my legal opinion around mandated mask use - which is a law i refuse to recognize. - is that the infringement of s. 7 is unquestionable. there is really no debate around this issue - a law mandating mask use is a clear infringement of the security of the person, and no judge at any level would entertain an argument, otherwise. that is just blatantly, clearly obvious.

the ambiguity is around s. 1 - because, in canada, you can pass an unconstitutional law and then argue it's justified "in a free and democratic society".

my position on this has been crystal clear from the start - the science supporting mask use is entirely non-existent, and rather leaning in the opposite direction, and has been for decades. nobody that is familiar with the literature on the topic will honestly uphold the efficacy of mask use. and, there is actually quite a lot of evidence that suggests that they can be quite dangerous in a real pandemic (ie not the common cold), if not handled properly.

citing the opinion of a "health expert" is not a valid legal argument. it's just, like, their opinion. really.

so, the legal debate at hand is really about the efficacy of mask use, and that's an argument i'm certain i would win.

i haven't been bothered about this yet, but i'm willing to take it to the supreme court if pushed on it.