Federal Court of Appeal Confirms Emergencies Act Was Illegally Used Against Freedom Convoy
- Jason
- 5 days ago
- 3 min read
January 16th, 2026
by: Jason LaFace
Freedom Convoy(Ontario Road Captain)
IT Admin(Canada Unity) -
No More Lockdowns(Ontario North Organizer)
In a landmark decision with major implications for civil liberties in Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal has upheld a 2024 ruling that found the Liberal government unreasonably and unlawfully invoked the Emergencies Act during the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests.
The ruling confirms what many Canadians have argued for years: the federal government overstepped its legal authority when it used extraordinary emergency powers to shut down largely peaceful protests, freeze bank accounts, and expand police powers—despite failing to meet the legal threshold required under Canadian law.
No National Emergency Justified the Use of Extraordinary Powers
At the heart of the decision is a critical finding: there was no national emergency as defined by the Emergencies Act.
A three-judge panel of the Federal Court of Appeal concluded that the situation in Ottawa, while disruptive, did not rise to the level of a national emergency that could not be handled using existing laws. The court found that law enforcement already had sufficient tools available under the Criminal Code and provincial legislation to manage the protests.
The Emergencies Act, which was designed as a last resort for extreme situations such as war or catastrophic threats to national security, was not intended to address public demonstrations or civil unrest—particularly when those demonstrations are largely peaceful.
Government Actions Found Unreasonable and Unlawful
The court upheld the lower court’s conclusion that the federal government’s decision was both unreasonable and unlawful, stating that the invocation of the Act was not supported by the evidence presented at the time.
Importantly, the ruling emphasized that government decision-making must be grounded in facts and law, not political expediency or public pressure. The court found that the threshold for invoking emergency powers had not been met and that the decision failed to respect the limits Parliament deliberately placed on the use of the Act.
Unlawful Freezing of Bank Accounts
One of the most controversial aspects of the government’s response—the freezing of bank accounts without court orders—was also addressed in the ruling.
The court determined that the financial measures used against protesters and donors violated Charter rights and were not legally justified. Canadians had their accounts frozen without due process, judicial oversight, or clear criteria, setting a dangerous precedent for future government overreach.
Civil liberties organizations, including the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), have consistently argued that these measures represented a serious infringement on fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and protection against unreasonable state action.
A Warning About Government Overreach
This decision sends a strong message: emergency powers are not a political tool.
The Federal Court of Appeal made it clear that governments cannot bypass constitutional safeguards simply because a situation is inconvenient or politically challenging. The Emergencies Act carries enormous power, and with that power comes a high legal threshold that must be strictly respected.
The ruling reinforces the principle that the rule of law applies even during moments of crisis, and that governments remain accountable to Canadians and the courts.
Why This Ruling Matters to All Canadians
Regardless of one’s views on the Freedom Convoy itself, this decision is about something far bigger than a single protest.
It is about:
Protecting civil liberties
Limiting government overreach
Preserving constitutional safeguards
Ensuring emergency laws are not normalized or misused
If emergency powers can be invoked without meeting strict legal requirements, no Canadian is immune from similar actions in the future.
What Happens Next?
While the government may continue to defend its actions politically, the legal reality is now clear: the Emergencies Act was improperly used.
This ruling will likely shape how future governments approach crisis management and may influence legislative reforms or further legal challenges aimed at strengthening protections against abuse of emergency powers.
Conclusion
The Federal Court of Appeal’s decision marks a significant victory for the rule of law and constitutional rights in Canada. It confirms that even in times of tension and unrest, governments must operate within the boundaries set by Parliament and the Constitution.
Extraordinary powers demand extraordinary justification—and in this case, the court has ruled that justification simply did not exist.
Canadians should pay close attention to what this decision means, not just for the past, but for the future of freedom, accountability, and democracy in this country.
Jason LaFace
Comments