Court denies group's request for public interest standing in COVID-19 rules case
A group that describes vaccine mandates as "dictatorial" has been denied public interest standing in an application for a judicial review of Nova Scotia's COVID-19 rules.
The application by the Citizens Alliance of Nova Scotia was heard by Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice John A. Keith in Yarmouth, N.S., earlier this year. The organization alleged the province's vaccine mandates during the pandemic infringed on the rights of Nova Scotians.
The alliance requested public interest standing in a review because the public health restrictions didn't affect the group directly. Public interest standing allows individuals and organizations who don't have a personal stake to challenge certain actions taken by government.
Keith considered whether the alliance had a case to bring the issue forward for a judicial review and if it was the right party to do so.
"The facts and evidence before me are insufficient to provide CANS public interest standing for the purpose of seeking such broad relief in respect of governmental actions that are neither in place, nor threatened, nor imminent," said Keith's decision, which was released last week.
Dr. Robert Strang, the province's chief medical officer of health, Health and Wellness Minister Michelle Thompson and the attorney general were named as respondents on the application.
Keith also dismissed a request by the group for the court to ban any future provincial governments from imposing mandatory immunization.
"The court does not address challenges based on hypotheticals or conjectural scenarios that may or may not come to pass," the decision said.
Concerns about evidence
The judge had concerns about whether the alliance has a genuine interest in the issue brought forward to the court, the decision said.
The organization doesn't appear to be open to any outcome other than voluntary immunization in the future "without regard to whatever facts or context may or may not exist in the future," Keith said in his decision.
"The evidence and controversy are simply not ripe and is largely based on unrealized fears or abstract conjecture," the decision said.
Keith also shared concerns raised by the respondents about the evidence the alliance used to support accusations against them.
Dr. Robert Strang, the chief medical officer of health, and Health Minister Michelle Thompson are both named as respondents in the application for a judicial review of Nova Scotia's COVID-19 rules. (Communications Nova Scotia)
The alliance alleged that the respondents violated the rights of children and parents by forcing children to get a "coercive" vaccine, fraudulently asserted the "experimental mRNA" vaccines caused immunity to COVID-19 and acted in bad faith because Strang had evidence at the time showing no asymptomatic spread of COVID-19.
"These are allegations at this stage. They are not based on self-evident conclusions, or universal truths," Keith's decision said.
There are serious concerns about the alliance's ability to represent the public interest and present their case "in a sufficiently concrete and well-developed factual setting," Keith said.
The judge still has to decide on other motions within the case, for which hearing dates have yet to be scheduled.
The alliance did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the decision.
MORE TOP STORIES
