Lawyers representing several Ontario residents have filed an appeal claiming the province’s vaccine passport system was unconstitutional. The appellants are challenging a December decision by the Ontario Superior Court that upheld the legality of the passport system.
The appellants say they did not get vaccinated due to religious beliefs or concerns about adverse effects. The passport system in place from September 2021 to March 2022 required patrons to show proof of vaccination before entering gyms, restaurants, and other venues.
The appellants say these restrictions caused them suffering—emotionally, mentally, and in some cases physically.
Another appellant represented by JCCF is nurse Sarah Harjee. She was pregnant during the passport mandate. Harjee was concerned about adverse effects on herself and her unborn child and wanted to wait until more data and studies were available.
December Decision
In December 2022, an Ontario Superior Court found the passport did not violate Charter rights. Part of that decision says the passport “did not require the Applicants to undergo any form of medical procedure, and they remained at all times in control of their bodily integrity, free from state interference, as a result of their choice to remain unvaccinated.”It said the restricted access to restaurants and entertainment venues cannot constitute interference with access to medical treatment.
It said there is no evidence the emotional and psychological harm reached the high threshold needed to engage Charter rights. A person’s right to security does not protect one from “the ordinary stresses and anxieties that a person of reasonable sensibility would suffer as a result of government action,” it said.
‘Diverse Needs and Rights’
JCCF has argued against the justifications for the mandate. JCCF says, for example, that it was unfair to blame the unvaccinated for burdening an already fragile health care system.It says the criteria for exemptions were too narrow. Two of its clients had a history of blood clots and other medical conditions but could not get exemptions.
One of its clients, Sam Sabourin, is an Ottawa gym owner who did not want to turn clients away based on vaccination status. Business owners could face fines of up to $100,000 or a year in jail for not enforcing the mandate.
“It was implemented without scientific justification, without a proper legal framework and without taking into consideration the diverse needs and rights of the population,“ said Jorge Pineda, counsel for the Applicants, in the March 23 release. ”We will be asking the Court of Appeal to recognize this reality, and to uphold the rights of individuals to be free from government overreach, even in times of fear and panic.”
Ford said the decision was based on the advice of the chief medical officer of health and “based on the latest evidence.”