Lockdowns in BC are a violation of our rights.

It has been said that BC [British Columbia, Canada] is not and never has been in lockdown but only in "restrictions”. The semantic argument is for idiots. We in BC are significantly locked out of activities to which we have inalienable Charter guaranteed rights. This arbitrary and illegal denial of our rights, including our rights to carry on our legitimate businesses to the benefit of our employees and the public, are being jerked like a choke chain every few weeks or days. This province is sputtering like an engine with a bad starter motor. We are being strangled and we are being promised, by every act of strangulation, that the rolling lockdowns will never end. Bankruptcies, suicides, mental health emergencies – all these numbers are through the roof and climbing. If this isn’t lockdown what the hell are we supposed to call it? What are they telling us?

BC Government:

"Provincial restrictions are in place to help stop the spread of COVID-19. Some restrictions are made by the Provincial Health Officer (PHO) under the Public Health Act and others are made under the Emergency Program Act (EPA). Most orders can be enforced by police and compliance and enforcement officials."

"Between March 29 at 11:59 pm and April 19 at 11:59 pm the PHO is strengthening province-wide restrictions:

• The variance allowing indoor religious gatherings and >worship services between March 28 and May 13 is suspended.
• Indoor low intensity group exercise classes are cancelled.
• Restaurants, pubs and bars are closed for indoor dining.
• Outdoor patio seating and take-out or delivery is allowed.
• Whistler Blackcomb ski resort is closed"

Every citizen of this country is guaranteed rights by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Among these rights are freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom to worship according to one's faith.

These rights can only be limited as the Charter states:

"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

1. "reasonable limits"
2. "proscribed by law" [law is law enacted by parliament, not executive orders issued by health authorities or any so-called extra-parliamentary authorities]
3. "demonstrably justified"

None of these qualifications have been successfully passed in any court of law by our federal and provincial governments. The issues must be argued in court. "Reasonable limits"? This is the question. "Proscribed by law"? None of these dictates have been proscribed by any law. "Demonstrably justified"? That means demonstrably justified in a court of law according to the laws of Canada by presentation of evidence that these "restrictions" have had effect in curbing this epidemic and that they have not had a worse effect than the disease which has a demonstrated death rate of less than 0.5%. "Proscibed by law" and "Resonable limits" have zero chance of being demonstrated successfully. These "restrictions" would be tossed out by any fair court.

If this question ever gets to a court of law, (and it’s a huge and disturbing IF given the bad attitude toward the Charter guarantees of freedom of speech announced by our Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) these “restrictions” will be judged to have been illegal, our Charter guaranteed rights will be upheld and following that judgement there will be lawsuits. IF the SCOC hears the case. IF.