A Personal Declaration Of Opposition To The Abuse of Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms By The State .


I am writing this because I feel an obligation given that I am the last living First Minister who help craft the Constitution Act 1982 and The Charter of Rights and Freedoms that forms part of it. 

Secondly, I am doing it because I must speak on behalf of those deceased First Ministers, the majority of whom , would advance the views that I am advocating now. 

And thirdly, I am doing it on behalf of many Canadians who feel they have no voice; those who have love ones who have died as a result of the vaccines and others who have been injured as a result of the vaccines ; and then those who have love ones who have died or been injured as a result of the undemocratic lockdowns. 

Who would have thought it would come to this???

In Christmas Season 2021 Governments across Canada make orders to diminish our democracy by limiting our rights and freedoms guaranteed under the The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and engage as little as possible the 14 Parliaments of this nation. 

It has been, for all intents and purposes, an assault in two ways: one political and legal and the other, scientific. 

A. The Science—-

Quote: ‘The task of understanding the trajectory of a virus through a population falls within the purview of a few specific scientific fields. Lockdowns, in contrast, impact all aspects of our society. So, what we have here is not a singular, specific problem, to be tackled by a small group of “experts” with domain-specific knowledge and skills. Instead, we face a vast web of interrelated problems, demanding many different areas of theoretical and practical expertise.’ 

Professor Mathew Ratcliff , writing on the website Collateral Global , Professor of Philosophy , University of York .

It has been known for many months that the restrictions that have been placed on our rights and freedoms do not work. The Great Barrington Declaration of Oct 4, 2020 should have alerted Governments that their approach was wrong . This declaration was instigated by three world class medical scientists : Dr. Martin Kulldorlf, Professor at Harvard University , Dr. Sunetra Gupta, Professor at Oxford University and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Professor at Stanford University. Here is part of what that declaration says:  

‘The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. ‘

This declaration has been signed by over 45,000 medical practitioners and over 15,000 medical and public health scientists. 

Additionally, numerous  studies have shown the folly of wearing masks;  yet our Governments continue to invade our person . The Swiss Policy Research has detailed 39 studies and their conclusion is :

‘So far, most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.’

To pick just one of these studies :

‘A Danish randomized controlled trial with 6000 participants, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine found no statistically significant effect of high-quality medical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection in a community setting.’ Source : March 2021: Annals Of Internal Medicine. 

Then there are The PCR tests : a flawed procedure not even meant for the purposes now used. Even the American CDC is phasing out their use in the Covid context . And the cycle threshold used in this country is so high that there is about a 5% reliability.  It averages over 30 , and some Provinces over 40 , when 25 is said by experts to be the most effective cycle. 

The following study is instructive

‘The research group of French professor Didier Raoult has recently shown that at a cycle threshold (ct) of 25, about 70% of samples remained positive in cell culture (i.e. were infectious); at a ct of 30, 20% of samples remained positive; at a ct of 35, 3% of samples remained positive; and at a ct above 35, no sample remained positive (infectious) in cell culture (see diagram).

This means that if a person gets a “positive” PCR test result at a cycle threshold of 35 or higher (as applied in most US labs and many European labs), the chance that the person is infectious is less than 3%. The chance that the person received a “false positive” result is 97% or higher.’

On November 30 Dr. Paul Elias Alexander( former Professor at MacMaster University, former advisor to the US Government, former advisor to WHO) wrote the following on the Brownstone Website:

 ‘More Than 400 Studies on the Failure of Compulsory Covid Interventions

‘What follows is the current totality of the body of evidence (available comparative studies and high-level pieces of evidence, reporting, and discussion) on COVID-19 lockdowns, masks, school closures, and mask mandates. There is no conclusive evidence supporting claims that any of these restrictive measures worked to reduce viral transmission or deaths. 

Lockdowns were ineffective, school closures were ineffective, mask mandates were ineffective, and masks themselves were and are ineffective and harmful. ‘

Dr. Douglas Allen of Simon Fraser University in British Columbia has done a study showing the cure is worse than the disease . Part of abstract to his study states :

‘An examination of over 80 Covid-19 studies reveals that many relied on assumptions that were false, and which tended to over estimate the benefits and under estimate the costs of lockdown. As a result, most of the early cost/benefit studies arrived at conclusions that were refuted later by data, and which rendered their cost/benefit findings incorrect.’

Where are the Governments and Our Courts on all this independent science? It’s not like its being hidden! One click of the mouse ! 

Sadly , It is being deliberately ignored. 

And it is this faulty science that forms the basis of these unconstitutional measures and some early faulty Court decisions. 

AND , the Governments and Courts deny what has happened in Florida, Sweden, and Uttar Pradish  , India. This later state of over 200 million people has been able to reduce medical problems by early treatment and have less deaths and so called cases than other states that implemented lockdowns. AND THEIR VACCINATED RATE WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN 50%. 

