While Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members were being bullied and punished — some sadistically — for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine, Gen. Wayne Eyre, chief of the defence staff, piled on..Eyre said refusals by serving members to follow orders “raises questions about your suitability to serve in uniform.” He essentially disparaged the integrity of members who served well and loyally, some for decades, while warning them to take the jab or face release..“It's dangerous in the military to have legal orders disobeyed. It's a very slippery slope,” Eyre told the Canadian Press last October..Does the question about suitability to serve in uniform now apply to Eyre who enforced a mandate that, according to a tribunal, violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?.The Military Grievances External Review Committee (MGERC) determined that the military’s vaccine policy was “overly broad” and its implementation was “disproportionate” when it ruled on three of 157 grievance cases before it. .MGERC member Nina Frid wrote that the disputed provisions in the policy were “unconstitutional and therefore invalid” and impacted the “livelihood, and physical and psychological integrity of the complainants.”.Specifically, the committee deemed that the policy violated rights — life, liberty, and the security of a person — Section 7 of the Charter protects, and the limitation of these rights weren’t in accordance with fundamental justice. .As well, she said the limitations imposed weren’t justified under Section 1 of the Charter that protects rights and freedoms subject to reasonable limits..Frid wrote there was justification for a vaccine mandate to reduce the “the likelihood of becoming seriously ill or dying” from COVID-19. .But she criticized the arbitrary directive that separated those who were unable to take the jab for religious or medical reasons from those who were unwilling. Those falling into the latter category were punished by losing promotions, deployment opportunities, and jobs..“The characterization that members who are ‘unwilling’ to get vaccinated are displaying misconduct is in contradiction with the CAF's own pre-existing policies and statements that also guarantee their members’ choice towards medical treatment,” wrote Frid..The CAF claims that 299 people had been released and 108 left on their own by the time the mandate was lifted in October 2022. The number who opted for early retirement rather than take the jab is unknown. .The MGERC recommend that all actions taken against members who refused the vaccine enforced in late 2021 be rescinded..So now what? .Well, the committee’s recommendations and findings are non-binding. .Eyre — the commander who should have been riding shotgun to protect everyone under his command but allowed posses to go after troops and make their lives hell — gets to make final decisions in the grievances..St. Albert lawyer Catherine Christensen has a problem with that. .The military law expert with Valour Law is representing 330 CAF members in a class action lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions in damages for lost income, pensions, and promotions..“From this review committee it goes to the final authority’s desk to decide on the grievance. The final authority is Gen. Eyre. The same guy that made the order is the one that gets to decide if he’s going to accept the review committee decision which is part of our lawsuit,” said Christensen..“We want to challenge that because the person who made the order should not be making the decision on whether it was a fair order or not.”.Christensen claimed that Eyre didn’t have the authority under the National Defence Act to breach Charter rights. .“What that review committee has basically said, in my opinion, is that he issued an unlawful order. It means the whole house of cards fall apart because if this order was unlawful, then everything that happened after October of 2021 related to those directives was unlawful.”.“He issued the order. It’s on his head.”.Eyre was warned by his senior legal and medical advisers about the legalities of requiring all troops to be vaccinated a couple of months before he enforced then-defence minister Harjit Sajjan’s directives..At the time, Eyre declared he was “in agreement” with mandate..“I issued the order. Make no mistake, it’s my order,” he said..The MGERC recommended that military members pursue their rights in the court..That’s the “slippery slope” Eyre should have been worried about when he ignored warnings about a potential legal mess. .The 330 military members involved in Christensen’s class action lawsuit aren’t the only ones. .“I have hundreds more that are about to bring their own claim,” she said. .The committee’s report will likely encourage more military members to take legal action to challenge the CAF’s “abuse of power and process.”.Christensen welcomed the MGERC’s findings..“I see this as a very positive thing because it’s the first time in Canada that we’ve had some sort of review of the mandates that say it did violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”.“On behalf of my clients I’m very happy that we have the support in the court of public opinion that we have. It helps.”.“I was kind of happy to see the next potential prime minister of Canada admit that the Government of Canada was at fault, online, in public. Carefully, but he did.”.Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, who in September 2022, demanded an end to the vaccine mandate for military members, responded to the MGERC report on Twitter..“Trudeau violated the Charter of rights of the men and women who protect all our Charter rights — our military members. He should apologize for dividing, discriminating and demonizing Canadians,” tweeted Poilievre..Tough talk. But pointless. The prime minister who enforced the Emergencies (War Measures) Act on peaceful truckers will apologize when hell freezes over. Besides, an apology for a grave injustice that trampled on Charter rights rectifies nothing. It’s not enough..An apology from Eyre would be equally vacant and never earn the lost trust from the men and women he leads..The MGERC has given him a golden opportunity to extend an olive branch to those who were forced out but are willing to return to the understaffed CAF..So, what’s it going to be? .Will the CAF remain fixated on gender pronouns and woke uniforms?.Or will Eyre embrace the committee’s recommendations and bring back skilled, experienced troops he gave the boot to? But the Liberal government wouldn’t like that. Prediction? .Canada’s courtrooms are going to be glutted with these lawsuits.
While Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members were being bullied and punished — some sadistically — for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine, Gen. Wayne Eyre, chief of the defence staff, piled on..Eyre said refusals by serving members to follow orders “raises questions about your suitability to serve in uniform.” He essentially disparaged the integrity of members who served well and loyally, some for decades, while warning them to take the jab or face release..“It's dangerous in the military to have legal orders disobeyed. It's a very slippery slope,” Eyre told the Canadian Press last October..Does the question about suitability to serve in uniform now apply to Eyre who enforced a mandate that, according to a tribunal, violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?.The Military Grievances External Review Committee (MGERC) determined that the military’s vaccine policy was “overly broad” and its implementation was “disproportionate” when it ruled on three of 157 grievance cases before it. .MGERC member Nina Frid wrote that the disputed provisions in the policy were “unconstitutional and therefore invalid” and impacted the “livelihood, and physical and psychological integrity of the complainants.”.Specifically, the committee deemed that the policy violated rights — life, liberty, and the security of a person — Section 7 of the Charter protects, and the limitation of these rights weren’t in accordance with fundamental justice. .As well, she said the limitations imposed weren’t justified under Section 1 of the Charter that protects rights and freedoms subject to reasonable limits..Frid wrote there was justification for a vaccine mandate to reduce the “the likelihood of becoming seriously ill or dying” from COVID-19. .But she criticized the arbitrary directive that separated those who were unable to take the jab for religious or medical reasons from those who were unwilling. Those falling into the latter category were punished by losing promotions, deployment opportunities, and jobs..“The characterization that members who are ‘unwilling’ to get vaccinated are displaying misconduct is in contradiction with the CAF's own pre-existing policies and statements that also guarantee their members’ choice towards medical treatment,” wrote Frid..The CAF claims that 299 people had been released and 108 left on their own by the time the mandate was lifted in October 2022. The number who opted for early retirement rather than take the jab is unknown. .The MGERC recommend that all actions taken against members who refused the vaccine enforced in late 2021 be rescinded..So now what? .Well, the committee’s recommendations and findings are non-binding. .Eyre — the commander who should have been riding shotgun to protect everyone under his command but allowed posses to go after troops and make their lives hell — gets to make final decisions in the grievances..St. Albert lawyer Catherine Christensen has a problem with that. .The military law expert with Valour Law is representing 330 CAF members in a class action lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions in damages for lost income, pensions, and promotions..“From this review committee it goes to the final authority’s desk to decide on the grievance. The final authority is Gen. Eyre. The same guy that made the order is the one that gets to decide if he’s going to accept the review committee decision which is part of our lawsuit,” said Christensen..“We want to challenge that because the person who made the order should not be making the decision on whether it was a fair order or not.”.Christensen claimed that Eyre didn’t have the authority under the National Defence Act to breach Charter rights. .“What that review committee has basically said, in my opinion, is that he issued an unlawful order. It means the whole house of cards fall apart because if this order was unlawful, then everything that happened after October of 2021 related to those directives was unlawful.”.“He issued the order. It’s on his head.”.Eyre was warned by his senior legal and medical advisers about the legalities of requiring all troops to be vaccinated a couple of months before he enforced then-defence minister Harjit Sajjan’s directives..At the time, Eyre declared he was “in agreement” with mandate..“I issued the order. Make no mistake, it’s my order,” he said..The MGERC recommended that military members pursue their rights in the court..That’s the “slippery slope” Eyre should have been worried about when he ignored warnings about a potential legal mess. .The 330 military members involved in Christensen’s class action lawsuit aren’t the only ones. .“I have hundreds more that are about to bring their own claim,” she said. .The committee’s report will likely encourage more military members to take legal action to challenge the CAF’s “abuse of power and process.”.Christensen welcomed the MGERC’s findings..“I see this as a very positive thing because it’s the first time in Canada that we’ve had some sort of review of the mandates that say it did violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”.“On behalf of my clients I’m very happy that we have the support in the court of public opinion that we have. It helps.”.“I was kind of happy to see the next potential prime minister of Canada admit that the Government of Canada was at fault, online, in public. Carefully, but he did.”.Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, who in September 2022, demanded an end to the vaccine mandate for military members, responded to the MGERC report on Twitter..“Trudeau violated the Charter of rights of the men and women who protect all our Charter rights — our military members. He should apologize for dividing, discriminating and demonizing Canadians,” tweeted Poilievre..Tough talk. But pointless. The prime minister who enforced the Emergencies (War Measures) Act on peaceful truckers will apologize when hell freezes over. Besides, an apology for a grave injustice that trampled on Charter rights rectifies nothing. It’s not enough..An apology from Eyre would be equally vacant and never earn the lost trust from the men and women he leads..The MGERC has given him a golden opportunity to extend an olive branch to those who were forced out but are willing to return to the understaffed CAF..So, what’s it going to be? .Will the CAF remain fixated on gender pronouns and woke uniforms?.Or will Eyre embrace the committee’s recommendations and bring back skilled, experienced troops he gave the boot to? But the Liberal government wouldn’t like that. Prediction? .Canada’s courtrooms are going to be glutted with these lawsuits.
