Constitutional Challenge Update 1: The evidentiary basis is stacked in our favour. – Adamson Barbecue

Constitutional Challenge Update 1: The evidentiary basis is stacked in our favour.

Constitutional Challenge Update

“By its very nature, truth is belligerent because it wages war against all forms of deception” – Mark Passio

I implore you to hold the following in your mind, without judgement or emotional reaction, until you have finished reading. If you intend to respond with accusations or insults about my business license, social associations, empathy towards those affected by COVID, or other one-sided narratives projected by the media, please check out this video where I address those issues and more. If you cannot consider another perspective, consider going about your day before perpetuating a shallow, unnecessary narrative.

I am forever grateful to everyone who supported the GoFundMe after the BBQ Rebellion back in November. Patriots & freedom fighters around the world helped raise over $300k for my legal defense. These people shared my feelings that lockdowns are unjustified and unconstitutional. I feel a strong sense of responsibility to honour these donations by building the most effective legal challenge possible.

My lawsuit has very little to do with my restaurant. It is a constitutional question of the Reopening Ontario Act, and the evidence (or lack thereof) used to justify it. The ruling of this case will effect everyone living in Ontario, and will set precedent for legal challenges across the country. Many have called this the most important constitutional case in the Country.If this challenge is successful, entrepreneurs can reopen their restaurants, bars, gyms and salons, children can go back to school, and everyone can gather together to celebrate, mourn and worship. Anybody who wants to stay in isolation, use curbside pickup, or wear a mask to feel safe can continue doing so.

Over the last six months, BBQ has been on the backburner and I’ve been fully immersed in building this challenge. Guided by intuition and truth, I’ve hired and fired 6 lawyers, ending up with a well balanced team of activists who are passionate about ending these lockdowns. Michael Swinwood of Elders Without Borders, constitutional lawyer, is chief litigator. He prepared the Notice of Constitutional Question and the Factum. Pradeep Chand of Chand & Snider, former federal prosecutor, has been retained to handle the evidentiary portion of the case. He prepared the expert witnesses and oversaw their cross-examinations.

This challenge absolutely shreds the mainstream narrative of “a deadly pandemic which warrants stay-at-home orders, business and school closures, social distancing measures and mask mandates”. This challenge consists of four main tenets:

a. Do the Federal, Provincial and Municipal Governments have lawful constitutional
authority to unequivocally adopt, adhere and legislate in relation to the international
recommendations and guidelines of the World Health Organization to declare a
global pandemic without oversight and due process?
b. If it is found that the declaration of the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent
emergency measures were lawful despite the lack of oversight and due process,
does the Provincial Government have constitutional authority under s. 91 of the
Constitution Act to legislate the suspension of rights and freedoms with criminal
law sanctions and dire emotional, financial and health consequences for Ontarians,
on matters concerning the health and welfare of all Canadians based on purely
preventative concerns?
c. Are the Applicants’ sections 2, 7, 8, 9 and 15 rights and freedoms under the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms infringed by the implementation and
application of the preventative measures as legislated and applied, and if so, is that
infringement justified under s. 1?
d. Finally, has the Provincial and Federal Government breached their constitutional
commitment to promote equal opportunities pursuant to s. 36(1) of the Constitution
Act, 1982, to specifically (a) promote equal opportunities for the well-being of
Canadians, (b) furthering economic development to reduce disparity in
opportunities, and (c) provide essential public services of reasonable quality to all
Canadians?
 

The province of Ontario takes the position that the restrictions on our charter rights are demonstrably justified, so this case will come down to the evidence. Are these restrictions to our charter rights justified? My legal team, supported by six well-qualified experts, asserts that they are not.

The evidence that I used to justify re-opening my restaurant back in November has been further validated over the last six months. Our experts have brought to light the invalidity of the PCR test, the lack of cost-benefit analysis on masks and lockdowns performed by the government, the brutal economic and public health damages caused by lockdowns, the province’s ignorance of reasonable alternative treatments, the insignificance of asymptomatic transmission, and the statistics around ICU admissions and mortality.You can click the names of these doctors and scientists to view their affidavits:

Dr. Joel Kettner, PhD 
Former Chief Medical Officer of Health of Manitoba, and professor at the University of Manitoba. He has submitted evidence concerning the following:

  • The principles and strategies of public health, in conjunction with the Charter
  • The lockdowns, transmission in various settings, mortality rates and ICU capacity
  • On reply: public health strategy, epidemiological methodology, the rationality and proportionality of the lockdowns, definitions, and risk factors

Dr. Douglas Allen, PhD
Professor of economics at Simon Fraser University. He has submitted evidence concerning the following:

  • A critical economic assessment of nearly 90 lockdown cost-benefit studies
  • An analysis of predictive mathematical models, the value of a statistical life, and voluntary versus mandatory lockdown behaviour
  • The costs of lockdowns and an alternative cost-benefit methodology
  • On reply: an analysis of all costs and benefits was never conducted by the government, almost no evidence has been provided in support of the lockdowns, no recognition of endogenous human behaviour, and a misrepresentation of of excess mortality