Most tragically , Governments have denied the medical repercussions of lockdowns —the delayed surgeries and death , the delayed and cancelled specialist appointments , the increased depression and suicides .

Furthermore , they have deliberately downplayed the value of vitamin D, Zinc, Vitamin C and Quercetin in reducing hospitalization and the severity of the disease and the value of treatments used early such as , Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin . Dr. Peter McCullough,  a world renown researcher in the field has persuasively shown that early treatment could reduce hospitalization by up to 85%. 

Prevention, once the hallmark of Public Heath Policy is absent from the narrative. Why is this? 

Additionally , Governments have narrowly focused their efforts ignoring the Emergency Planning agencies on which they all have been spending millions of dollars over many years . Lt. Col. David Redman , an outspoken critic of the present approach , and former Emergency Director with the Alberta Government , has a very effective way to describe sound Emergency Management :

‘Let me give you all a new concept.

Think of Emergency Management in terms of an orchestra.

The Public is the audience, filling a hall.

At the front is the conductor. That is the Emergency Management Officer (EMO). 

The EMO is not a violinist, a drummer, a woodwind player, or a brass player. The conductor does not specialize into one section of the orchestra. The EMO stays a part and leads the whole. The conductor knows each group in the orchestra, knows what they do, how they contribute to the whole, and knows how to get the best out of each section. Most importantly, the conductor knows how to get all the sections to work together to produce not just a good piece of music, but the best piece of music with the skills present. The conductor also knows what this orchestra is missing and where to go get those missing elements.

In the String section – let us call them the doctors – we have different types of violins, cellos, violas, etc. each with a lead (Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes). The Medical Officer of Health (MOH) is a generalist for Stringed Instruments, not one of the specialist leads. The MOH is promoted to be the leader of the String section.

Now, let’s imagine the orchestra conductor (EMO) is not available or is sent out of the auditorium and is replaced by the leader of the String section. This leader (MOH) is put in charge of the entire orchestra, in place of the conductor. The String Instrument leader is not trained on how all the other sections play, the methods for best use of their instruments, or if other sections even have a part to play.

Over in the drum section, we have a lot of instruments that keep the entire orchestra in tempo and coherent. Let’s call them the power grid, water supply system and the food system. The String Instrument leader just assumes that they will always be there, so ignores them.  

The real Conductor, now ordered out of the room, would never ignore them.

The Brass section has been told by the String Instrument leader to stop playing, period, because the violin conductor does not think they are essential for the music. Let’s call them small business, tourism, air lines, etc. The Brass section members start to develop resentment, mental health issues, drug issues, and they sell their instruments because they have no income and need livelihood.

You see where I am going.

The EMO who is the conductor for all emergencies is sitting in the lobby and the orchestra collapses, the public covers their ears and starts to have social and mental health issues from the noise.

The audience agrees they never want to see this performance again, but there is no other show in town.

The media throughout has been extoling how great the new Stringed Instrument leader is, regardless of the music.

The Stringed Instrument leader continues to believe they are doing a great job, and it would have been worse if they were not in charge.

The public needs to understand we are going about this all wrong.

We knew better and chose to ignore all Lessons Learned from all previous Pandemics and ignore the pre-existing plans that were written from these Lessons Learned.

As an old army friend constantly says about what we are doing.


And now a new study has just been produced by The Canadian Covid Care Alliance detailing the many flaws in Pfizer’s first months of trials entitled “ More Harm Than Good’ , showing more problems from their vaccines than they prevent. 

B. Legal and Constitutional Issues 



Governments have forged ahead with infringements on our freedoms like it was just another day in the park. The blatant ignorance, and casual approach regarding this is breathtaking. The arbitrary implementation of these measures is the greatest assault on individual freedom in the forty years that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been in effect. 

A. Let it be recorded that The Charter of Right and Freedoms is the Supreme Law of Canada . So says Section 52 of the Constitution Act 1982. All laws in Canada involving Governments are subject to conforming with this Charter. 

B. Let it be recorded that the first words of the Charter are : ‘Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:’ 

Note that a colon punctuation comes at the end —that is that everything that follows is in this context. 

C. Present Government covid measures violate the Charter , especially Section 2, 6, 7, and 15.

D. Section 2 describes the freedoms individuals have relating to conscience, religion, expression and the press. Additionally other freedoms described are freedom of assembly and association. Today across the nation individuals are prevented from association and assembly .

E. Section 6 talks of Mobility Rights; the right to travel anywhere in Canada and leave Canada . Additionally, it describes the right to ‘to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.’ As we speak people are losing their jobs , thousands of them across the country , it being alleged that their  health status is inconsistent with Government edits.  

F. Section 7 describes a person’s rights to ‘Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.’ Right now our life and liberty are being violated and the coercion is rampant in violating our ‘security of the person.’

