh, no, we, we, we, yeah, we spotted that one too.

00:17:43.360 Yeah.

00:17:43.460 That's, we've, we've pursued that extensively.

00:17:45.520 Uh, you know, okay.

00:17:46.740 You put it to the witness.

00:17:47.600 All right.

00:17:48.240 Uh, a scenario, a doctor, uh, you're, you're vaccinated and you're sitting on an airplane

00:17:53.140 and you have a vaccinated person sitting beside you.

00:17:56.980 Neither of you have been tested.

00:17:58.700 It's possible you would agree with me, doctor, that that person sitting beside you could be

00:18:02.960 positive with COVID.

00:18:03.920 Correct.

00:18:04.260 And they could transmit it to you even though they're vaccinated.

00:18:06.980 Correct.

00:18:07.360 Yes, yes, yes.

00:18:08.400 All right.

00:18:09.360 Wouldn't you be safer if you're sitting on that airplane and an unvaccinated person was 1.00

00:18:13.920 sitting beside you that was tested before getting on the airplane?

00:18:16.820 You'd agree with me, doctor, that that person's safer to you and has a greater likelihood of

00:18:21.740 reducing the transmission of COVID.

00:18:23.720 Right.

00:18:24.040 You know, so, and have they answered that?

00:18:27.380 I'm in this cross-examination mode.

00:18:29.380 My apologies.

00:18:30.900 No, I'm, I'm curious though, if you're, if you're getting the clear answers on that.

00:18:33.920 I put it to you that the salt shaker is at the end of the table.

00:18:37.700 I say my poor wife.

00:18:40.540 Anyway.

00:18:40.740 So as, as we look at this then going forward, Keith, and I don't know how many people you,

00:18:45.540 you get to subject to this cross-examination.

00:18:47.920 And let me tell you, I do not envy them at all, but does it get to the, I mean, have you

00:18:51.800 unearthed or have you approached that area of finding out who actually made this call?

00:18:57.560 Because it often has seemed that it's not really the doctors that are making these calls.

00:19:02.380 It's the politicians.

00:19:03.220 And in some cases the politicians say that they're just completely hands off on this, but

00:19:08.040 is that within the scope of, of what you're able to uncover?

00:19:11.520 Oh yeah.

00:19:12.080 We pursue that every day.

00:19:14.140 And it's, I, I kind of, my wife and I have four kids and I kind of feel every day, like

00:19:19.860 coming home and finding the cookie jar empty and saying to the kids, all right, who took

00:19:26.060 all the cookies?

00:19:26.760 And they all go, wasn't me.

00:19:28.700 Right?

00:19:29.740 So, uh, what's become clear is they say either it wasn't them or if it was them, if they've,

00:19:44.240 so there's 16 government witnesses that the government has put forward, very senior government

00:19:49.300 officials, uh, properly credentialed in the right places, they say that, um, they only

00:19:56.500 make recommendation.

00:19:57.460 The decision as to whether or not the mandate remains or is in place or is revoked is a political

00:20:02.440 decision.

00:20:02.980 It's made by cabinet.

00:20:04.360 It's not made by them. 0.51

00:20:05.800 And then the cabinet ministers were parading themselves before the microphones for the

00:20:09.860 last several weeks saying, Hey, it's not us.

00:20:12.300 It's the experts while the experts have testified under oath.

00:20:14.980 It's not them.

00:20:15.860 So it's obvious that this is just a political process and they're using, uh, they're engaged

00:20:21.360 in a political decision-making process.

00:20:23.540 And it's just, it's just become obvious to so many Canadians.

00:20:27.220 What's really going on here.

00:20:28.820 We have, uh, we very much look forward to the trial and the other things you're able to

00:20:32.680 unearth there.

00:20:33.200 And I know you won't let them off the hook easily, nor should you.

00:20:35.700 And, uh, thanks again for, uh, for chatting as we were working on this freedom convoy book.

00:20:39.800 I think people will find you had a lot to offer and we very much appreciate it.

00:20:43.560 Thank you, Keith.

00:20:44.700 Looking forward to it.

00:20:45.580 Thank you very much.

00:20:46.400 Thanks for listening to the Andrew Lawton show.

00:20:48.760 Support the program by donating to true north at www.tnc.news.

Juno News - June 17, 2022

Lawyer challenging mandates says government must be held accountable

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript