TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @echipiuk
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
“So there really was no need to criminalize the non-violent trucker protests, he declares.” This is about as straightforward as it is. It was a loud and uncomfortable (for some residents) protest, but no one should have been charged, because at no point did they behave criminally. The government and police mismanaged the situation and charged people criminally in an attempt to manage it and save face.
@nationalpost - National Post
Lawyer decries 'double standard' on Freedom Convoy, anti-Israel protests https://nationalpost.com/news/lawyer-decries-double-standard-on-freedom-convoy-anti-israel-protests?taid=68fe1f9e92f26800016b3816&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
“The Governor General’s decision to allow a prorogation is a betrayal of the essence of Canadian democracy. Intentionally or not, she has allowed herself and her office to be used as the Liberal party’s stool-pigeon… The prime minister’s request for prorogation permits him to flee Parliament. He would be trying to escape the wishes of the people and their representatives. This is the moment for which we provide the special reserve powers of the governor general — to prevent a government from running away from the will of the people’s representatives.” We need some very serious reforms in this country so that this never happens again. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/christopher-dummitt-governor-general-betrays-constitution-by-letting-liberals-escape-parliament
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - Rath & Company is pleased to announce today that it has been successful in its application for certification on behalf of Alberta business owners impacted by Covid-19 restrictions and closures imposed through Chief Medical Officer of Health (“CMOH”) Orders. Justice Feasby of the Court of King's Bench of Alberta released his decision today certifying the class action in Ingram v Alberta, 2024 ABKB 631. This class action, led by Rebecca Ingram and Christopher Scott (the “Proposed Representative Plaintiffs”), sought to certify a class on behalf of affected Alberta business owners who suffered losses due to the CMOH orders, which were found to be ultra vires—outside legal authority and therefore unlawful—under Alberta’s Public Health Act (“PHA”) in Ingram v Alberta (Chief Medical Officer of Health), 2023 ABKB 453 (“Ingram 2023”). As a result, the Court Certified multiple claims, including negligence, bad faith and misfeasance in public office. The Court allowed affected businesses to claim compensation for harm and losses incurred due to the illegal CMOH Orders including punitive damages. Central Allegations of Bad Faith and Call for Punitive Damages A core component of the case was the allegation that Alberta’s Cabinet acted negligently or in bad faith by issuing orders through the CMOH when Alberta’s Cabinet chose to camouflage their actions as public health orders under the PHA so they could blame the CMOH rather than accept political responsibility.” Specifically, Justice Feasby found: “The Proposed Representative Plaintiffs plead essentially that Cabinet hid behind the CMOH thereby avoiding democratic accountability. That, in my view, is a collateral purpose that is plausibly bad faith.” The Court expressly permitted claims for punitive damages to hold Alberta accountable and deter future misconduct. Justice Feasby agreed that this is a reasonable common issue and certified it for consideration. Unlike general damages, which require individual assessments, punitive damages can be addressed as a common issue when the misconduct affects a broad group. Specifically Justice Feasby acknowledged that punitive damages are intended to punish wrongful conduct rather than compensate for losses, and can sometimes be assessed on a class-wide basis. The Court has certified a class consisting of: “All individuals who owned, in whole or in part, a business or businesses in Alberta that was subject to full or partial closure, or operational restrictions, mandated by the CMOH Orders between March 17, 2020, and the date of certification. For clarity, “owned” does not include ownership as a shareholder in a corporation or as a member of a cooperative.” Lead counsel Jeff Rath stated: “This is a huge day for Alberta businesses that were illegally harmed by Jason Kenny and Deena Hinshaw. The Court found that the action can proceed against the government of Alberta on a number of grounds including misfeasance in public office allowing the plaintiffs to seek punitive damages against the Alberta government for wrongdoing.” Important Notice for Potential Class Members The application for class action certification seeks to provide a fair and efficient resolution for Alberta business owners who suffered losses due to the CMOH Orders. A class proceeding is the most effective way to address these claims, given the widespread impact on Alberta’s business community. If you believe you are a class member, please retain all relevant records, as this evidence will be essential in the upcoming steps. For more information and updates on this case, or to complete our intake form if you believe you are a class member, please visit: https://rathandcompany.com/business-class-action/