G. To top it off is Section 15 —‘Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.’ 

Presently I ,and many thousands , do not enjoy equality before the law because we are prevented from going certain places that others can go.

Governments believe that they are immune from these protected rights and freedoms. 

I contend they are not!

Section 1 of the Charter says:

‘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.’

This section does not apply to the present circumstance. When this was being written it was in the context of a serious threat to the state , a war, insurrection , a clear and present danger . A virus whose recovery rate is 99% and fatality rate is 0.08% (source, The Justice Centre For Constitutional Freedoms quoting Government documents)  surely doesn’t qualify as a threat to the state. 

Consider: the country took 114 years before it had a written charter of rights and  freedoms. America had one in 1791. And it was clear to everyone in 1981 when the Charter was being negotiated  that a further opening of the Constitution was unlikely for many decades , generations away, if not more.  Its already 40 years. Hence , what we were dong then was very, very important. And long lasting. 

We were not negotiating fundamental freedoms and rights to be in the Constitution to see them easily taken away, especially by highly questionable science at best, and downright wrongdoing by many of the stakeholders at worse. And even then four tests would have to be met to override those freedoms and rights. 

You see , if these rights and freedoms can be taken away in this circumstance , where the science is against what is being done , where more effective alternatives are medically available , where alternate approaches like the Redman approach are available, and where deaths and injuries from the so called ‘vaccines’ are more than from all other vaccines combined in the last 30 years , then the Charter becomes diluted, peoples rights and freedoms sacrificed on the altar of fear and convenience ; that means ,then , future serious circumstances will be easier to justify violating our rights and freedoms using this present falsity as a precedent to bypass the Charter all over again. 

The permanence we thought we achieved for individual freedoms and rights in the Constitution becomes a fleeting concept floating hither and yon in the shifting winds of political expediency, fear and faulty science and faulty approaches, not the bedrock of a secure democracy as we had thought. 

That’s why this is all so wrong——

H. OK , for argument’s let’s assume that Section 1 applies to the present circumstance .  There are four tests to be met:

  1. Demonstrably justify
  2. By Law 
  3. Reasonable Limits
  4. Consistent with a free and democratic society 

Has any Government in Canada met these tests ?

Where is the ‘demonstrably justify?’Nowhere to be seen! One would think that such harsh measures , denying personal liberties , people’s jobs eliminated,  would require a cost benefit analysis , a report, a study . None exits. 

Reasonable limits . There’s no reasonable limits but arbitrary edits , reissued over and over again, most often with no parliamentary oversight. 

By law —one would think that this would require a new law, requiring The Parliament, the peoples’ house to open and be intimately involved. When peoples rights and freedoms are being taken away is this not a matter for the peoples’ representatives ? If not , what is? In the Case of Section 33 , the so called notwithstanding clause , in order for Governments to override Sections 2, 7, and 15 the Parliament must be opened and a new law proposed and passed before any  change can occur. And then with a time limit. 

In a free and democratic society . This validates the previous point. How can a Government be consistent with the concept of a free and democratic society without the Parliament being intimately involved ? If in fact it was such a big issue as the Governments daily pronounce , then let the people speak through their elected representatives. 

Furthermore, Many Governments are using existing laws that were in place long before this present circumstance existed . A new law is needed for a new circumstance , not hiding behind existing laws for other circumstances. 

And so even if Section 1 applied , which I contend it does not, the Governments have failed these tests and therefore their actions are unconstitutional . 

And then the Courts so far have failed us and abused the Charter .

J. Sins Of Omission and Sins of Commission

Perhaps no where is the fatal flaw ( error in law) of the various court judgements concerning the Charter of Rights and Freedoms more blatant than in the omission of consideration of the first words of the Charter itself:

Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:

Note the grammatical use of the colon. Everything comes after this !

All considerations of the Charter must be in ‘the context of , ‘under the umbrella of’ these  important concepts. 

One does not have the luxury to pick and chose what parts of the Charter are to apply in a given case. The totality of the Charter must  be considered, applied in any rendering of judgement concerning the Charter. 

Nowhere in the judgements I have read considering the Charter in this circumstance has consideration being given to this important part of the Charter, its introduction , that is obviously to guide the rest of the Charter and its interpretation. 

What does ‘supremacy of God ‘ mean ?

Is it a stretch to consider unalienable rights? 

Does it not mean justice and fairness at the very least? 

One is reminded of the US Declaration of Independence, A document very much a part of the jurisprudence of North America. 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’

What does ‘rule of law’ mean ?

Does it mean following the law as written, consistency and justice? Robert H. Bork writing in his book ‘Coercing Virtue ‘ states:

‘ One of the indispensable institutions of Western civilization is the rule of law. That rule is central to democratic government , a vigorous economy, and individual liberty. A functioning rule of law requires that law be understood to have force and moral weight of its own, a force and weight independent of the political and cultural struggles of the moment.’

