7.1.10 Policing During COVID-19 Pandemic: Balancing Authority and Citizens‘ Rights

Introduction

The role of law enforcement agencies in Canada is firmly rooted in the principles of maintaining public safety, upholding the rule of law, and safeguarding the fundamental rights and freedoms of its citizens.

Policing at various levels of government, from federal to provincial to municipal, forms a critical part of Canada‘s social fabric. Yet, as the nation grappled with the unprecedented challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the actions of law enforcement agencies came under heightened scrutiny.

It is critical to understand the role and intent of the police in Canada, emphasizing what they are meant to do and what falls outside the scope of their duties. While the police are entrusted with maintaining order, their authority is carefully controlled by the principles of democracy and respect for individual rights.

Many witnesses described actions of the police to enforce government mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic that may have encroached upon the basic and fundamental rights of Canadian citizens. These actions included forced closures of businesses, arrests of citizens, the forceful breakup of peaceful protests, and the arrest and imprisonment of members of the clergy.

Canadians must assess whether law enforcement agencies in Canada have struck the right balance between protecting public health and respecting the constitutional rights and civil liberties of Canadian people during these extraordinary times.

Witnesses described specific cases and events that have garnered attention, weighing the considerations of public safety, individual freedoms, and the rule of law.

In a country that takes pride in its commitment to democracy and human rights, it is essential to critically evaluate the actions of the police in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and reflect upon the broader implications for Canadian society. By engaging in this dialogue, we seek to promote a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by law enforcement and the rights of citizens, ultimately contributing to a more informed and just society.

Testimony of Witnesses

Witnesses who testified concerning the actions of the police include the following:

Chief John Greg Burke

Chief Burke described how he was assaulted by store employees for not wearing a face mask, despite his having a medical exemption from wearing a mask. When the police were called, they allegedly assaulted Chief Burke and arrested him. Chief Burke had interactions with both Bedford Police and RCMP.

Tom Marazzo

Mr. Marazzo described his interactions with the police while attending the truckers‘ protest in Ottawa, which included the alleged assault of a disabled war veteran.

Natasha Petite

Ms. Petite testified that due to a disability, she was not able to wear a mask. She testified how when she and her mother were shopping, police were called and she was pushed to the ground by police and arrested.

Vincent Gircys

Mr. Gircys was a retired 32-year veteran of the Ontario Provincial Police. He attended the Ottawa truckers‘ protest, where he acted as a liaison between the protestors and the police. Mr. Gircys testified that the police had committed alleged crimes against various churches. Mr. Gircys also testified that the police services refused to investigate alleged crimes related to the vaccines.

Tobias Tissen

Mr. Tissen ministered a church in southern Manitoba during the COVID-19 lockdowns. His church was closed down by the RCMP and he was arrested for keeping his church open during the pandemic.

Richard Abbot

Mr. Abbot was an Edmonton police officer for 25 years. He discussed his experiences and observations of the police actions during the protest in Coutts, Alberta.

David Leis

Mr. Leis testified regarding the failure of Canadian institutions to protect the civil rights of Canadians.

Danny Bulford

Mr. Bulford retired after a 15-year career with the RCMP. He spoke about the actions of the RCMP during the protests. He further spoke about a police detective who was disciplined for launching an investigation into suspicious infant deaths potentially related to the vaccines.

Pastor James Coates

Pastor Coates testified how his church services were disrupted by the police and he was arrested and jailed for keeping his church open during the lockdowns.

Discussion of Police Actions

Testimony of the witnesses suggested that the police took actions to enforce mandates and rulings that were contrary to section 52.1 of the Canadian Constitution, which included the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Section 52(1) of the Constitution states:

52.(1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.

Lockdowns, forced vaccinations, restrictions of travel, interruption of church services, and assaults on peaceful protestors are all actions which appear to be inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and/or the Criminal Code of Canada.

Citizens‘ fundamental rights were violated under the guise of a public health emergency, despite the government not having to prove the validity of that public health emergency within an objective and independent inquiry, or through open and honest debate.

