GOLDSTEIN: Freedom Convoy didn’t endanger democracy, Trudeau did

Existing laws to deal with illegal or harmful activities by some protestors already existed, without needing to invoke the EA.

Published Jul 29, 2026  •  Last updated 25 minutes ago  •  3 minute read

Part of the Freedom Convoy protest on Wellington street in Ottawa on Feb. 17, 2022. Photo by Jean Levac /Postmedia Network

See more Toronto Sun on Google — save as a Preferred Source

Article content

More than four years after the Freedom Convoy protesters arrived in Ottawa in late January 2022, it’s now clear the real threat to democracy was Justin Trudeau’s imposition of the Emergencies Act, not the actions of the demonstrators.

Article content

Recommended Videos

Article content

The federal government has already lost twice in court in its bid to justify that decision — first in June 2024 at the Federal Court and again at the Federal Court of Appeal in January this year.

The rulings in both cases regarding the government’s response to the protests — which began over federal vaccine mandates for cross-border truckers but quickly expanded into a larger protest about restrictive COVID-19 measures and the Trudeau government itself — were clear.

They were that the government’s use of the EA was unreasonable, illegal and unconstitutional in violating Charter rights.

The government failed to establish that the actions of the protesters, including the blockades in Ottawa and elsewhere in the country, constituted a threat to national security, or a national emergency, under the wording of the EA.

Article content

Article content

Government actions such as directing financial institutions to freeze the assets of protesters and disclose confidential financial information — often on the basis of unverified news stories and social media reports — violated the Charter right of Canadians to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.

Instead of focusing on protesters engaging in unlawful activities, the courts ruled, the government violated the Charter rights of those engaged in peaceful protest by restricting their movements.

The government also failed to use existing measures in the Criminal Code to deal with the unlawful actions of those demonstrators who were breaking the law.

To be clear, the two court rulings were not a blanket endorsement of the tactics of the Freedom Convoy protesters, or a denial that some of them broke the law.

Indeed, the judges agreed some of the activities of the protesters were highly disruptive to the lives of Ottawa residents and that the blockades in several parts of the country were economically damaging.

Article content

But they emphasized that existing laws to deal with those issues already existed, without needing to invoke the EA.

In the most serious case — the discovery of a cache of weapons, ammunition and body armour near the Freedom Convoy blockade in Coutts, Alberta, the police investigated and laid charges using the Criminal Code without any need for the EA.

Given the federal court rulings, it’s reasonable to conclude what happened during the Freedom Convoy was that the incompetence of police and all three levels of government in Ottawa — municipal, provincial and federal — led to so much havoc that the federal government illegally invoked the nuclear option of the EA to end it.

A decision that would have not been necessary had they done their jobs in the first place.

There’s also no question incorrect media reports contributed to and were used to justify the government’s response.

For example, the false allegation protesters attempted to light a fire in an Ottawa apartment building after locking the exit doors.

Article content

The false allegation convoy protesters had large caches of weapons stowed in their trucks parked in downtown Ottawa.

The false allegation Russia was secretly behind the protests.

The false allegation millions of dollars in financial support for the protesters was coming from foreign actors, including white supremacist groups.

In fact, most of the donations came from individuals in Canada and the U.S., acting on their own volition because they supported the protest, not because of a conspiracy.

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Richard Wagner. Photo by Via Supreme Court of Canada

All of this is now relevant because in March the federal government sought leave to appeal the Federal Court’s ruling to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will hear the case.

Chief Supreme Court Justice Richard Wagner has raised widespread concerns about his objectivity by refusing to recuse himself, even though he made highly critical comments about the Freedom Convoy — telling Le Devoir it was “the beginning of anarchy” and akin to hostage-taking.

If the Supreme Court decides not to hear the case or hears it and upholds the ruling of the Federal Court of Appeal that won’t be an issue. If it decides to hear the case and sides with the federal government, it will be.

Read More

1. 

   GOLDSTEIN: Why natural gas is crucial to Canada's economic growth

2. 

   GOLDSTEIN: Do the math, Liberals — we need fossil fuels

Article content