Church lawyer cheers decision
Judge won’t order actions against renegade churchgoers before case is heard in court
The lawyer for a Kelowna church fined for holding worship services is celebrating a court’s decision not to grant an injunction being sought by the government.
Marty Moore of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is representing the Harvest Ministries International Church on Harvey Avenue as well as other churches that have been fined for holding services in violation of COVID-19-related public health orders.
“Our clients are relieved that the court denied the injunction,” Moore said in a Wednesday release.
“The B.C. government was seeking a court order for police to scrutinize the intentions of individuals and detain them if police believed they intended to attend a prohibited worship service,” Moore said.
Moore said the government sought the injunction to effectively shut down those churches where worship services have continued before legal arguments on the constitutionality of the worship ban have even been heard in court.
“Our clients look forward to the fast approaching full hearing on the constitutional challenge to B.C.’s complete prohibition on inperson religious services,” Moore said.
In justifying the ban on worship services, Moore said, the government has claimed that 180 COVID-19 cases have been associated with religious gatherings in B.C.
To date, Moore notes, more than 74,000 people in B.C have been infected with the virus that causes COVID-19.
While worship services have been banned, Moore says, most businesses remain open, even big-box retail stores where many hundreds of people may be gathered.
The government's health order also allows for “outdoor assemblies for the purpose of communicating a position on a matter of public interest or controversy,” Moore says.
In her reaction to the court’s decision not to grant the injunction, public health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry said the matter was a “procedural” one and believed the constitutionality of the ban on worship services would be upheld in future legal proceedings.
“Based on the science and evidence, I put public health orders in place to protect faith leaders, their congregations and the communities in which they worship,” Henry said in a statement released by the government. “These are legal orders that apply to everyone in our province, and most churches are following them. I thank each of them.”
“I am confident that all public health orders are in accordance with the law, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and we look forward to the conclusion of the larger case that remains before the courts,” Henry said.
VANCOUVER — A judge has dismissed the British Columbia government’s application for an injunction against three Fraser Valley churches that are breaking COVID-19 rules that prohibit in-person services.
The injunction request by B.C.’s attorney general and provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry came after the churches and others filed a petition challenging the rules, arguing they violate their charter rights and freedoms.
B.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson said in a written ruling released Wednesday that the provincial health officer has means under the Public Health Act to enforce the rules without an injunction.
“To be clear, I am not condoning the (churches’) conduct in contravention of the orders that they challenge, but find that the injunctive relief sought by the (province) should not be granted.”
The Riverside Calvary Chapel in Langley, the Immanuel Covenant Reformed Church in Abbotsford and Free Reformed Church of Chilliwack are part of the petition filed last month, arguing the court should quash Henry’s Nov. 7 public health order, as well as certain violation tickets issued since then.
The Justice Centre of Constitutional Freedoms said last month it would challenge more than a dozen $2,300 violation tickets handed out to B.C. individuals and faith communities, including the three churches.
Hinkson said he’s satisfied with the B.C. government’s argument that members of the public could suffer from transmission of the deadly virus by people unsafely attending gatherings.
But he said during a hearing last week the province was putting the court in an “impossible position” by asking for an injunction before the churches’ petition is set to be heard starting March 1.
Hinkson’s judgment cites the recent case in which the Vancouver Port Authority was granted an injunction against protesters, but the B.C. Prosecution Service declined to pursue charges, saying it wasn’t in the public interest given the nature of the offences and the passage of time during the pandemic.
“The reputation of administration of justice was brought into disrepute because no consequences were pursued,” he said.
RCMP in Chilliwack said in December they investigated in-person church services and forwarded a report to the prosecution service for charge assessment, Hinkson said.
“I am left to wonder what would be achieved by the issuance of an injunction in this case,” he said. “If it were granted and not adhered to, would the administration of justice yet again be brought into disrepute because the B.C. Prosecution Service considers that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute those who refused to adhere to the orders sought from this court?”
Lawyers for the province had argued that while Henry’s public health orders aren’t dissuading the churchgoers from their religious beliefs and practices, they would be more likely to comply with a court order, the judgment said.
“I have reservations that an injunction alone, without enforcement by the B.C. Prosecution Service, would overcome the deeply held beliefs of the petitioners and their devotees,” Hinkson concluded.
The Attorney General’s Ministry said the provincial health officer was expected to issue a statement on the decision later Wednesday.
The ministry said it would not comment on a case that’s before the courts.
Henry told a news conference on Tuesday her public health orders still apply while the churches’ challenge is before the court.
“They apply for the reasons that we put them in place based on the signs and the evidence when I believe there is risk of (COVID-19) transmission and where we have seen transmission in these settings.”
She also said she doesn’t know if she has the authority to add enforcement measures to her public health orders.
“We’re not talking about arresting people. What we’re talking about in terms of detention was preventing people from entering a premises, for example, and so that is something that is under the Emergency Management Act part of the (health) orders.”