Only one narrative was permitted and any dissenting options were censored and vilified by the media and public officials.

Testimony was provided on how significantly people‘s lives were affected, which included death due to the mandates, allegedly through increases in suicides or credible allegations concerning an unsafe medical procedure being forced upon citizens.

Testimony showed that information provided to the public by the government and the media misled the people and, in so doing, may have contributed to deaths.

Witnesses testified that they were allegedly forced to take medical procedures under threat of loss of employment. It may be reasonable to believe that the actions taken to have people take injections agains their will could be considered a Criminal Code violation.

Forcibly subjecting a person to unwanted medical treatment in Canada can potentially violate several provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada, depending on the circumstances and the severity of the actions involved. Here are some relevant sections of the Criminal Code that may apply:

• Assault (section 265): Forcing someone to undergo medical treatment against their will may constitute assault under the Criminal Code. Assault includes not only causing bodily harm but also the intentional application of force without consent.

• Aggravated Assault (section 268): If the forced medical treatment results in severe bodily harm or endangers the life of the victim, it may be charged as aggravated assault, which carries more severe penalties.

• Kidnapping (section 279): If the victim is forcibly taken to a medical facility or detained against their will for medical treatment, it could be considered kidnapping under certain circumstances.

• Uttering Threats (section 264.1): Threatening someone with harm or injury if they refuse medical treatment may lead to charges of uttering threats.

• Unlawful Confinement (section 279): If a person is forcibly confined to a medical facility or prevented from leaving against their will for medical treatment, this may be treated as unlawful confinement.

• Mischief (section 430): Interfering with or damaging medical equipment or property related to medical treatment may fall under the offence of mischief.

Consent is a crucial factor in medical treatment in Canada, and any medical procedure performed without Informed and Voluntary Consent can lead to criminal charges.

However, specific charges and penalties will depend on the circumstances and the evidence available. Legal authorities will thoroughly investigate and assess each case to determine the appropriate charges.

The police failed to take action and investigate credible allegations of criminal wrongdoings, despite being presented with evidence of such alleged wrongdoings by multiple sources throughout Canada.

Witness testimony indicated that frontline police officers could initiate a criminal investigation on their own and that an investigation of any alleged criminal actions related to the pandemic measures and police actions must have been authorized by senior administrative staff.

Testimony confirmed that in a number of instances when police officers took action to investigate allegations of misconduct, these officers were disciplined.

The actions of the police services at the various peaceful protests sites, but most notably the Ottawa protest, indicated that the police were being given erroneous information concerning the nature and threat posed by the protestors. Witness testimony described how the protestors were exercising their rights to peaceful protest and that the character and the nature of the protestors was readily evident. Despite this, the police frontline members were replaced by members who had not been in direct contact with the protestors. These replacement members allegedly acted in a completely inappropriate manner using excessive force and violence on an unarmed and peaceful crowd of Canadian citizens.

The area where the Ottawa protests took place, in front of Canada‘s Parliament, was monitored by numerous video cameras, so there are likely a great number of recorded videos available which recorded both the actions of protestors and the police. This video record is critical to any investigation into the alleged misconduct of the police. As yet, this video record has not been presented to the public, and we do not know if it is being used in any criminal investigations of the police conduct.

Police officers are not robots; they are human beings entrusted with a crucial role in upholding the law and ensuring public safety. In performing their duties, officers are not merely expected to blindly follow orders but, rather, to employ their judgment and analytical skills. They must assess the legality and appropriateness of the orders they receive, all while considering the specific circumstances unfolding before them. Importantly, officers have a solemn duty not to enforce any orders that are illegal or in violation of fundamental rights. This obligation to act appropriately, guided by the reality of the situation on the ground, underscores the importance of independent decision-making within the framework of the law and serves as a cornerstone of democratic policing in free and just societies.

It is unknown whether any internal investigations of police actions have been undertaken, despite the level of alleged violence perpetrated by the police on the civilian population.

