A Saskatchewan Court has dismissed an appeal against the province’s restrictions on outdoor gatherings during the pandemic, calling the curb on charter rights justified.
Jasmin Grandel and Darrell Mills filed the original lawsuit, challenging the restrictions on how many people could gather outdoors during the pandemic. The case was dismissed in 2022, with the Court of King’s Bench saying although the restrictions did hinder individual charter rights they were justified.
On May 15, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal upheld the decision.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), which provided attorneys for Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills, said it was disappointed by the decision.
Justice Kalmakoff reviewed the background behind the case, noting outdoor gatherings were limited to 50 people between March 17, 2020, and March 26, 2020. Further restrictions were put in place from March 26 until June 8, limiting outdoor gatherings to 10 people. Restrictions were eased to allow 30 people from June 8 to December 17.
Outdoor events were again restricted to 10 people from Dec. 14, 2020, until May 30, 2021, when the health officer expanded the outdoor limit to 150 people. All restrictions were lifted in July 2021.
Mr. Mills received one violation ticket and Ms. Grandel was given eight tickets for attending protests over COVID-19 restrictions. The court said that Ms. Grandel was also a key player in organizing the events.
Justice Kalmakoff said the Court of King’s Bench judge had considered the evidence regarding transmission rates and mortality rates of COVID-19 and observed that “against that backdrop, the Government had acted by making orders, based on the science available to it, to attempt to balance public safety and individual liberty.”
Justice Kalmakoff said the protests had a higher risk of transmission, even though they were held outside.
“There was also evidence that outdoor protests brought with them a higher incidence of activity that elevated the level of risk, including an unstructured environment, prolonged periods of contact, non-maintenance of physical distancing, carpooling, travelling from various communities, and an inability or unwillingness of participants to take public health precautions,” he wrote.
“In the face of all of that, I can find no error“ in that aspect of the decision, Justice Kalmakoff said, adding Justice Konkin ”made factual findings that are supported by the evidence and correctly applied the legal test to them.”