Dr. William Matt Briggs, PhD
Former professor of statistics and biostatistics at Cornell, and co-author of The Price of Panic: How the Tyranny of Experts Turned a Pandemic into a Catastrophe. He has submitted evidence concerning the following:

  • Misunderstandings and misnomers in the definitions of cases, hospitalizations and deaths
  • The woeful inaccuracy of predictive mathematical models
  • All-cause mortality and COVID death statistics
  • Worldwide statistical analysis of lockdowns
  • Comparison to other pandemics
  • On reply: no evidence that mask mandates or lockdowns work, putting COVID-19 in perspective with other causes of death, and more on ICU capacity

Dr. Gilbert Berdine, MD
Harvard Medical and MIT educated pulmonologist and professor at Texas Tech University. He has treated COVID patients and has submitted evidence concerning the following:

  • Criticisms of COVID-19 diagnosis and PCR test inaccuracy/invalidity
  • Pathology of exposure, infection, disease and death
  • Mortality curves and effects of interventions, including herd immunity
  • A comparison between Canada and other countries
  • Reasonable alternatives to emergency measures and proper metrics
  • Variants of concern, their transmissibility and mortality rates
  • An look at Texas and how their cases, hospitalizations and deaths plummeted
  • On reply: a visual comparison of cases, mortality and fatality rates in different settings; the lack of asymptomatic transmission; more on variants of concern; no evidence and egregious use of statistics; and further mention of Texas

Dr. Harvey Risch, PhD
Professor of epidemiology at Yale and author of over 300 peer reviewed papers. He has submitted evidence concerning the following:

  • Outpatient usage of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with zinc and ivermectin
  • An analysis of treatment benefit versus mortality
  • Studies of safety and adverse endpoints with HCQ
  • Said treatments are reasonable alternatives to emergency measures

Dr. Byram Bridle, PhD
Professor of virology and immunology at the University of Guelph. He had a COVID-19 vaccine candidate in development and has submitted evidence concerning the following:

  • An analysis of the population dynamics of the SARS-CoV-2 virus
  • The virus is not a problem of pandemic proportions requiring emergency measures
  • The inaccuracy and invalidity of PCR tests
  • An immunological analysis of asymptomatic transmission and re-transmission of the virus being either negligible or nonexistent
  • An analysis of the variants of concern
  • An analysis of the effectiveness of masking and PPE containment of the virus
  • Prolonged isolation and masking of children can cause irreparable harm
  • Ivermectin is a reasonable alternative to emergency measures

In response to these six experts, the province has called one measly expert to speak on the justification to quarantine healthy people. His name is Dr. Hodges, a hired gun, a consultant brought in for legal challenges by the province. He has admitted to not knowing the difference between the virus SARS-COV-2 and the disease COVID-19. He has declared he is not qualified to speak on our strongest argument, the invalidity of the PCR test, yet considers anyone questioning it to be involved with a “conspiracy theory”. The absence of our health ministers Williams, Yaffe and DeVilla on this case is shocking. Are they absent in an effort to shield liability?

The hearing for this case is on June 28th and 29th. I post frequent updates on our Instagram and Twitter pages if you’d like to follow along.

41 responses to “Constitutional Challenge Update 1: The evidentiary basis is stacked in our favour.

  1. Thank you seems so insignificant relative to the epic scale of importance of your Constitutional challenge. Thanks to the ignorance and treachery of MSM the majority Canadians are oblivious to what you are undertaking on their behalf. Sincere gratitude.Sending Lov and Light to you on this journey where your connection and alignment with well being will see Good and Freedom prevail

  2. They have nothing but the so called ‘narrative’ behind them, no fact no actual science and no foundation to stand on. The only issue here is that the justice of the peace may be compromised. DESTROY THEM.

  3. Thank you for taking this on. Our Charter of Rights is what protects us from over-reaching governments, despots and mobs. If we don’t respect and adhere to this document, we can’t call ourselves a liberal democracy.

  4. Are the public able to witness this hearing? Can you supply hearing details so we can request from the court access to view?

      1. How do you thank someone who has put so much on the line for our Freedoms?! I don’t have the words, but you have our gratitude and support. We’ll be there, if only by Zoom but also with strength. Please express our deep gratitude to each of the members of your Team who have, like you, put so much on the line for all Canadians!

  5. Good luck Adam. Thanks for taking this on for all Ontarians. You have a great bunch of experts on your team.

  6. Thank you for your continuous efforts! I fully support this legal challenge and will be a customer for life.

  7. Keep up the good work and the pressure! The government needs to be taken to task and know that the Canadian people are fed up and deserve their Rights and Freedoms! Watching from Alberta. My thoughts and prayers are with you. Truth will prevail!

  8. We appreciate everything you are doing Adam. Thanks so much for challenging the government on their ridiculous rules- you are AWESOME!

  9. “a. Do the Federal, Provincial and Municipal Governments have lawful constitutional authority to unequivocally adopt, adhere and legislate in relation to the international recommendations and guidelines of the World Health Organization to declare a global pandemic without oversight and due process?”

