Freedom of Speech is a foreign concept north of the border... It is the same in any Common Wealth country such as the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand.
Section 2 — Fundamental Freedoms Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
So Section 2(b) specifically is:
“freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.”
Unless of course you are suffering from the FLU... - Freedom of expression & assembly (2(b) & 2(c)): Protests, rallies, and even church gatherings were restricted.
- Freedom of religion (2(a)): Churches, mosques, synagogues were ordered closed or heavily limited.
- Freedom of mobility (Section 6): Canadians were told not to leave provinces or even cities; unvaccinated people were barred from international travel.
- Right to liberty and security (Section 7): Vaccine mandates and lockdowns were argued to infringe personal autonomy.
For many, this felt like a blanket suspension of rights.
How the Government Justified It - Every Charter right is subject to Section 1 — “reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”
- Courts generally accepted public health as a pressing and substantial objective.
- Using the Oakes Test (a proportionality test), many judges said limits were justified because they were temporary, targeted, and aimed at protecting health systems.
Court Outcomes - Some challenges failed: Courts said mask mandates, business closures, and gathering limits were justified under Section 1.
- Some challenges succeeded: In a few cases, courts found overreach — for example, in Alberta, a judge ruled certain health orders were invalid because they weren’t made by the proper elected official.
Bottom Line - Yes, freedoms were restricted — but under Canadian law, that can still be constitutional if justified under Section 1.
- That’s the “Canadian difference” compared to the U.S. First Amendment: in the U.S., courts would have been much less willing to accept broad speech/assembly restrictions.
|
