News
Featured Image
 Shutterstock

You’re invited! Join LifeSite in celebrating 25 years of pro-life and pro-family reporting at our anniversary Gala August 17th in Naples, Florida. Tickets and sponsorships can be purchased by clicking here. 

(LifeSiteNews) – In a decision that lawyers are blasting as an affront to freedoms, an Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench judge ruled Tuesday that one’s constitutional rights do not apply to persons seeking organ transplants.

The legal decision comes from a case in court by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) concerning 57-year-old Sheila Annette Lewis, who has a terminal condition known as idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

In March 2021, Lewis was told that she would no longer be on the wait list for organ transplantation unless she submitted to the COVID shots.

In her legal affidavit, Lewis noted that getting the “vaccine offends my conscience.”

“I ought to have the choice about what goes into my body, and a lifesaving treatment cannot be denied to me because I chose not to take an experimental treatment for a condition,” Lewis noted.

Allison Pejovic, JCCF lawyer and legal counsel, said that “the Court’s decision is deeply disappointing.”

“AHS has an obligation to ensure that doctors that are carrying out their duties within the provincially funded transplant program are upholding the Charter, and it seems that the court has effectively ruled that AHS can contract out of its Charter obligations,” she added.

In Alberta, organ transplants are funded by Alberta Health Services (AHS), with both the program and health authority having policies in place that mandate COVID shots before transplant surgeries.

The JCCF said Pejovic was clear in that “AHS and the treating doctors, either made the policies, were aware of the policies, or enforced the policies.”

According to the JCCF, Justice R.P. Belzil found that Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to AHS, in this instance “the proposed AHS policy, which has not been completed, mirrors the recommendations of the treating physicians which are exercising clinical judgment.”

However, the JCCF said that neither the “treating physicians’ nor AHS’ Covid vaccination policies for transplant patients are written, but both were communicated to Ms. Lewis by her treating physicians.”

The JCCF noted that the evidence “in fact showed that one of the treating physicians advised Ms. Lewis in November 2021 that AHS required Covid vaccination for transplant candidates.”

According to the JCCF, Lewis brought an application “in the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench asking that the court uphold her Charter-protected right to conscience, bodily autonomy, and freedom to choose (the COVID jabs) without coercion.”

The JCCF said the case is under a publication ban that prohibits the disclosure of the names of the doctors involved, the hospital, and city where the transplant program is located.

Currently in Alberta, both Calgary and Edmonton offer transplant services at medical facilities. A September 2021 report by True North appears to indicate the location of the hospital involved, and the type of transplant, after news first broke of the legal case.

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Stop Tedros' WHO Pandemic Treaty
  Show Petition Text
101248 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 125000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

The WHO Pandemic Treaty looks set to be one of the biggest power-grabs in living memory, with unelected globalists seeking the power to declare pandemics, and then control your country's response. 

But it's not too late to do something about it. 

SIGN and SHARE this special petition telling Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that the WHO will never usurp your nation's sovereignty.

The past two years have been rife with infringements on personal liberties and civil rights by national governments, but now the World Health Organization is seeking to appropriate those same abusive powers to itself at a global level. 

194 member states representing 99% of the world's population are expected to sign pandemic treaties with the WHO that would allow Tedros, or any future Director General, to dictate exactly how your nation would respond to a new disease outbreak which they consider a pandemic.

This attack on national sovereignty will come as no surprise to those who for years have listened to elites like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates discussing their vision for the centralization of power into globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the WHO and the rest of the United Nations. 

SIGN this petition against the WHO's Pandemic Treaty, before it's too late.

Ludicrously, 20 world leaders calling for the treaty, including Tedros, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, compared the post-Covid world to the post-WWII period, saying similar co-operation is now needed to "dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and co-operation - namely peace, prosperity, health and security."

Australian PM Scott Morrison is the latest leader to express support for a “pandemic treaty”.

The stated intention of the WHO is to “kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

The wheels are already in motion, with the Biden administration officially proposing the initial steps towards handing global pandemic control to the WHO. 

Biden's representatives have submitted amendments to the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR), which would give the Director General the right to declare health emergencies in any nation, even when disputed by the country in question.

These amendments, which would be legally binding under international law, will be voted on by the World Health Assembly (the governing body of the WHO) at a special convention running from May 22-28 and set the stage for a fully-fledged pandemic treaty to be passed. 

SIGN and SHARE the petition telling the WHO that you won't accept any pandemic treaty

The ball has been rolling since the last World Health Assembly meeting in December, where the United States launched negotiations "on a new international health instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response," a U.S. statement read. 

"This momentous step represents our collective responsibility to work together to advance health security and to make the global health system stronger and more responsive. 

"We look forward to broad and deep negotiations using a whole-of-society and whole-of-government approach that will strengthen the international legal framework for public health/pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and enable us to address issues of equity, accountability, and multisectoral collaboration evident in the COVID-19 pandemic. 

"We know it will take all of us working together across governments, private sector, philanthropy, academia, and civil society to make rapid progress towards a long-term solution for these complex problems," the U.S. statement added.

SIGN the petition today to show the WHO that you won't accept this attack on national sovereignty.

These are precarious times in which freedom and self-determination must be defended from those who would ride rough-shod over your civil rights. 

We do not want to go back to global lockdowns, vaccine mandates and propoganda.

Sign the petition - speak up now!

For More Information:

Biden hands over American sovereignty with proposed WHO treaty - LifeSiteNews

Pandemic Treaty is a backdoor to global governance - LifeSiteNews

Dr. Robert Malone on the WHO's power-grab - LifeSiteNews

**Photo: YouTube Screenshot**

  Hide Petition Text

Vaccinologist: Benefits of getting jabs ‘so small’ it was ‘unethical to require her to get the Covid’ shot

The JCCF presented as part of its argument expert reports from two immunologists, Dr. Bonnie Mallard and Dr. Byram Bridle.

Bridle is a vaccinologist who has spoken out against COVID jab mandates.

The immunologists’ oral testimony said the JCCF  “illustrated that the Covid vaccines are still in clinical trials and will be in clinical trials until late 2022 at the earliest, and that the peer reviewed research and raw scientific data lead them to seriously question the safety and efficacy of the Covid vaccines as compared to traditional vaccines that have been around for decades.”

Also filed was an expert report from Dr. Benjamin Turner, a surgeon with a master’s degree in health Care ethics. The JCCF noted that Turner “testified that the benefit of vaccination for Ms. Lewis was so small that it was unethical to require her to get the Covid vaccine prior to her transplant.”

“Justice Belzil declined to address the scientific and ethical arguments advanced because he determined that the Charter did not apply to the treating physicians,” the JCCF said.

The JCCF will review the ruling and decide at a later time whether or not to appeal the decision.

Virtually all Canadian provinces had in place COVID mandates for healthcare workers. While these mandates have been dropped except for British Columbia, many provinces are desperately now looking to rehire the unvaccinated workers.

All COVID vaccines approved for use in Canada are still experimental, with clinical trials not being completed until 2023.

Help Jenny Porter recover from her vaccine injury: LifeFunder

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

5 Comments

    Loading...