Commentary
In September, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced that the right to make one’s own choices about receiving vaccinations should be added to the Alberta Bill of Rights, stating: “No Albertan should ever be subjected or pressured into accepting a medical treatment without their full consent.”
Some argue that new laws to protect the right to bodily autonomy are redundant because the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms already protects citizens from government abuse.
In theory, the charter protects bodily autonomy, including the right to make medical choices, under the right to “life, liberty and security of the person.” In theory, the charter protects the right to decide for oneself, without any coercion or pressure, whether to get injected with a vaccine. In theory, governments must justify “demonstrably” with cogent and persuasive evidence that any health order that violates a charter right or freedom is reasonable, rational, truly necessary, and bringing about more good than harm. In theory, judges should base their rulings only on the evidence placed before them in court by the parties in a dispute, to the exclusion of media reports. In theory, when judges state that party “A” has presented better and more persuasive evidence than party “B,” judges will explain why and how they came to that conclusion. In theory, when a judge upholds lockdowns or vaccine passports as justified violations of charter rights and freedoms, the judge will explain why she or he believes that the government’s evidence is better and more persuasive. In theory, Canadians don’t need laws to be changed because the charter already protects citizens from being forced, pressured, or manipulated into getting injected with a vaccine….