Honourable David Lametti P.C.,Q.C.,MP
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Dear Sir:

I have a copy of a letter you sent to a friend of mine concerning your Government’s unconstitutional covid actions.

You try to defend the indefensible.

You say :

‘It is important to note that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows governments to balance the rights of individuals with the interests of society by permitting justifiable limits on guaranteed rights and freedoms. This means that when a government limits individual rights during a pandemic, it must only take actions that are a reasonable and proportionate response to the risks to the health and safety of Canadians.’

I guess you are referring to Section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms .

‘1 The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.’

What a contrast ! Your statement and the actual section.

First , as the last living First Minister that helped craft the Charter , I must inform you that the intent of Section 1 disqualifies it from being applicable in our present circumstance .

This Section was intended in a circumstance where the country was in peril , like a war or insurrection. A virus which has a recovery rate of 99% and a fatality rate of well below 1% hardly qualifies as a threat to the existence of the country . This is especially the case when alternatives such as early treatment ,adherence to the Great Barrington Declaration principles , and following already established emergency measures plans , would mean no threat to hospital or medical capacity and ,therefore , no so called emergency.

Secondly, even for arguments sake if Section 1 did apply , the four tests outlined , demonstrably justify, by law, reasonable limits and consistent with a free and democratic society, have not been met by any Government.

Take, for example, ‘demonstrably justify ‘. I note in your reply that you omitted ‘demonstrably’ . This was deliberately inserted to ensure that Governments would have to ‘ go out of their way’ to show justification like , for example , a cost benefit analysis. No Government has done this.

Thirdly, I also note that you conveniently used the word ‘pandemic’ . There is no such word in Section 1. And reasonable is not the phrase in Section 1 , it is ‘reasonable limits prescribed by law’, a quite different meaning than reasonable and proportionate . Where are the reasonable limits in law ?

The meaning of Section 1 has been garbled and construed beyond its simple meaning.

In summary:

Section 1 does not apply in this circumstance since there is no threat to the state .
Even if one tried to make it apply, the four tests have not been met.

Therefore , the Governments have acted unconstitutionally, in violation of Canada’s Supreme Law .

Furthermore, if such a circumstance was applicable the first ministers would not have bothered with putting the freedoms and rights in the Constitution . They would have just said put these in an Act of Parliament and the Provincial Legislatures.

The whole idea was to make individual rights and freedoms permanent , that is in The Constitution, not temporary like the Bill of Rights of 1960 , an Act of the Federal Parliament.

This was a National action not Federal or Provincial action. The essential written glue of the Country

By definition , then , any override of such rights must only be in the most dire of circumstances.

One last point if I may: there is no reference in your reply of the two principles that under gird the Charter , the first words of the Charter : the supremacy of God and the rule of law. It is in the context of these principles that the Charter must be interpreted .

It is clear then that the Charter , its principles at the beginning , and the following provisions of individual freedoms and rights have been violated.

It is also clear that courts have gone beyond their authority , making new laws , rather than interpreting the existing ones , your reply is a prime example, using court’s creation of new meanings and words , the antithesis of the words written.

Hon. A. Brian Peckford P.C.
Parksville, BC
Last Living First Minister Who Helped Craft The Constitution Act In Which the Charter Is Located.

You can find this along with other thoughts of the Honourable Brian Peckford at

https://peckford42.wordpress.com/