“An Ontario court has ruled in favor of a woman who was charged and convicted for refusing to submit to a COVID nasal swab test upon returning home to Canada in 2022.
In a June 26 ruling, Ontario Court Justice Paul Monahan decided in favor of Canadian woman Meththa Fernando, who was charged in 2022 for refusing a COVID nasal swab test when returning to Canada from abroad and subsequently found guilty. Monahan concluded that in Fernando’s case, requiring her to submit to such an invasive test was unlawful and ordered her conviction be overturned.
“I do decide that the nasal swab test, which the screening officer in this case required or demanded Ms. Fernando submit to, was an unlawful requirement or demand,” wrote Monahan in his ruling.
“Ms. Fernando’s refusal to comply with the requirement or demand was lawful on her part,” he continued. “Because the requirement or demand made of her by the screening officer was not lawful, Ms. Fernando should not have been found guilty by the Justice of the Peace.”
Fernando began her legal journey in 2022 when she refused a nasal swab at Pearson International Airport in Toronto, Ontario. Upon her return home to nearby Mississauga, a screening officer from the Canadian Public Health Agency randomly selected her to undergo the nasal test.
However, Fernando, who told the officer she was already vaccinated against COVID, refused the test. She was charged and later convicted of failing to comply with an order under Section 58 of the Quarantine Act and fined a total of $6,255.
Canada’s Quarantine Act was used by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government to enact severe draconian COVID travel rules on all returning travelers to the country.
Fernando chose to take her case to an appeal court following conviction, arguing that the Quarantine Act did not “authorize a screening officer to use a screening test which involved the entry into the traveller’s body of an instrument or other foreign body.”
During the hearing, Monahan admitted that this argument had “merit” since Section 14 of the Quarantine Act states, “Any qualified person authorized by the Minister may, to determine whether a traveller has a communicable disease or symptoms of one, use any screening technology authorized by the Minister that does not involve the entry into the traveller’s body of any instrument or other foreign body.”
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ontario-judge-rules-in-favor-of-woman-who-refused-covid-nasal-swab-test
That will reverberate. Now consider if people felt bullied into these tests or took them under duress. there might be a basis for a mass class action for assault.
Let's think. An intrusion into the body without legal authority is an assault.
It might be an interesting idea for the right entrepreneurial lawyer.
Are some of the Canadian judges getting a sense of the magnitude and importance of their role.
I got forced to retire from the City and County of San Francisco on March 1, 2021. I refused the nasal swab. I was refused entry into the place of my employment, and I was sent home…on my lunch break. I wasn’t even allowed the get my belongings from my locker. I was an employee for 23 years.
THIS is reality! There’s lots of us out there!
I was appalled when first hearing of this long stem swab, to be jammed so far up as to maybe cause abrasion or puncture to most delicate area!! (And/or odd compound tainting)
Nothing funny about it, but reminded me of the Neil Innis song “Ballad of Sir Robin”, about “...nostrils raped....”