I submit that all the judgements rendered that involve interpretation of the Charter must involve consideration of all the relevant parts of the Charter . Failure to do so renders these judgements incomplete and hence invalid. 

In the present context the recent judgements interpreting the Charter are invalid because they err in omitting consideration of the first words and concepts of that very charter, concepts that are suppose to guide the subsequent interpretations of the court. 

The ruling by Chief Justice of the Queen’s Bench of Manitoba for example makes this statement in his conclusions  :


[54] There is no constitutional or any legal basis for invalidating the impugned provisions of the PHOs as argued by the applicants. Section 67 of the PHA represents neither an unconstitutional nor an undemocratic delegation of power.

This omits any consideration of the context in which this decision should have been made , that is the other relevant parts of the Charter !!

A judge does not have the authority, I contend,  to arbitrarily decide what parts of the Charter to consider in deciding a case based on the Charter. If so it makes a mockery out of the concept of Justice. The Charter’s words mean something , all of them,  and must be interpreted in the light of all the evidence submitted. 

Additionally, the Judge omits any reference  to the substantial scientific information submitted by the litigants.

Finally, sacred individual freedoms and rights that took 114 years to form part of the Constitution are not to be swept away by ignoring the concepts that were to guide the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and form its context: the supremacy of God and the rule of law. As Robert H Bork said again : ’ Constitutions speak for permanent values——-.’

Similarly, other relevant cases bearing on the present circumstance recently heard in the Supreme Court of BC , Beaudoin v British Columbia , 2021 and Klassen v British Columbia ( Attorney General) 20121 fail to include in their consideration of the Charter the first concepts introduced which are suppose to guide in the deliberation of the Charter . 

Tangentially, the Manitoba case just referenced , the Judge did not carry out his obligation and rule using all relevant law , based on the evidence , but rather he bowed to an unelected bureaucrat stating that he, the judge, was not an expert in health matters, as if in all his other judgements he has made involved him being  an expert on all the various subjects that came before him. Are we to deduce that this is how judges decide these days? Not on the law interpreted through the evidence presented but on the views of one set of experts. This is an abdication of duty. 

Let me describe a little of my views concerning BC First case , Beaudoin v British Columbia

While the judge  recognizes the importance of the Charter in point 56 in his ruling,  although without specifically referencing ,like he should have , the concepts of the supremacy of God and the rule of law,  he goes on  to essentially not recognize it in the manner in which he deals with the violations of the Charter later in his judgement . 

No where in this judgement is there evidence that the Province ‘demonstrably justified ‘ their multiple actions to restrict the freedoms and rights of the people  Often one finds finds an over emphasis on the words ‘reasonable limits ‘ and less emphasis on the words ‘demonstrably justify’ . In any plain reading of Section 1 it is about demonstrably justifying , by law , within  reasonable limits consistent with the values of a free and democratic society. None of these tests have been clearly established in the Judge’s ruling. 

In October the Government and/or the Judge knew or ought to have known that many of the statements of the previous year by the Provincial Department proved to be incorrect . The incidence of receipt and transmission of the virus by the vaccinated being one dramatic example. In other words the very reason for the vaccine to prevent contracting the virus , proved blatantly wrong. And data from around the world was readily available about the  incidence of cases rising after lockdowns were introduced . This is not rocket science and was available in independent publications of which there are many. 

The framework  of the Charter is contained in the opening sentence of the Charter. This in not  mentioned anywhere in the Judge’s decision and renders incomplete a full assessment of the application of the Charter. 

The  Government and/or the judge knew or ought have known that their/his slavish reliance on the now well know faulty science of the Provincial Department of Health ( Section 118) was  a big problem. Reference Sections 122–125 also refer. 

The Government of British Columbia and/or the Judge knew or ought to have know of the significant health problems caused by the Government’s measures , delayed surgeries causing death and injuries . Public information was readily available where Government had delayed surgeries, delayed critical specialist appointments . Many know someone damaged by these lockdowns or who died. 

We are talking about life and death and it behooves the Government and/or the judge to ensure they have the most relevant information . A full year previous , the Great Barrington Declaration was issued . Results from the Governments of Israel and the UK were readily available, real data showing the Provincial Government narrative to be flawed. And data from the US and Europe Government Agencies showing deaths and injuries from the covid vaccines to be more that all the deaths and injuries from all vaccines for the past 30 years. 

And in the Judge’s own backyard at Simon Fraser University , Burnaby , BC, Dr. Douglas Allen published a paper in April 2021 a full six months before his decision entitled ‘Covid  Lockdown: Cost Benefits: A Critical Assessment of the Literature ‘ in which it was revealed that most of the data relied upon by Governments like the Government of British Columbia was unreliable and much of it false. 80 studies were examined .

