Are Interprovincial Boundrey Closings and Checkpoints Illegal?

Nova Scotia, Manitoba and Quebec have erected police roadblocks and checkpoints along their interprovincial boundreies in order to vet and reduce interprovincial travel deemed non-essential during the Covid-19 crisis. Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland has publicly supported and applauded these moves by the provinces.

COVID-19 emergency checkpoints strain long-standing free movement between provinces | National Post

The problem is these actions may violate sections 6.2 and 6.3 of the Canadian Constitutional Act of 1982, found on page 55 of the linked document below. Section 6, which guarantees mobility rights in Canada, cannot be overridden by the "Not Withstanding Clause" of Section 33 in the same act found on page 62 of the link below.

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Canada_2011.pdf?lang=en

So are the provinces breaking the law and violating the constitution by closing interprovincial boundries? Is the Canadian Federal Government aiding and abetting provincial governments to break the law? Are the rights and freedoms of Canadians of all provinces and territories at serious risk from the precedents being set here by the provincial and Federal governments during this crisis?

What say you?

It’s a tough question and I’m not 100% comfortable with some of what’s going on, even in what I am doing in my day to day in the economic realm I’m not sure is 100% legal and I will not get into that, but I feel like it’s one of those, well we’re just gonna do it now and the inquiries will sort it all out later.

What I will say is this virus is odd because it’s on a sweet spot of being relatively not as deadly as other diseases like Spanish flu and Ebola, but I promise you, if this thing was like 20-30% death rate and killed children, there would be soldiers on the street with shoot to kill orders and the whole country would be on a strict quarantine.

But yeah, I’m not comfortable with $100,000 fines for house parties and interprovincial hard borders.

Clearly I have to learn how to spell boundary and boundaries correctly. Apologies to all. Bad proofreading again. Sigh.

Sheepishly.
Evilroddy.

Jetboogieman said:

It’s a tough question and I’m not 100% comfortable with some of what’s going on, even in what I am doing in my day to day in the economic realm I’m not sure is 100% legal and I will not get into that, but I feel like it’s one of those, well we’re just gonna do it now and the inquiries will sort it all out later.

What I will say is this virus is odd because it’s on a sweet spot of being relatively not as deadly as other diseases like Spanish flu and Ebola, but I promise you, if this thing was like 20-30% death rate and killed children, there would be soldiers on the street with shoot to kill orders and the whole country would be on a strict quarantine.

But yeah, I’m not comfortable with $100,000 fines for house parties and interprovincial hard borders.

Click to expand...

Jetboogieman:

The word "Draconian" comes to mind.

Ten days ago I drove from Southwestern Ontario to Montreal and back to pick up and bring home my cousin who wanted out of Montreal and to come home for the crisis. I saw no police on my trip there and only one police car on the same-day return trip. Now the SQ (Quebec Provincial Police for our American cousins) is imposing both interprovincial and internal road blocks and checkpoints all over the province and stopping people from moving around. That is different from Manitoba and Nova Scotia who are spot checking cars and informing people that they need to stay put. It's a very dangerous set of precedents which Quebec is setting and I think they will comeback to bite Canada in the end.

The problem with follow-up inquiries is that the legal precedent has been set by the time the review begins. I would rather see Canadian military checkpoints or RCMP ones than unilateral SQ checkpoints along the boundaries as hard boundaries can be construed as borders and could aid Quebec's claim to sovereignty by force of arms.

I am frankly astonished that Deputy PM Freeland has endorsed these moves. Someone should be advising her of the legal jeopardy she is putting Canadians in.

Fear is the mind killer and fear may cost us all dearly. Fear coupled with political ambition is absolutely toxic to liberty and to democracy.

I have written my local MP (a Liberal) last week for an explanation of the Manitoba and Nova Scotia moves and have, not surprisingly, received no reply. I wrote a second note and sent it along yesterday regarding Quebec's April Fools surprise. We will see what comes of that.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Evilroddy said:

Clearly I have to learn how to spell boundary and boundaries correctly. Apologies to all. Bad proofreading again. Sigh.

Sheepishly.
Evilroddy.

Click to expand...

I caught those and chalked it up to the same rule that gets us

..color, you colour.

..behavior, you behaviour,

..there are a handful more that don’t come readily to mind.........:thinking

I see it in the same vein as the provinces putting restrictions on the sizes of gatherings. It is a necessary measure in a state of emergency, it is not like the oversight has been removed.

Carjosse said:

I see it in the same vein as the provinces putting restrictions on the sizes of gatherings. It is a necessary measure in a state of emergency, it is not like the oversight has been removed.

Click to expand...

Carjosse:

While I see where you're coming from on this, the freedom of association is not a right in Canada and that freedom can be legally overridden by provincial and the Federal Parliaments according to our constitution. However interprovincial mobility is a right, not a freedom, and therefore cannot be overridden by any parliament in Canada legally, in my opinion. "That's the rub!", as the Great Bard said.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Evilroddy said:

Carjosse:

While I see where you're coming from on this, the freedom of association is not a right in Canada and that freedom can be legally overridden by provincial and the Federal Parliaments according to our constitution. However interprovincial mobility is a right, not a freedom, and therefore cannot be overridden by any parliament in Canada legally, in my opinion. "That's the rub!", as the Great Bard said.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Click to expand...

I think you are forgetting the very first clause of the Charter:
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 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.

I don't think there is a single person who could successfully fight that restricting movement during the current crisis is not a reasonable limit. You are welcome to fight it in court if you so convinced of its infringment on mobility rights.

Carjosse said:

I think you are forgetting the very first clause of the Charter:
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 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.

I don't think there is a single person who could successfully fight that restricting movement during the current crisis is not a reasonable limit. You are welcome to fight it in court if you so convinced of its infringment on mobility rights.

Click to expand...

Carjosse:

Did Quebec demonstrably justify its actions before overriding the Canadian constitution unilaterally? No. These blocks and check-points came about by a Quebec Cabinet Order. So your point is at best moot. Quebec nor any government in Canada can override Article 6 of the Charter legally.

The Romans often dealt with crises by appointing temporary dictators. But one day in 44 BCE one ex-dictator crossed the Rubicon River with his legions, marched on the City of Rome and ended the Roman Republic by force of arms. That is why we must be careful about overreach even in the midst of a crisis, lest democracy and our rights wither in the harsh lights of efficiency and ambition to limit societal tolerances of its members. We are a tolerant country built by people who migrated away from the intolerant efficiency of despots and dictators in their ancestors' homelands. The Law matters even in times of crisis.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Do someone have the freedom to put others' in harms way (Your family, my family)? The purpose of these actions is to save lives. It should not require enforcement for people to do what is right. The right thing to do is stay home unless there is an over-riding legitimate reason to go out. It is a sudden change to our normal social activity and some people have difficulty adapting, but if we embrace it rather than fight it, we will all get through this much faster and with less loss of life.