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
@borncurious369 Please read the decision. In part it speaks to and how important government accountability is. It is also still open to sue Kenney and cabinet personally for misfeasance in public office. https://t.co/MNQKQQWa4u
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
How can these two statements from Health Canada be true at the same time? “Only vaccines that meet Health Canada's regulatory requirements for safety, effectiveness and quality are approved for use in Canada. COVID-19 vaccines reduce the risk of severe illness, death and post COVID-19 condition (long COVID).” - Currently on Health Canada’s Website (link: https://canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/vaccines/safety-side-effects.html) And “At the time of initial authorization of the first COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech) in December 2020, there was no reported evidence on the efficacy of the authorized COVID-19 vaccine to prevent asymptomatic infection, to reduce viral shedding, or to prevent transmission.” - Public Health Agency of Canada February 5, 2024 (link: https://dropbox.com/t/fbD1k0Arhzcaj4Zl) Anyone?
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
We will eventually find out via the Sakamoto Lawsuit which alleges as follows: “3. Health Canada negligently approved the Covid Vaccines under an expedited process which allowed manufacturers to apply for authorization for the sale and distribution of Covid Vaccines without the completion of all long-term safety studies or commitment to review new evidence about the Covid Vaccine as it become available, much less demonstrate that the Covid Vaccines were “safe and effective” for the general population. 4. By contrast, the Defendants knew, or ought to have known, that Covid Vaccines were neither safe or effective. The Defendants knew of reports of injury and harms caused by the Covid Vaccines and had access to information from the vaccine manufacturers stating the Covid Vaccines were not warranted for safety. Information from the vaccine manufacturers demonstrated various harms and injuries expected from the Covid Vaccines, yet the Defendants: a. Never disclosed this information to the general public or to physicians, and censored and suppressed information relating to the adverse events and injuries from the public; b. Continued to market, promote and distribute the Covid Vaccines as a “safe and effective” vaccine for the SARS-CoV-2 virus or Covid-19 (“Covid”); and c. Coerced and incentivised the public to take the Covid Vaccines while deliberately withholding relevant safety information about the Covid Vaccines which interfered with the public’s ability to exercise their right to full and informed consent to medical treatment. 5. The Defendants held themselves out as public health experts, reporting on behalf of health experts and public health doctors thereby establishing a relationship of trust between themselves and the public during the Covid pandemic at a time when the public was vulnerable, and the Defendants knew or ought to have known that the public would be relying on their information for their health, safety and protection. In public appeals meant to be relied on, the Chief Medical Officer of Health of Alberta routinely referred to all Albertans as her “patients” and issued 113 public health orders known as Chief Medical Officer of Health Orders (“CMOH Orders”) ultra vires to Section 29.(2.1) of the Public Health Act, RSA 2000, c P-37 (the “Public Health Act”) which included restrictions to Albertans not vaccinated for Covid. On July 31, 2023, the Alberta Court of King’s Bench determined that the CMOH Orders were ultra vires the Public Health Act. 6. The Defendants misrepresented the safety and efficacy of the Covid Vaccines and encouraged, and even implored, the public to trust the Defendants for their health, safety and protection. Further, the Defendants censored and suppressed information relating to the adverse events and injuries from the Covid Vaccines to influence public confidence in the Covid Vaccines and maintain trust in the public health authorities. The collective conduct of the Defendants to keep this information suppressed from the public in a manner which amounted to a conspiracy to commit assault and battery which deliberately interfered with the public’s ability to exercise their right to informed consent to medical treatment. 7. The Defendants knew, or ought to have known, that the Covid Vaccines would cause damage to the public, including the Plaintiff, and the Defendants, conspired to commit assault and battery, and failed to take adequate measures, or any measures, to prevent harm to the public, including the Plaintiff. 8. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants acted negligently, breached their public duty, or in the alternative made representations in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit assault and battery and committed malfeasance in public office in doing so.” https://rathandcompany.com/covid-19-vaccine-class-action/
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
For more re Sakamoto lawsuit👇
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
🚨MEDIA RELEASE🚨 Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Federal and Provincial Government for Misinformation and Negligence about risk and dangers of Covid-19 Vaccines A class action lawsuit has been filed by Rath & Company on behalf of Albertans harmed by the Covid-19 vaccines (the “Covid Vaccines”). This legal action is centered around allegations of unlawful, negligent, inadequate, improper, unfair, and deceptive practices by the Defendants in relation to the warning, marketing, promotion, and distribution of the Covid Vaccines. Carrie Sakamoto who filed the claim individually last year, is listed as class representative for the proposed class action lawsuit. The lawsuit, filed in the Court of King’s Bench in Lethbridge, Alberta, against the Government of Canada and Province of Alberta (the “Defendants”). The lawsuit claims that the Defendants were negligent, provided information they knew to be false and incomplete, and that they censored and suppressed truthful and reliable information about vaccine injuries thereby vitiating informed consent and causing harm to Ms. Sakamoto and many others in Alberta. The lawsuit goes on to allege misfeasance in public office and conspiracy to commit assault and battery on the public. Jeffrey Rath, lead counsel on the case, says: “I think Canadians will be shocked to learn about the rushed changes to safety standard for the Covid Vaccines which removed the requirement for the Covid Vaccines to be either “safe or effective” while, at the same time, the Defendants promoted, distributed, and marketed the Covid Vaccines as “safe and effective” to the public. And the Defendants didn’t stop there, they went further by coercion the public to take the Covid Vaccines by stripping rights from them or providing financial incentives for taking the Covid Vaccines. What does that do for informed consent? Does this amount to a conspiracy to commit assault and battery on the public? These are questions that we are asking the court to determine. And, I think, the public deserves some answers.” “The Government of Canada has already conceded, to the Public Accounts Committee, that the contracts with the manufacturers were rushed, did not contain the normal standards, and provided additional indemnities in favour of the manufacturers,” Eva. Chipiuk co-counsel on the case goes on to say. “The Defendants held themselves out as public health experts and gave medical advice to the public at large. They intentionally set out to build a relationship of trust between themselves and the public during the pandemic at a time when they knew the public was vulnerable and afraid. They knew or ought to have known that the public would be relying on their information for their health, safety and protection.” The class action represents all impacted individuals in Alberta. If you have been injured or otherwise adversely affected by the Covid Vaccines and with to join this class action lawsuit, please register by completing the online form at https://rathandcompany.com/vaccine-class-action/. Should the Court grant permission for this action to proceed as a “Class Action” (also known as “Certification”), you may qualify as a class member whether or not you have registered. Millions of Canadians relied on the representations of the Defendants at a time when they were particularly vulnerable. We now know that many Canadians suffered physical and psychological injuries due to the misinformation and negligence of the Defendants. This proposed class action lawsuit seeks justice for individuals who have suffered physical and psychological injuries or death due to the alleged negligence and misconduct by the Defendants in respect of the Covid Vaccines. It aims to hold the Defendants accountable and obtain compensation for those adversely affected.
