Canada’s top judge could preside over any Freedom Convoy appeal despite having publicly likened the 2022 Ottawa protest to anarchy and hostage taking, raising concerns about impartiality as the federal government weighs its next legal move.Blacklock's Reporter says Chief Justice Richard Wagner’s remarks have prompted calls for recusal should the Supreme Court agree to hear an appeal of recent rulings that found Ottawa acted unlawfully in invoking the Emergencies Act. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms says the comments demonstrate bias against convoy protestors.“If the Supreme Court chooses to hear an appeal of this judgment, it would be open to lawyers to ask the Chief Justice to recuse himself in light of his highly inappropriate comments which demonstrate a clear bias against the peaceful protest and those who participated in it,” said JCCF president John Carpay. “It would be up to the Chief Justice to acquiesce to this request or not.”The issue dates back to an April 9, 2022 interview with Québec daily Le Devoir, in which Wagner described the downtown Ottawa protest as a form of hostage taking. “What we saw on Wellington Street here was the beginning of anarchy where certain people decided to take other citizens hostage, to take the law into their own hands,” he said.Those remarks triggered a formal complaint by 13 lawyers to the Canadian Judicial Council, warning that any future Freedom Convoy litigation could eventually reach the Supreme Court..Two lower courts have since ruled cabinet acted unlawfully by invoking the Emergencies Act against protestors near Parliament Hill. Most recently, the Federal Court of Appeal found on Friday Ottawa breached constitutional rights through its response to the demonstrations.The Department of Justice has not yet said whether it will seek a final ruling from the Supreme Court.In its decision, the Court of Appeal acknowledged some protestors disrupted daily life by blockading downtown Ottawa, blaring truck horns, staging late-night street parties and using megaphones. However, it said the activity was non-violent expression aimed at conveying opposition to federal COVID-19 policies.“While undoubtedly disruptive and very annoying to residents of downtown Ottawa, this was non-violent expressive activity,” the court wrote..Judges also ruled cabinet violated protestors’ freedom of expression and protection from unreasonable search when it directed police to freeze demonstrators’ bank accounts. The court said information-sharing orders allowed financial institutions and police to intrude on privacy based on potentially unfounded and subjective beliefs.The Supreme Court does not publish a binding ethics code for itself. However, the Canadian Judicial Council’s draft Ethical Principles for Judges warns jurists to avoid circumstances that could reasonably cause others to question their impartiality, including situations where a judge has previously expressed views evidencing bias.Past Supreme Court decisions have drawn scrutiny on this front. In 2021, the court allowed a justice to rule on a case involving a plaintiff who had employed her husband. In another case, then-Justice Rosalie Abella authored a copyright decision favourable to York University while her husband was professor emeritus there. The court did not explain why the matter was not reassigned.Whether Wagner would step aside in a Freedom Convoy appeal remains an open question — one that could shape the credibility of any final Supreme Court ruling on Ottawa’s use of emergency powers.
