Sarah Miller, the lawyer who represented Artur and Dawid Pawlowski, says without their victory at the Court of Appeal, the right to protest would have been gravely threatened..On May 6, 2021, Justice John Rooke granted a pre-emptive injunction against the operator of the Whistle Stop Café, and organizers of advertised illegal gatherings and rallies that breached COVID-19 public health orders. On May 8, the Pawlowskis were served notice of the order at a Saturday morning church service, then arrested and detained. . Sarah MillerSarah Miller .On June 29, 2021, Justice Germain agreed the order applied to Pawlowskis and they had been in contempt of it. On July 21, 2022, the Court of Appeal overturned that decision, something Miller says was clearly the right decision..“The Court of Appeals said that order that they got was not clear enough. It was not specific enough. It could not be applied to the Pawlowksis for hosting Church on May 8th,” Miller told the Western Standard in an interview..“That's not anywhere close to what the order said, so you can't interpret it that way.”.In its ruling, the Court of Appeal said the order “was not sufficiently clear and unambiguous” and “must therefore be set aside.” Had the order stood, Miller says, governments or corporations might have won broad injunctions in the future to block all protesters against them instead of just specific people for demonstrable reasons..“It enforces government overreach, it provides power to those who already have it, and it takes away power of protesters who are trying to gain power and gain notice. So it was a very concerning precedent to leave in place,” Miller explained..“The Court of Appeal has righted that to a certain extent, and said you need to be specific, you need to follow through appropriately.”.Miller said as the pandemic subsides, Canadians will have a better idea whether setbacks to their rights indicate a more lasting trend..“Have we abandoned our constitutional principles indefinitely? I don't know. Certainly, there was a lot of constitutional civil liberties offenses throughout the pandemic. The courts haven't necessarily seen it that way because they continue to say these are temporary measures that are being put in place to protect us from a very severe public health crisis,” Miller said..“It could be a wave, where we're licensing media outlets — oh, are you spreading false news or not? Are you allowed to say what you're saying? [There’s] a lot of hate speech crimes and things of that nature [being threatened].”.Miller believes Art Pawlowski received disproportionate attention and penalties from authorities who didn’t like what he said..“I think it is targeted for sure. Part of that is because he's loud and garners attention. Part of it is because he calls police officers Nazis and they don't like that so they exercise their power and authority over him as they can,” Miller said..“Certainly there was an aggressive approach with the Pawlowskis that was not anchored in law or respectful of constitutional rights. We've seen that in other cases as well. I hope that it's a blip. I hope it's a sad asterisk in post-Charter Canada, and not a reversion to telling people what is right and wrong, having the government decide that for you. So we will see, I think, as time progresses.” .The Calgary lawyer, whose services for the Pawlowskis were funded in part by The Democracy Fund, says everyone’s personal rights must be defended for the sake of everyone else’s..“We have to protect everybody's civil liberties, because if we attack the ones that we don't agree with first, people in power will eventually come for ours, right? It's very hard to say, well, I only protect a civil liberty if I agree with it, and then who decides to agree with it?”