@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
And see here the response in Parliament👇👇
@canindependent - The Canadian Independent
LOOK: Liberal Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health Yasir Naqvi says that “at the time of initial authorization of the first COVID-19 vaccines, Pfizer-BioNTech, in December 2020, there was no reported evidence on the efficacy of the authorized COVID-19 vaccine to prevent asymptomatic infection, to reduce viral shedding or to prevent transmission.” A House of Commons transcript from March 22, 2024, shows that Conservative MP Colin Carrie posed the question, “With regard to Health Canada’s authorization of COVID-19 vaccines, at the time of approval through the Interim Order Respecting the Importation, Sale and Advertising of Drugs for Use in Relation to COVID-19 in 2021: (a) was there evidence that the vaccines stopped people from transmitting the virus to others?” Liberal Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health Yasir Naqvi responded, saying, “Mr. Speaker, in answer to part (a) of the question, at the time of the initial authorization of the first COVID-19 vaccines, Pfizer-BioNTech, in December 2020, there was no reported evidence on the efficacy of the authorized COVID-19 vaccine to prevent asymptomatic infection, reduce viral shedding, or prevent transmission.”
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Just watched this video put out by @PierrePoilievre about the housing crisis in Canada. The video highlights the significant increase in mortgage and rental prices since Justin Trudeau became Prime Minister. It also explains the federal government's role in driving up interest and principle payments on mortgages. Thank you for creating this informative video and for your effort in helping Canadians comprehend the intricate relationship between our financial and bureaucratic systems, and how they impact housing prices. I strongly urge more elected officials to follow suit. When individuals are well-informed, it leads to a more constructive conversation that focuses on collaborative solutions, rather than divisive politics. Ultimately, this serves the best interests of the public as a whole. Such initiatives also hold the potential to restore trust in elected officials and public institutions, a vital component for a thriving democracy. In the face of significant divisions, I believe it is high time to elevate the conversation and empower Canadians. I believe Canada deserves better. Do you agree?
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Ep. 006 - I had the pleasure of speaking with @MaximeBernier, leader of the People's Party of Canada (PPC), to talk about political issues, including vote splitting, personal autonomy and the importance of family values in today's society. Bernier highlights the ideological differences between the PPC and the Conservative Party, focusing on the essence of true conservative values and the importance of standing firm in one's beliefs. We also delve into the concept of a more efficient government, advocating for policies that champion individual freedom while maintaining a balance with societal needs. Finally, this conversation is not just about political ideologies, but also about empowering individuals to take an active role in the democratic process. You can also find the full episode on your favorite platforms, including @rumble, @Spotify, @YouTube and @ApplePodcasts. Enjoy!
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Can we really say the trial of Tamara Lich and Chris Barber is not political when the Former Mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson is scheduled to testify as a witness for the Crown? Seems like an odd witness to me. What evidence can he offer that those that work for the city or police cannot? I guess we have yet to see what type of evidence he will present.
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Can someone answer me this: Why is it illegal to drink a beer in the park in #Canada but you can smoke crack? Does this sound reasonable or rational to you? “Those opposed to drinking in public spaces have cited the health impacts of normalizing alcohol consumption and worries about drunk driving and dangerous and disorderly behaviour, among other concerns.” @CBCNews But if you shoot up heroin, none of these problems exist? I am in London, England and you can drink on the street, because the government here treats their citizens like adults. If you think the government in Canada is doing it to protect you, think again. This is about control. If you let the government treat you like a child, they will treat you like a child using control and discipline. Also take it a step further, you can’t drink outside because you are not responsible enough, but you are responsible enough to pay taxes so they government can tell you where you can drink (or again, shoot up in public, not problem in fact, public transportation buildings seem to be preferred). Do you see the problem now? Still not convinced, this is actually in the article: “No surveillance, no trust Malleck, the medical historian with Brock University, says that for the last century, the notion of drinking in a public space has been that it's fine as long as it's in a controlled public space, such as a bar or restaurant, where someone in a position of authority knows that if rules are broken, they could lose their liquor licence. But in public, he says, there's no consistent surveillance.” You NEED to be surveilled. You are not responsible enough to drink in public, just make sure you pay the government first. What other areas of government control don’t make sense to you? https://cbc.ca/amp/1.6904771
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Can we have a serious discussion in Canada about the actual evidence, and charges of, Tamara Lich and Chris Barber? It seems necessary to say, sedition and treason are extremely serious charges. These are not allegations or terms that should be used lightly in any context or country, including Canada. Using these terms so causally and flippantly does a disservice to Canada, the public, the democratic and justice system.