Surely this information should be at least sufficient for a pause in what was being implemented. 

The other aspect of this sad tale is that the Government of British Columbia has a obligation to bring all the latest scientific information to the Judge’s attention—-as the Judge and the Government keep saying —-IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST . The Premier and Minister of Heath take an oath to conduct their affairs with integrity. 

The Courts of Canada have a solemn obligation to interpret the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as written especially those concepts that undergird its very existence:  The Supremacy of God and the rule of law, the permanence of values.


A. The science is not present to justify the draconian, arbitrary measures being used. Many times the cure is worse than the disease. 

B. The measures violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The bar has not been met to allow Governments to violate basic individual rights and freedoms. A 99% recovery rate sure does not pose a threat to the nation.  

C. Section 1 of the Charter does not permit the Governments license to implement their measures . And even if it did the Governments have not passed the four tests necessary to take such action. 

D. Early court decisions err in their judgements , failing to invoke all the relevant parts of the Charter and exam all the scientific information that was readily available.  

E . The reason for putting the Charter in the Constitution in the first place was to  protect it from easy change . Trying to ‘square ‘ a virus out break with a ‘round ‘Section 1 just doesn’t cut it. 


This is all an affront to our Democracy , an abuse of our Constitution by selectivity and law making rather than interpretation; a mangling of the scientific method and the abandonment of reason .

It is up to the higher courts of this land to rectify this injustice and restore the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to its rightful place protecting the freedoms and rights of individual Canadians against the false claims of Governments who are attempting to usurp it. 


The Four Horsemen of the Modern Era

If the above is not enough,  we have the Four Horseman of the Modern Era circling over us like massive locusts , ready to pounce on any deviation in behaviour by the people to the Government edits.

Consider the power of the media. They formed their falsely named Trusted  News initiative that essentially blocks all news that is negative to their narrative that all is well and that the lockdown destruction is not real, and the hundreds of thousands of deaths from the vaccines is untrue . They play on attacking alternate views by playing the conspiracy theory card , up to now keeping  the masses in check.  Meanwhile , in Canada they take $600 million from the Federal Government , this, the very group that is suppose to expose conflicts of interest in high places, be independent  ———-now fallen on their own sword. 

Our Governments have become too big and undemocratic. The Parliaments  of this nation should be meeting regularly and oversee what is happening. The people are shut out and a small coterie of people in one discipline are running the show, completely ignoring the Emergency Measures that are in place ready to give the weight of of the many disciplines needed to properly manage the situation. The Prime Minister is acting like a President or Monarch; the power has shifted from Parliament to The  Prime Minister’s office by passing even the Cabinet. There are over 1400 working directly for the PM in the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister’s Office( this info  a few years ago, current stats were hard to come by) consuming an annual budget of $150,000,000. Yet , there are over 7000 other executives working for the Government . For a full examination of this dire situation let me recommend ‘ Democracy in Canada—-The Disintegration of Our Institutions’  by Donald A. Savoie. 

Big Pharma have their tentacles everywhere —from the local hospital purchasing agent to the Cabinet Room. The intermingling of people on Govt regulatory Agencies and Big Pharma is a prime example of the rot that has set in. These are the people who will not stand behind their product yet reap billions of dollars from the masses with its use; an experimental product whose long term effects are completely unknown. Pfizer has had to settle out of court for billions of dollars as a result of charges brought against them ; $175 million because of experiments on Nigerian Children, $2.3 billion to settle false claims that the company gave to Governments, , and $300 million regarding Chantix. And now the recent study by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance  that exposes their unethical behaviour in the conduct of their clinical trials on their covid vaccine. Note : ‘The claim was that the inoculations were safe and showed 95% efficacy 7 days after the 2nd dose. But that 95% was actually Relative Risk Reduction. Absolute Risk Reduction was only 0.84%.’

Big Tech is perhaps the most dangerous,  hiding behind their portals to commit all manner of wrong doing and double speak. Their friendly ties with China , excusing many of the horrific abuses there , to gain their twenty pieces of silver and market access is well know. Acting as judge and jury to gain access to their sites smacks of corruption to which Governments seems powerless to act , given that many politicians receive substantial sums of money ( fronted through false so called non profits and other nefarious entities) from these tech behemoths. 

This is now the nature of our western society, corrupted from within and without by these horsemen. 

Hon A. Brian Peckford P.C.

Parksville. British Columbia , Canada 

69 thoughts on “A Personal Declaration Of Opposition To The Abuse of Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms By The State .

  1. Thank you for this reasoned and valuable post. I am forwarding it to my elected representatives with the hope they will listen sooner rather than later.


  2. Thank you Mr Peckford.
    The clarity and dignity you bring to your writing honours your past service to our country, which is very much appreciated.
    But some of us are willing to call what is happening for what it is.

