Featured Image

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) – According to recent court documents, the Liberal government’s almost nine-month ban on domestic and foreign travel for vaccine-free Canadians was not based on science.

National Post contributor and freelance journalist Rupa Subramanya published a piece for Bari Weiss’ Common Sense substack wherein she outlined the details from newly released documents that show a lack of scientific rationale for the unprecedented ban.

She wrote that “recently released court documents — which capture the decision-making behind the travel mandate — indicate that, far from following the science, the prime minister and his Cabinet were focused on politics.”

Subramanya was referring to information that has been revealed to the public as part of a lawsuit filed by two Canadian residents against the government.

Shaun Rickard, a British citizen and permanent resident of Canada, and Karl Harrison filed a court challenge in the winter against the travel ban. Both have family in Britain and were cut off from seeing them because of the restrictions.

The two are represented by lawyer Sam Presvelos, who said, “the real focus of the case is just looking at the science.”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Stop Tedros' WHO Pandemic Treaty
  Show Petition Text
116176 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.

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

The travel mandate was crafted by a department of the Canadian government that Subramanya called “the secretive government panel. By way of the lawsuit, it has been unearthed that “no one in the COVID Recovery unit, including Jennifer Little, the director-general, had any formal education in epidemiology, medicine or public health.”

In fact, Little has an undergraduate degree in literature, and she testified that only one of the 20 members of the panel had any experience working with a public health agency, but it was not specified what the role was.

Little also suggested that a “senior official” in Trudeau’s Cabinet or maybe even Trudeau himself ordered the panel to impose the travel ban. This was intimated by the fact that Little said she could not reveal who gave the orders because of “cabinet confidence.”

Subramanya wrote, “The term ‘cabinet confidence’ is noteworthy because it refers to the prime minister’s Cabinet. Meaning that Little could not talk about who had directed the COVID Recovery unit to impose the travel mandate because someone at the very highest levels of government was apparently behind it.”

It was also discovered that in the days leading up to the implementation of the mandate at the end of October 2021 that “transportation officials were frantically looking for a rationale” to impose the draconian measures.

According to Subramanya, “they came up short,” as was “made clear by an email exchange” between relevant government officials.

Aaron McCrorie – the associate assistant deputy minister for safety and security in Transport Canada, the department that houses COVID Recovery – emailed a colleague charged with finding a rationale for the restrictions “just over a week” before the mandate was implemented, saying he “need[ed] something fairly soon.”

Two days before the mandate was enacted, McCrorie received a reply with the alleged general benefits of the COVID jab, but with no information relative to why there would be a travel ban.

This means that when Trudeau’s government announced the policy in August, and when he was campaigning to a would-be electorate about the unvaccinated being a danger to the jabbed on trains and planes, that there was no established rationale with Transport Canada.

When the mandates were dropped in June – at least temporarily as they could be re-enacted at any time – Subramanya said that “government lawyers filed a motion to shut down” the case due to the fact that it was now “moot” as there were no restrictions leveled against the vaccine-free.

Presvelos told Subramanya that he believed this was done to make sure the court documents were never made public.

In order to ensure the case would continue, Presvelos filed for additional damages on behalf of his clients that made “sure the suit didn’t go away and the court documents were made public.”

It is expected they will have a day in court in September.

Help Jenny Porter recover from her vaccine injury: LifeFunder