OTTAWA—As the trial of Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber nears its end, Crown lawyers argued in their closing statement that the case against the two is “overwhelming.”
“As the Crown mentioned in its opening address and emphasized during this trial, Mr. Barber and Ms. Lich are not on trial for their politics,” said Crown attorney Siobhain Wetscher at the Ottawa courthouse on Aug. 13. “It’s the unlawful means that they employed to pursue their political and end goals.”
Barber and Lich are currently on trial for mischief, obstructing police, counselling others to commit mischief, and intimidation in connection with the trucker protest in early 2022. The demonstration saw hundreds of vehicles flood the streets of downtown Ottawa to protest COVID-19-related public health restrictions and vaccine mandates.
The federal government invoked the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 to end the demonstration, giving law enforcement expanded powers to arrest demonstrators and freeze the bank accounts of individuals involved in the protest.
A commission held later in 2023 as part of the legislation found that the federal government was justified in invoking the act; a 2024 court ruling, however, found its invocation “unreasonable” and infringed on Canadians’ charter rights.
The trial for Barber and Lich, which began in September 2023 and was expected to last just 16 days, has dragged on due to Crown and defence lawyers engaging in numerous arguments about what can be admitted as evidence. The trial has lasted so long that Barber’s lawyer Diane Magas has considered introducing a Jordan application, which says any person charged with a crime has the right to be tried within a reasonable time.
A decision has also not yet been made about the Crown’s Carter application, which asserts that Barber and Lich conspired so closely that any charge applied to one should apply to the other. Defence lawyers have argued that for the Carter test to be met, the conspiracy must be between the parties and have a “common unlawful design,” which was not true in this case.
While the Crown made its case on Aug. 13, defence lawyers are expected to argue in favour of Lich and Barber in the coming days.
Crown Says Pair ‘Crossed the Line’
Aided by a PowerPoint presentation, Crown lawyers argued to the court that the “credible and reliable” evidence they had introduced against Barber and Lich, which included witnesses, text messages, social media posts, and business records, had not been contradicted during cross-examination.Defence lawyers previously argued that of all the witnesses who testified at the trial, many of whom were Ottawa residents, none had directly interacted with Lich. The lawyers said this meant that the only evidence admissible against her came in the form of social media postings, videos, and text communications.
Wetscher reiterated on Aug. 13 that the pair had “crossed the line” when the Freedom Convoy went from a lawful demonstration to an “occupation” of Ottawa. She said the protest’s noise, traffic congestion, “and in certain cases, harassment” took the Convoy “outside the spectrum of what would be considered lawful demonstration.”
Wetscher said while some court cases related to the Freedom Convoy had seen the accused acquitted, “not a single case has said the demonstration was lawful.” She also said the evidence established “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Barber and Lich were the organizers and leaders of the Convoy.
Justice Heather Perkins-McVey pushed back against that argument, saying the evidence had established the pair were part of the more “moderate group” that worked with the City of Ottawa to minimize the demonstration’s impact. She also questioned Wetscher’s statement that Barber and Lich’s negotiations with the city were an example of “making the crime you’re committing less impactful for a short while.”
“These vehicles were directed onto Wellington, and when they were welcomed and directed onto Wellington, they were following the advice of Ottawa police,” Perkins-McVey said. “What always struck me with the evidence, is it seems a number of things converged at once that nobody really had the intelligence on, and they didn’t plan accordingly... It began in a way that was hard to get out of.”
Wetscher went on to highlight prior court cases where judges made convictions on mischief during protests or demonstrations, attempting to establish a connection to Barber and Lich’s actions.
One case, which dates back to a 1989 land dispute, saw the judge rule that “Civil disobedience methods in the promotion of a just cause does not transform illegal actions into legal ones.”
At the outset of the trial in September 2023, defence lawyer Lawrence Greenspon argued that Lich and Barber were peacefully protesting and worked with police to help move protestors’ vehicles throughout the protest. He also took issue with the Crown’s characterization of the protest as an “occupation,”saying the word historically had “far more serious implications and consequences.”
To emphasize his point that Lich and Barber attempted to protest peacefully, Greenspon showed the court footage of Barber telling protestors that “under no circumstances” should they engage violently with police.