    This ‘plandemic’ is an abomination on our society. It was indeed planned. That information is also available with a few keystrokes – and by NOT using google.
    This isn’t about health.
    This isn’t about safety
    This is about corruption of leadership on a global scale.
    This is the systematic planned destruction of the Western democracies.
    It is no longer reasonable at this point to expect Justice in our courts.
    It is no longer reasonable to expect protection of our rights and freedoms.
    This is Evil.
    And they are not even bothering to disguise it anymore. Totalitarian control. Censorship. A ‘social credit’ system. Financial control.
    Not very long ago we felt sorry for the people in China, living under that oppressive regime.
    Now the regime is here.
    When will Canadians wake up?? What’s it going to take??

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Reblogged this on In defense of human freedom and commented:
    I am sharing this good defense of the constitutional rights and freedoms of Canadians, by a former Premier, against the spectre of medical tyranny that has threatened Canada for almost two years, through lockdowns, mandates and restrictions. It should be reprinted in every major newspaper, instead of the drivel and lies they routinely print in the mainstream media, which has essentially degenerated into propaganda for pharmaceutical corporations. Canada is still worth fighting for and defending, even if a majority of people are still unaware of the threat posed by the corruption of our politicians and media and healthcare system now taking place.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. Thank you for these well-reasoned and authoritative arguments, Premier Peckford. The truth is that you shouldn’t have to take on this work — our legal scholars should be doing this for you, while you enjoy a well-earned retirement. I remember 20 years ago, the legal professors at the University of Toronto held a conference and brought out a book at lightning speed to consider the proposed anti-terrorism legislation: https://www.amazon.ca/Security-Freedom-Essays-Canadas-Anti-Terrorism/dp/0802085199. However, we don’t have a similar effort today. Why not?

    Meanwhile, our idiot prime minister is ramping up his rhetoric, suggesting anti-vaxxers are misogynistic and racist, bemoaning that they “they take up some space” and asking “Do we tolerate these people?” https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trudeau-denounces-unvaccinated-misogynistic-and-racist-extremists


  5. Thankyou Mr. Peckford for your courage to speak up and represent what this country used to stand for and hopefully will be regained as more courageous individuals speak up and are heard. I will share this compendium of good sense and wisdom with as many people as I am able


  6. Dear Mr. Peckford,
    Happy New Year, optimistically 2022 will be an improvement over the past two.
    A couple of errata, “WordPhil” has messed with your text and substituted “edits” for “edicts”- he tried to do it to me just there as well!
    I was sorry to have missed you at the EZRA Conference in Nanaimo last month. Dr. O’Dwyer’s presentation really laid out the harm being done and techniques being used .
    Dr. Robert Malone also reviewed this as “Mass Formation Psychosis” on from Dec. 9 in Tampa. The video on YouTube is essential viewing.
    I am disappointed but not surprised that our judiciary has been suborned. Certainly the Presidential PMO was the result of Justin’s father’s wishes in your time, with decreasing relevance of the elected representatives. I had hoped that there would be enough ornery and litigious barristers to have attacked the nonsense, but insight seems lacking. And the medical profession- trained o “believe” in vaccines since at least the 1950’s and without the wit to see that experimental chemotherapy injections are not “vaccines” in any real sense.
    I am glad that you were able to name the involved judges and can keep asking Jody Wilson-Raybould’s question- “Are they Complicit or Incompetent?” I have decided to answer with another conjunction- they are both.

    With profound respect,


  7. I don’t see the courts coming to our rescue until the public loose at least a bit of their mass insanity. Courts today seem to take public sentiment into account more than the actual law, which Mr Peckford alluded to above. That said when we have a general public so scientifically illiterate as to believe lie after lie after lie one can only assume they have reached an advanced stage of insanity. How can we reach the masses that have so little interest in their own health and that of their children that they willingly take the vaccine without having any idea of what it is or what it may do to them in a year or five. Again that is not stupidity, it can only be described as insanity. The science just becomes clearer daily about the failures of the vaccines as well as the not so deadly virus itself and yet we have people lining up around the block to get tested week after week. This can only be changed if some how we can change the narrative but I fear that ship has sailed. My own family have made it quite clear that they don’t want me sending them any more of my misinformation, even though I am quite careful to never repeat anything not scientifically vetted. They are quite sure that the govt knows better than I and thousands of Drs and scientists around the world that have put themselves in harms way to oppose this utter nonsense. Until we can reach the masses I fear we are doomed.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. God does not always give us what we want–that would be a cheap, false deity. But He always gives us exactly what we need.

    Perhaps the greatest challenge to the faith is to want what we need.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Dear Mr. Peckford:

    This is with the greatest of respect and regard for all your service to Canada.

    Appreciate YOU and for Standing UP for Canada!

    Canada is better than this, surely!

