KOWALCHUK: What's this? In Alberta, rights are abridged to expand rights?

Katherine Kowalchuk is an Alberta lawyer whose practice focus is family law. She is the co-founder of Lawyers 4 Truth and a member of the Council of Alberta LawyersOn October 28, 2024, in what appears to be an attempt to appease the freedom-minded base of the United Conservative Party (“UCP”) and in advance of this weekend's UCP Annual General Meeting where Danielle Smith’s leadership is under review, the Minister of Justice, Micky Amery, tabled Bill 24, the Alberta Bill of Rights Amendment Act, 2024 (“ABRAA”.)The purported aim of the Act is to strengthen Albertan’s rights and prevent government overreach. Arguably, these amendments worsen the status quo. Regarding an individual’s rights to property, although individuals will now receive just compensation in the case where property is expropriated, how does the Alberta Government plan to protect an individual’s right to acquire, keep and use firearms in accordance with the law, when the Federal Government has jurisdiction to restrict these rights under the Canadian Firearms Act? Regarding the right of the individual to receive medical care, medical treatment or a medical procedure free from coercion, unless that individual is likely to cause substantial harm to that individual or to others, and for the individual with capacity not to be subjected to, or coerced into receiving a vaccine without the consent of that individual, could a vaccine not be considered a medial treatment? What is the definition of substantial harm? Why did the government not define these terms better? Should the Alberta Government not have made explicit that no invasive procedure of any sort, including a vaccine, PCR test, brain chip, etc., can ever be mandated? These amendments are confusing and subject to judicial interpretation. However, the most alarming aspect of the ABRAA is the addition of the following: “the rights and freedoms recognized and declared by the Act are subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic Alberta. For greater certainty, a reasonable limit on the rights and freedoms recognized and declared by this Act that is prescribed by law and demonstrably justified under subsection (2) is not an infringement or denial of those rights and freedoms.” This language mirrors Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which “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.” This clause provides the Alberta Government the authority to limit your rights. If the goal is to protect Albertans’ rights and freedoms, why is this being added? Section 1 of the Charter allowed the governments to abridge individual’s God-given rights and freedoms during the COVID-19 era. Millions of Canadians, were, inter alia, coerced into receiving a medical intervention, described by the Rockefeller created medical establishment as a vaccine, to keep their jobs. Because of this, many families and friends were divided; many were injured or died. Not only did the governments see fit to impose their coercive mandates onto their citizens with impunity, the courts across the nation also relied on the concept of judicial notice, in the absence of demonstrable justification, to uphold those actions. Judicial notice is a rule that allows a fact to be admitted into evidence if the truth of that fact is so notorious that it cannot be reasonably doubted. An example being that people can agree that the sky is blue without having to provide evidence of the truth of this statement. But, in the COVID-19 era, courts accepted the Federal Government’s narrative that a pandemic was in progress and the “vaccine” was safe and effective, both of which were highly disputed. Further, the governments were often not compelled to demonstrably justify their position, which often tilted the result in their favour. The Alberta Government can now place limits on individual’s rights and freedoms, during a future pandemic for instance, when they previously did not have this right. Governments should never have the authority to infringe on an individual’s rights and freedoms. The inclusion of section 1 of the Charter was a major misstep by the Canadian Government and the inclusion of similar language in the ABRAA, is an even bigger misstep given what we all learned and experienced during COVID-19. If the goal was to strengthen and protect individual rights from government overreach, Bill 24 does the exact opposite. Katherine Kowalchuk is an Alberta lawyer whose practice focus is family law. She is the co-founder of Lawyers 4 Truth and a member of the Council of Alberta Lawyers.

KOWALCHUK: What's this? In Alberta, rights are abridged to expand rights?

Related Stories