(06-29-2021, 12:56 PM)ac3r Wrote: Domestically, I don't know how it works. I don't know if a province something like require vaccinations. We have Mobility Rights within our charter that grant us free mobility throughout the country, and I don't think any province can supersede that federal right we posses...but I'm not well versed in these sort of laws. Of course they can close borders as some provinces did, but that's different than forbidding anyone from not flying/entering lest they have been vaccinated.
Every right in the charter is subject to the reasonable limits clause
Quote: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.
So it's fundamentally up to the courts to determine what reasonable is when it comes to restrictions on things like inter-provincial travel or vaccinations. The test for the clause is the Oakes Test
Quote:
- There must be a pressing and substantial objective
- The means must be proportional
- The means must be rationally connected to the objective
- There must be minimal impairment of rights
- There must be proportionality between the infringement and objective
There's a good explanation of what all the parts mean on Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_1_...d_Freedoms .
I think any court will find that reasonable pandemic management measures pass this test, as long as Covid remains a significant threat to our health. You probably couldn't require vaccinations to live in Canada, but you could require them to eat at a restaurant. Provincial border crossing would be similar, if there's a province that has the pandemic under control they could require travellers from provinces with high case counts to either be vaccinated or self-isolate on entry. The infringement would be minimal (there's the self-isolation alternative), and the issue would be obvious (travel from a high case count to a low case count area).