    Yes, we are missing the Conductor of the Symphony Orchestra.

    Having spent more than 20+ years in Service to the Public,
    what currently happening is unconscionable.

    What is to be done now from this point on and moving forward?

    Blessings you and everyone for a better 2022!

    Thank YOU !!


  10. How a G7 prime minister of the free world can publicly state that they are “attacking” our freedoms and rights because they have found a “loophole” in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and get away with it, is beyond asinine. And then to come out a few days later and state that those not taking the most injurious injection of all time are an extreme group of “racists” and “misogynists” puts the cherry on top. My God how did we ever get to this point with this absolute imbecile at the helm of such a once great nation.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Dear Mr. Peckford,

    Happy New Year and very best wishes for 2022. If the following are true, then there is no reason to believe the courts will intercede to force our governments to follow the Charter and constitution:
    1. The courts are appointed by politicians of any party that has seen power in living memory, both provincial and federal.
    2. The globalists through Davos, Bilderberg, the BIS, and Bank of Canada control all political parties that have seen power in Canada within living memory.

    If these are true we should not expect that we can achieve redress through the courts. If that is the case, what options are we left with beyond natural law and citizen’s arrest?


    • There is still a chance an Provincial Appeal Court or the SCOC will get it right, although I concede this does not look great. Otherwise, it is civil disobedience , and it looks like the people are still in a trance and unable, unwilling to act.


  12. I tested positive on a rapid test on dec20 I have only taken ivermectin 1-3cc every second day or so I weight 185lbs vitamin c,d3,zinc and over the counter medication I am 43years old I have been try ing to stay hydrated water gatorade juice Neo citron hot chocolate etc. other than that I have slept as much is three days straight it a shot and then a week at the most day and a half months throughout the middle of it most of the time zone awake for an hour or two and back to sleep again lack of taste remember Eating a vanilla pudding thinking I was having applesauce that’s how bad my taste buds were it’s pretty sad when you cannot trust the doctors to do the right thing and this is after they’ve killed my father in the hospital as well it has been straight hell I’ve had a fever as high as 103 Fahrenheit while still having goose bumps on my legs and feeling cold well room temperature was 70degrees in damn near impossible to shake the cold feeling I know I still do not believe in taking the jab and it’s funny how all of this is about the vaccine s and not about the type of person that would create a A disease like this they can leave everybody feeling helpless at the same time not to mention discredit the government officials doctors and all the rest who have been feeling is full of lies and bullshit

    Get Outlook for iOS ________________________________

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sorry to hear of your illness , but hang in there and don’t be afraid of the ivermectin. My wife and I just got over the covid but only had mild symptoms compared to you. I only had fever first day and then started taking ivermectin and large doses of d and c. After that we lost our taste me for about 20 days and my wife for about 28. We are both pretty much back to normal now. We had to take the horse paste because we can’t get anything else, we are both in our early sixties.
      We were taking the ivermectin at .2 mg per kilo of weight which might be on the low end, was talking to someone else whose wife was really getting bad and said he gave her a large dose of ivermectin and couldn’t believe the difference in only an hour. I hope you can find some Dr that can help you with all this as we shouldn’t have to self medicate in this day and age. Happy new year and good luck with it all

      Liked by 1 person

  13. If I’m leaving this message in the wrong place I apologize please put us through the summer work and help and do some good thank you

    Get Outlook for iOS ________________________________


  14. I am so disappointed in these corrupt organizations, in the media, the governments. I absolutely think it is a crime to enforce the vaccines on children.
    Everyone needs to decide their own fate.


  15. I am one of the millions injured by this so called “vaccine” which is actually just a therapeutic drug!! And ☠️Deadly/Harmful drug it is!!!!👎👎👎👎


  16. Though we’re not fellow countrymen, I thank you again for your service and wisdom, Mr Peckford. Your passion is evident and appreciated.

    It’s kind of depressing to watch your country and culture twitching out like a disgusting meth-head in the throes of death.

    More than one commentator has observed that there is no going back to the old life. Those people and that world failed us; attempting to regroup and rebuild is folly.

    We must create a new culture, a new civilization. Hopefully we have learned something.

    Liked by 3 people

  17. “The permanence we thought we achieved for individual freedoms and rights in the Constitution becomes a fleeting concept floating hither and yon in the shifting winds of political expediency, fear and faulty science and faulty approaches, not the bedrock of a secure democracy as we had thought. ”

    I think we have seen the fruits of democracy ever since 1867. Democracy is merely a means by which oligarchs and their allies can gain control by any means and cull and plunder the public in the service of their own agendas. In the current situation this involves the creation of massive government debts, massive genocidal real estate prices and last but no less deadly the clot shot. Canada is based on the supremacy of god and the rule of law and not the supremacy of oligarchs and the rule of evildoers. which is what we currently have. We need new and different leadership in this country.


