Cara Zwibel
Toronto Sun, Oct. 20, 2022
“… an intolerable situation requiring decisive action is not the same thing as a national emergency, nor does it demonstrate a threat to national security.”
Act first, ask questions later. That’s what the Emergencies Act allows the government to do.
No parliamentary debate, no sober second thought in the Senate, no transparent democratic process. Just action. New legal orders start to govern us on the sole authority of the prime minister and cabinet.
n times of true national crisis, this may be necessary. But the concentration of power in a few hands is dangerous. It is just as necessary that the use of this power be severely constrained and closely scrutinized.
The Emergencies Act is an exceptionally powerful law. And it’s for that reason that it sets a high legal threshold before an emergency can be declared. The law also includes several important accountability mechanisms — including the public order emergency commission taking place right now — to thoroughly examine how the law was used.
In the case of a “public order emergency,” as was declared in February, the government has to demonstrate (with evidence) a situation that seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians or one that seriously threatens the government’s ability to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada. They must also show that the situation could not be effectively dealt with under any Canadian law. It must be a true last resort.
The commission is the “ask questions later” part of the equation. Although it can make no findings of legal liability, the government’s decisions and actions are nonetheless on trial. It is the government’s responsibility to prove they acted within the bounds of the law — ultimately the Constitution.
If you’ve been watching the commission’s hearings over the last few days, you’ll have heard about the harm Ottawa residents suffered during the protests in and occupation of their city, including reports of discriminatory intimidation and harassment. The situation was intolerable and needed to be addressed. The issue is how. When asked by commission counsel if the situation in Ottawa was “a failure at all levels,” Mayor Jim Watson didn’t disagree. SOURCE