Every weekend, a group of people have "anti-mask/anti-vax (passport)" rallies throughout Canada.

In Toronto, they march along main streets and more often than not gather in large parks, Queen's Park being a favourite. Recently, they attempted to storm the Eaton Centre. They have also been known to assemble near and at restaurants that enforce the "vaccine passport" mandate.

For the sake of this assignment, let's pretend that last week, the police started arresting some of the more aggressive people at these rallies and issuing tickets to others, fining them for being in violation of the anti-mask orders1, including assembling in large groups without social distancing.

Some of these protesters have been prevented from crossing the provincial border from Ontario into Manitoba as a result of restrictions. Some have been asked to leave, or denied entry to, multiple stores - including take-out restaurants - for not wearing a mask or showing their vaccination status.

The "anti-maskers" seem to feel that every one of these incidents is discriminatory in some respects. That's why they yell "freedom" a lot, and talk about their "rights".

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/news_centre/ohrc-policy-statement-covid-19-vaccine-mandates-and-proof-vaccine-certificates

1. If you were making an argument DEFENDING these laws and orders (in other words, acting for the government), on which section of the Charter would you rely and what would be the basic argument (no need to go into great details about meeting a test here).

2. Would there be situations in the above fact scenario to which the Charter would not apply? Why or why not?

3. What might one have to prove to a Human Rights Tribunal when alleging these rights have been violated? (refer to the OHRC Statement on Vaccines, linked on Backboard)