  18. Hi Brian.
    Thanks for putting these matters forth in logical terms. I agree with you. It is very sad and frustrating how people have been brainwashed to follow the edicts that are not only unlawful, but illogical. I do believe that the majority of people would not fall for this if they had learned how to think. Most people do not prioritize thinking anymore.
    One point I would like to address concerning the Supremacy of God. The Scriptures teach that man is made in the image of God. This means that we have been made with a mind – able to think logically, rationalize, communicate, etc. The very name of Jesus Christ in John1:1 is the “logos” in Greek, which could be translated as the “logic” of God, or “wisdom” of God, or “knowledge” of God.
    As creatures created by God, we do not have unalienable rights, for that would mean that even God could not override us. (i.e. an unalienable right to life would mean that even if someone was a child molester and murderer, even God who created them and owns all of creation may not take their life). Biblically, we have imputed rights from God. It is a legal term referring to the fact that all of our rights come from God and have been given to us, but because they have been given to us from a “Supreme God”, even those rights have limits are subject to His laws.
    If Canada truly recognized (as the Charter states) the Supremacy of God, the edicts which our unelected “health” overlords come up with would not be weighed not just according to their “legality” in court (for judges sometimes rule unlawfully, as you pointed out) but according to the moral laws of God, recognizing that “even” our government and health officials answer to the Supreme God and His laws.
    From our Prime Minister down, every corrupt politician, is railing against the Supremacy of God, and as Romans 1:18 says, they “suppress the truth”. “Claiming to be wise, they have become fools” (v22). Claiming authority even over the Supreme God who gives them their every breath, they snub their noses at God and the fair rule of law (our Charter that you have laboured over and seek to uphold) that recognizes God. Thank you for your work, Brian. I pray that God will give you and I the breath to persevere in the darkness of this age.
    I also pray that God will have mercy on a generation of individuals who care only about their own comfort for today and have no “thought” for the Canada of their children and grandchildren, or for their own eternal souls. Each one of us will stand before Christ one day and answer for the things we believed and said and did while on this earth. None of us are innocent before God – that is why Jesus Christ came to die on a cross and take the punishment we all deserved – sinners like you and me. It is never too late to trust in Christ for salvation and escape eternal punishment under the just rule of our Creator, if one still has God given breath in his lungs.
    It is also not too late for Canadians to do what is right before God with the land, life and liberty He has so generously given us.
    Blessings, Ernie van Boven.


  19. Bravo Mr. Peckford. By the comments on your declaration, it would appear that there are many like minded individuals still living and breathing as Canadian patriots.


  20. Mr. Peckford, I could not agree with you more! I am so glad that you are speaking out so boldly, even at the risk of being called a fool and being censored by the main stream media. (The distrusted news initiative) May they be exposed for their lies and purposeful twisting of the truth! It takes each of us to speak out the truth to expose the lies!
    I believe we need to recognize that we are created beings, created to live a certain way. When we recognize God, submit to Him and His supremacy over us we will again enjoy the freedom that He desires for us to live in! Jesus said ” You will know the truth and the truth will set you free!” He also said “When the Son has set you free you will be free indeed!” Powerful words from our Creator, Sustainer and Saviour!
    May we be revived in our hearts individually and as a nation to follow on His path!
    Thank you Mr. Peckford for standing up for the truth!


  21. Yes so true! A major problem is that many in our society today have bought into is the idea that truth is subjective (your truth is your truth and mine is mine) rather than objective (truth is truth no matter what I think. I need to seek this truth as it is unchangeable and always present and to be found by those look for it with an honest heart)
    With subjective type of thinking anything goes. For instance. One might say it’s okay to abort babies because they are not yet human, another might say babies are not human even after a week of being born or even others might say a baby of another “race” is not really human. Unless we believe that truth is objective and true no matter what my opinion might be, we run into quagmire of human thinking and ultimately the destruction of humanity! Thus the supremacy of God is so important! We must bow to Him and to His truth. We are as human beings created by God in His image and thus every life has an inherent dignity from conception until death. This is revealed to us in God’s word (eg.Psalm 139) and reflected in the Hippocratic oath which held our medical experts to account to protect life from conception onwards. As we see the departure from the objective truth of humanity being created in the image of God to the subjective “truth” that we are just evolved animals, here by chance, opens up the ugly head of racism, killing of the most vulnerable and every kind of holocaust imaginable. Why not, we could say, there is no standard or truth outside of my subjective ideology – anything goes. This is how Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin and Pol Pot got traction to do their evil deeds.
    God help us to seek Him and His truth in all areas of our lives and government!


  22. Pingback: Freethought Notes – Documented 3/12/2022 – Ebenezers’ Freethinking Notes

  23. How is this court battle going …… there are new controls extremely discriminatory that are being used at the border as of August 21, 2022. When will this case finally be heard?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s