Alberta Justice Adam Germain tore up the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, then spit the tattered remains in the face of Calgary Pastor Artur Pawlowski.
Because Pastor Pawlowski dares hold an opinion unapproved by our political masters.
Justice Germain believed it was his duty to crush this dangerous man, this man of ideas and principles, because our so-called ‘just society’ can no longer tolerate men capable of rational and critical thought.
Pastor Artur Pawlowski is such a man.
Justice Adam Germain clearly is not.
Justice Germain is the worst kind of man. Instead of upholding the law as he is sworn to do, this petty tyrant literally ordered Artur Pawlowski to parrot the State’s views as a caveat to his own personal thoughts and opinions – rights supposedly guaranteed to him under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Charter no longer exists, in practice. It stopped being the highest law of the land the moment COVID-19 hit our shores.
Compelled speech is now the law of the land.
How far we’ve fallen from the lofty ideals this nation was founded upon.
The final term of his probation order will be that when he is exercising his right of free speech and speaking against AHS Health Orders and AHS health recommendations, in a public gathering or public forum (including electronic social media); he must indicate in his communications the following:
“I am also aware that the views I am expressing to you on this occasion may not be views held by the majority of medical experts in Alberta.
“While I may disagree with them, I am obliged to inform you that the majority of medical experts favour social distancing, mask wearing, and avoiding large crowds to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
“Most medical experts also support participation in a vaccination program unless for a valid religious or medical reason you cannot be vaccinated.
“Vaccinations have been shown statistically to save lives and to reduce the severity of COVID-19 symptoms.”
I thought this was Canada.
When did expressing our ‘right of free speech’ become subject to government approval?
When did examining the evidence, the research and the studies and coming to a realistic and rational conclusion about these subjects become a criminal act?
And when did such a petty man as Justice Adam Germain become the Lord and Master of What Can Be Said In the Public Square?
On October 15, 2021, it would seem.
Thankfully i’m not alone in my assessment of this ruling. There are others, many credible others who find this ruling is absurd and violates the very Charter Justice Germain claims to defend.
Don Hutchinson says Justice Adam Germain’s ruling must be challenged because it is “hostile to a free and democratic society.”
Hutchinson goes on to say:
It would be regrettable if this decision by a single judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench goes unchallenged.
I expect the decision will be appealed for two reasons. Artur Pawlowski is a fighter. And the speech encumbering order of Justice Germain pleads for reconsideration by the Alberta Court of Appeal.
The price of dissent in Canada’s free and democratic society cannot be the impairment of free thought, belief, opinion and expression.
Dissent, in fact, is a hallmark of a free and democratic society. Dissenting actions may bring consequences. But non-hateful dissenting opinions and words must be accepted even by those who disagree with them. Neither government nor the courts should be permitted to command a citizen to utter words to which he or she personally objects. Dissent is the price of living in a free society.
Difference – including in religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression – is the cost, and benefit, of living in a diverse society.
Sarah Miller, counsel for Artur and Dawid Pawlowski, was shocked by Justice Germain’s compelled speech order.
“If the Alberta government issued the compelled speech law tomorrow that said if you are going to express views contrary to a majority of people there would be a Charter complaint automatically by civil liberties groups. And when a judge does it there may be a bit of a different analysis, but that doesn’t mean we should ignore freedom of expression rights and I think it is pretty problematic that Justice Germain went down that road.”
You may not agree with my assessment of this case, and that is your choice.
But should you disagree, I would encourage you to find the nearest mirror and ask yourself this simple question:
Is it just for a judge to order a defendant to violate his own freedom of thought and freedom of conscience?
Unless you are no longer capable of being honest with yourself, the answer is clearly “No.”
If you just called me names after reading that line, I dare you to select the one idea you’re willing to fight and die for, and imagine yourself before a judge such as this buffoon.
Would you still believe compelled speech is okay at that point?
No, of course not, because nobody, not even a judge in a court of law has the power to command what you are permitted to think.