The Commission heard testimony that the police services were experiencing internal struggles with the implementation of the mandates on their own members and that unions representing members were not defending the member‘s rights. This allegedly resulted in low morale and a removal of many experienced officers from the ranks at a time when the services were already experiencing staff shortages and morale issues.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the role of law enforcement agencies in Canada is deeply rooted in the principles of safeguarding public safety, upholding the rule of law, and protecting the rights and freedoms of Canadian citizens. The imposition of the various COVID-19 pandemic mandates posed unprecedented challenges, which brought the actions of these agencies into focus. It is essential to comprehend the intended role of the police in Canada, emphasizing their duty to maintain order within the boundaries of democracy and individual rights.

During the pandemic, police actions came under scrutiny, particularly in cases where they may have infringed upon the fundamental rights of citizens. This scrutiny encompassed instances such as forced business closures, citizen arrests, the dispersion of peaceful protests, and even the arrest and incarceration of clergy members. Canadians must carefully evaluate whether law enforcement agencies effectively balanced public health concerns with constitutional rights.

The witnesses‘ testimonies shed light on specific incidents where actions taken by the police seemed inconsistent with section 52(1) of the Canadian Constitution, which incorporates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The fundamental rights of citizens appeared to be violated under the pretext of a public health emergency, raising questions about the validity of these measures without objective inquiry or open debate.

The impacts on people‘s lives, including alleged harm and death, underscore the gravity of these issues. The testimonies also pointed to potential misinformation contributing to public perceptions and deaths. Additionally, there were allegations of coercive measures, potentially constituting criminal offences.

Frontline police officers faced challenges in investigating these allegations due to the need for authorization from senior administrative staff, and instances of officers facing discipline for initiating such investigations were reported. The response to peaceful protests, particularly in Ottawa, raised concerns about police actions and the accuracy of information provided to officers.

In assessing the actions of law enforcement during the pandemic, it is crucial to remember that police officers are human beings entrusted with the duty to uphold the law and protect the public. They are not automatons but individuals who must analyze orders critically and consider the prevailing circumstances. They bear the responsibility of refusing to enforce illegal or rights-violating orders. Independent decision-making within the framework of the law is foundational to democratic policing.

The situation also raised concerns about internal struggles within police services that affected morale and staffing levels. These issues are complex and multifaceted, warranting ongoing dialogue, investigation, and reflection to ensure that the actions of law enforcement agencies align with the values of democracy and justice in Canadian society. By engaging in this discourse, we strive for a deeper understanding of these challenges, ultimately contributing to a more informed and equitable society.

Recommendations

1. Independent Judicial Investigations: Conduct independent and transparent judicial investigations into allegations of illegal activities by law enforcement officers during the pandemic, ensuring accountability and adherence to the rule of law. This investigation must have the power to enforce subpoenas to obtain witness testimony and critical documents.

2. Review and Revise Policing Protocols: Collaborate with law enforcement agencies to review and revise their protocols and guidelines for enforcing government mandates, with a focus on respecting individual rights and freedoms while safeguarding public health.

3. Enhance Training and Education: Provide comprehensive training on handling public health crises to law enforcement officers, emphasizing respect for human rights, de-escalation techniques, and community engagement.

4. Public Awareness Campaigns: Launch public awareness campaigns to educate citizens about their rights and responsibilities during health emergencies, promoting dialogue and cooperation between the police and the community.

5. Community Policing Initiatives: Promote community policing initiatives that foster positive relationships between law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve, enhancing trust and cooperation.

6. Clear Accountability Mechanisms: Establish clear mechanisms for holding law enforcement agencies accountable for their actions during the pandemic, ensuring transparency and fairness in the disciplinary process.

7. Civilian Oversight: Strengthen civilian oversight bodies to independently monitor police conduct during public health crises, ensuring adherence to legal and ethical standards.

8. Regular Reporting and Transparency: Mandate law enforcement agencies to regularly report on their activities during health emergencies, providing transparency and accountability to the public, while respecting privacy and security concerns.

By implementing these recommendations, authorities can strike a balance between maintaining public safety during health crises and upholding the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, ensuring a more just and equitable response to future pandemics.