Objectors need to do a little bit of research

Nothing in the current cacophony about “rights” tells me that the protesters have studied the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, have any understanding of how civil rights are protected in Canada, or understand the legal issues related to vaccine passports.

In Section One, the Charter grants federal and provincial governments the authority to limit rights “subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

When a Charter challenge to vaccine passports occurs, the government will call many well qualified individuals to support their actions. They will probably pass the Oakes Test. (Look it up.)

The “rights” people have few, if any, credible authorities to testify against the effectiveness of vaccines.

One opinion states, “a person who chooses not to get vaccinated as a matter of personal preference—especially where that choice is based on misinformation or misunderstandings of scientific information—does not have grounds for a human rights complaint…”

I doubt protesters have researched what legal experts say about this issue. Much legal discussion relates to privacy and protecting religious beliefs and medical conditions.

A joint statement by Federal, Provincial and Territorial Privacy Commissioners, provides one of many comprehensive analyses of the problem.

Without a government vaccine passport, different institutions will establish independent policies. Some have already done so.

In Canada, some provinces have required proof of immunization for school entry for years. For years, different countries have required proof of vaccination before visitors can enter. Businesses have the right to restrict access to their premises, (barring discrimination against Charter-protected groups.)

No shoes, no shirt, no service — completely legal.

In B.C., smokers’ indoors rights were extinguished years ago and the public right to clean air took precedence. Legally. The few cases in Canadian Case Law “reflect a clear tendency for courts to defer to the government’s determination of the need to limit individual right for the sake of public health.”

In the event that new, solid evidence shows a different approach Is needed, this all becomes moot.

Nothing to date convinces me that the “rights” protesters understand the situation. Chicken Little has screamed, “The sky is falling,” and they are running alongside her, hurting people as they do so.”

Linda Pedy Penticton