Many lawyers disputed Trudeau’s claim, suggesting he had been misinformed about plans to clear downtown Ottawa of the protesters who had blockaded parts of the capital for weeks. After six weeks of dramatic witness testimony, Trudeau made his own long-awaited appearance before the Public Order Emergency Committee. He strongly defended his government’s decision to invoke the emergency law on February 14 for the first time in the law’s 34-year history. WATCHES | ‘This was necessary’: Trudeau defends decision to invoke emergency law:
‘This was necessary’: Trudeau defends decision to invoke emergency law
During his testimony before the Emergency Act inquiry, Prime Minister Trudeau was asked whether invoking the Emergency Act would open the “floodgates” and encourage future use. The Commission has previously heard that after initial confusion and dysfunction, the Ottawa Police Service [OPS]the Ontario Provincial Police [OPP] and the RCMP had come together to draw up an operational plan. “We kept hearing that there was a plan,” Trudeau testified Friday before a packed room. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appears as a witness at the Public Order Emergency Committee in Ottawa on Friday. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press) “I would recommend that people take a look at this real plan, which wasn’t a plan at all” Trudeau said the document he heard about was largely about the use of bond officers to shrink the protest’s footprint, with details of enforcement “to be determined later.” “It wasn’t even in the most generous terms a plan for how to end the occupation,” Trudeau said. WATCHES | Trudeau says Ottawa police had no plan to end motorcade protest:
Trudeau says Ottawa police had no plan to end motorcade protest
During his testimony at the Emergency Act inquiry, the premier highlights the weak planning by Ottawa police services to end the convoy protests. The question of whether police could have handled the crowds without the emergency law has been raised several times during the inquiry, as Commissioner Paul Rouleau considers whether his invocation was really a measure of last resort. The night before the law was invoked, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki told Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino’s chief of staff that she felt police had it has not yet exhausted “all available tools,” according to an email seen by the investigation. In that email, he also listed a number of measures that could be useful if the government moves forward. Jodi Thomas, Trudeau’s national security intelligence adviser, testified last week that Luckey failed to pass on that information during a Feb. 13 meeting with senior officials. “The people who are in this meeting are expected to provide information that is useful to the decision makers…the prime minister in his cabinet,” Thomas said on Thursday. A line of protesters against the order stand face-to-face with a line of police officers in downtown Ottawa on February 19. (Michael Charles Cole/CBC) Thomas also said she doubted the RCMP had worked out a plan with the OPP. “There was no evidence that there was a plan,” Thomas said. “We had been told there was a plan multiple times.” The Emergencies Act says a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that “cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.” “That was part of the problem, that not all the tools were used,” Trudeau said. Rebecca Jones, a lawyer for former Ottawa police chief Peter Slowley, pointed to Trudeau Luckey’s testimony that she and the OPP chief were told of a plan around Feb. 11. “We were satisfied with the plan,” Lucki testified last week. Jones suggested to Trudeau that there was a disconnect between their testimonies. “I would suggest that what happened is that Commissioner Lucki did not inform you and the cabinet that there was a full plan on the 13th,” he said. “I can’t comment on that,” Trudeau said.
Lawyers dispute how well Trudeau knew about the plan
Jones wasn’t the only lawyer to question Trudeau’s assessment of the police plan. Under cross-examination by Ottawa Police Service lawyer Jessica Barrow, Trudeau said he did not have the ability to review the police plan line by line. “I think you’d agree with me that maybe there was a little more substance to the plan than you knew on the 13th,” he said. “I can’t talk about it,” he said. Sujit Choudhry, an adviser to the Canadian Constitution Foundation, cited the Feb. 13 Ottawa police draft and pointed out that eight of its pages have been completely redacted. RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki exits a vehicle as she arrives at the Public Order Emergency Commission Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2022 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press) Choudhry asked that the pages not be redacted. The government refused. “Prime Minister, can I put it to you this way? You said we should read the plan, but I think you’ll agree we can’t,” he said. “Indeed,” Trudeau said. “I haven’t read the plan.” OPS Supt. Robert Bernier, who helped design the force’s plan to end the protest in downtown Ottawa last winter, told the commission last month that he was already planning a police operation when the law was invoked. When asked if he thinks the federal act was necessary to remove the protesters, Bernier said it’s hard for him to say. “I couldn’t do the operation without it,” Bernier replied. “I don’t know what complications I would have if the common law didn’t exist and wasn’t used.” Ottawa police and representatives of other police forces went ahead with what they called the “February 17 plan,” which methodically cleared the downtown core over a weekend. It was one of the largest police operations in Canadian history.
Trudeau says CSIS is not the decision maker
With critics arguing the government fell short of the law’s requirements, the inquiry looked at the legal definition of a public order emergency. The Emergencies Act defines a national emergency as one that “arises from threats to the security of Canada that are so serious as to constitute a national emergency.” The Act refers to Canada’s Security Intelligence Service Act definition such threats, which include harm done in order to achieve a “political, religious or ideological objective”, espionage, foreign intervention or the intention to overthrow the government by force. It does not mention financial security. The intelligence chief testified that he did not believe the protest met the definition of a threat to national security under the CSIS Act, but was told that the Emergency Act offered a broader definition of such threats. Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) David Vigneault is seen as he gives evidence to the Public Order Emergency Committee on November 21, 2022 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press) During her hearing, committee lawyer Shantona Chaudhury suggested to Trudeau that the protests “do not pose a threat to the security of Canada as defined in the CSIS Act.” “As defined for the CSIS Act,” Trudeau replied. “These words in the CSIS Act are used for the purpose of CSIS defining that they have the authority to act against an individual, a group or a particular plot … for example.” Trudeau said cabinet — not CSIS — decides whether to invoke the Emergency Act. WATCHES | Trudeau explains the reasoning behind invoking the Emergency Act:
Trudeau explains the reasoning behind invoking the Emergency Act
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the Commission’s lawyer that the decision to invoke the Emergency Act was made based on its definition which states that “there have been activities that support threats or acts of serious violence, threats of serious violence, for political or ideological purposes . ‘ “His purpose for this project was to be able to give us special temporary measures as set out in the Public Order Emergency Act. That would end this national emergency,” he said. “There was the deliberate use of children as human shields. That was a real concern both on the Ambassador Bridge and the fact that there were children on Wellington Street, that people didn’t know what was in the trucks if they were children. , whether it was weapons, or it was both.” The government has asserted attorney-client privilege to protect the legal advice it received regarding the interpretation of the Emergency Act. Trudeau said he is “calm and confident” in choosing to invoke the act.
CSIS had no tools, no mindset to deal with escort: PM
In an interview with Commission counsel in September, Trudeau said CSIS faced challenges during the convoy protests. A summary of that interview was released Friday. “He noted that CSIS does not necessarily have the right tools, mandate or even mindset to meet the threat Canada faced at the time,” the summary said. “He noted that CSIS has a very specific mandate and that when they determine whether there is a threat to the security of Canada, they do so with the intent of obtaining a warrant, a telephone conversation, or authorizing a targeted investigation.” CSIS’s primary mandate is to investigate activities suspected of posing threats to national security and to report to the Government of Canada. Tamara Lich, front left, returns after a break as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau waits for questioning to begin as he appears as a witness before the Public Order Emergency Committee in Ottawa, Friday, Nov. 25, 2022. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press ) “CSIS has been challenged in recent years by the threat of domestic terrorism, which it was not designed to address. He noted that CSIS is limited in its ability to…