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
@JessicaVdV But Lich and Barber aren’t charged with sedition (ie. overthrowing the government) or treason, they are charged with intimidation of mischief and some other minor charges. Would be strange for the Crown to present evidence of sedition or treason and not charge them with such a…
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
When you hear the words of @JustinTrudeau in this clip saying: “We need citizens to engage, to pay attention and to be demanding of better answers, to be demanding more of our leaders and our political figures,” how do you reconcile his words with the prosecution of Tamara Lich, Chris Barber, and other Canadians, who went to Ottawa to engage, pay attention and demand better answers, and demand more of their leaders and political figures? What PMJT called for was encouraging Canadians to take part in their civic responsibilities. What Tamara, Chris and other Canadians did was embrace their civic responsibilities. To live in a free and democratic society, we need more civic engagement, not less. If the protest was too long or too loud, perhaps it was not the protesters that were the problem, but the political figures that chose not to listen.
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Things do not appear to be going well for the Crown in the Lich and Barber prosecution. It seems all the calls for lawful and peaceful protest are making it harder for the Crown to make its case for the criminal elements of counselling mischief, obstruction of justice, and others… “The judge said the Crown’s movement to submit “unattributed” posts, which means the author is unknown, as “circumstantial evidence” is “highly misleading” and even falls short of the criteria for hearsay. The Crown was asked what is its intent with the disclosure evidence, to which he replied, “We will let you know.” “We are too late in the game for 'We will let you know,’” the judge responded. “You can't have hearsay circumstantial evidence.”” https://westernstandard.news/news/admissibility-of-crown-s-evidence-under-scrutiny-in-lich-barber-trial/article_ecba774a-4e8a-11ee-82a8-ebb9f3f766e5.html
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Hello @PaulChampLaw, since you asked, yes, suing regular Canadians for $400 million for exercising their democratic rights in the nations capital has caused a chilling effect and does not exemplify a free and democratic society. Have your clients ever thought of directing their concerns to, and seeking damages from, the government and police authorities who wholly mismanaged the protest? Seems like the public bodies paid by public funds to manage and minimize the damages you are seeking for the court to address ought to be held to account as well. Also, I’m much more than “convoy lawyer”. Feel free to use my name Paul.
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
The Freedom Convoy and the trial of Tamara Lich along with Chris Barber have broader implications, both humanitarian and internationally that are not often discussed as described by @DiegoTheEgo2 below. The world is watching Canada with concern. Question is, do Canadians see what is happening or will they continue to keep their eyes closed? Democracy is not grounded in unilateral sacrifices, but requires reciprocal participation. Canadians have failed to uphold their civic duties. We have been apathetic and unengaged, as a result our elected officials have forgotten they work for the public. The Freedom Convoy was a stark reminder to elected officials of what can happen when they ignore their constituents. Citizens should not be fearful about engaging with their elected officials and demanding answers. They are elected to serve the Canadian public. If elected officials can’t take the heat from the public, they should get out of the fire. Dialogue is key. Blocking and ignoring constituent concerns is not the answer. Our elected officials are showing the world that they are not leaders, they cannot commit to difficult conversations, and they cannot take the heat. This is not a good look Canada. #Canada deserves better.
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
👇👇
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
THE most frustrating part about representing certain members of the Freedom Convoy movement was the amount of misinformation and intentional lies. What it has taught me is to be very careful with second hand knowledge. In this day and age when so much is recorded and there is so much available information, we owe it to ourselves to take time to inform ourselves about what is factual and what is not. Let’s try to do better Canada. Let’s educate and elevate each other rather than disparage and shame one another.
@forevaeva79 - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM
Albertans could see pandemic-related charges withdrawn after ruling on Public Health Act breach