    What does “unequivocally” mean in this context? Will you also explain what “without oversight and due process” means in your argument? What due process did the Federal government fail to follow? And which entity failed in their oversight role over the Federal government? Same questions for the lower levels of government.

    “b. If it is found that the declaration of the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent emergency measures were lawful despite the lack of oversight and due process, does the Provincial Government have constitutional authority under s. 91 of the Constitution Act to legislate the suspension of rights and freedoms with criminal law sanctions and dire emotional, financial and health consequences for Ontarians, on matters concerning the health and welfare of all Canadians based on purely preventative concerns?”

    Legislative authority for the Provincial Parliaments is derived from s. 92 of the Constitution not s. 91… You’re also mixing up “Government” and “Parliament” here, because the Government can’t legislate anything let alone any “suspension of rights and freedoms”. The Ontario Government cannot make legislation, only the Provincial Parliament can do so in respect of the province. I hope this is just your paraphrasing of the pleadings and not the actual submission because, if so, you’re definitely overpaying your lawyers.

    c. Are the Applicants’ sections 2, 7, 8, 9 and 15 rights and freedoms under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms infringed by the implementation and application of the preventative measures as legislated and applied, and if so, is that infringement justified under s. 1?

    That’s the standard test. But what’s missing here is the argument. I noticed no constitutional or charter expert listed on the list of experts. What’s the precedent? What’s the plan? This is the most obviously important part of the argument, but there ain’t no meat here.

    d. Finally, has the Provincial and Federal Government breached their constitutional commitment to promote equal opportunities pursuant to s. 36(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, to specifically (a) promote equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians, (b) furthering economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities, and (c) provide essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians?

    This one looks like an extra tacked on for no reason. Pleading silly things doesn’t win points.

    Good luck. I expect you’ll lose.

  10. Thank you for taking on this challenge. Fighting this misinformation and outright obfuscation of truth by our ‘trusted’ leaders is unconstitutional and illegal.

  11. While I do support you and believe all this has gone too far at the same time I do believe the government is just trying to do it’s best protecting the residents where they govern. I do hope you win and you have my support.

    1. I am very sorry for you that you believe the Government of Canada is in control of this.
      They are puppets that the strings are being pulled by Corporate Oligarchs and wealthy families. WAKE UP CANADA!

  12. Hi Adam and Thank You!

    There has been an FOI request attributed to your case, circulating on Twitter, that the actual ICU bed count was way lower than popularly reported.

    Does your case include such a request? So much you’ve already written in the attachments (well, the writing of the doctors) you have gained as expert witnesses) is black and white but that ICU count, if true, is a something even people who don’t want to hear it will have to take in.

    Thanks!

  13. Great job! Someone needed to take the stand! The vaccine is their bio weapon, all this covid stuff was their plan to shut the world down to prepare us for the NWO.
    You deserve all the praise! 👏👏👏

  14. I feel for your position, but the government not only has the authority (as outlined in the Emergency Acts) but the responsibility to protect Canadians as a whole. If there weren’t so many ignorant individuals who would flaunt regulations, more businesses would have been able to stay open. Unfortunately, the steps taken had to include keeping selfishness at bay.
    Again, I feel for you and others suffering through this pandemic, but the laws and Acts were in place long before this. I really don’t see how this can be interpreted as a violation of the Charter of Rights.
    Just my opinion, I’m not a lawyer.
    I wish you the best moving forward.

  15. Wow keep up the good work Adam! Why isn’t this all over the news? I haven’t even heard about this on Independent news sites.

  16. Thank u for the fight for every small business and also the tyranny of this corrupt govt … mask ..Ppr testing … false possitive and what this plandemic has done to humanity … our children’s mental health and education .. suicides and drug overdoses … and now vaccine deaths and damage it has done to ppl …. Living in fear cause of media being paid to tell lies ..

  17. God Bless you Brother from someone in Medical Field that has watched my profession become weaponized against the people. Praying for success.

    1. The front line medical experts are exactly the ones that need to be heard from. ICU counts are critical to gaining context on this whole thing. I understand that health care cuts have happened for way too many consecutive years. We need context from you guys. How does this look compared to the last bad flu year in 2018??? In particular, the front line workers in the GTO. Rural areas have had patients transferred in. The general public NEEDS to hear from you. They also need to hear from main stream media journalists that are brave enough to tell the truth. I am 0% scared of covid but I am 100% terrified of my government

  18. Well done and am following…….so thankful for your strength in pursuing this. Praying for justice in this country!

  19. That they have such a poor defense suggests they have dirty tricks planned. Watch out for dirty tricks. Send out a basis for appeal.

    Good luck! Let’s hope it’s a slam dunk.

  20. Amazing case, much respect and support. Glad you also have a connection to the Reiner Fuellmich team in Germany. If the justice of the piece is compromised you need to appeal. All the way to Nuremberg 2.0 if necessary. People’s party of Canada candidate in Markham-Stouffville

  21. Always in my prayers you have a wonderful group of people on your team. Thank you Adam you are a gentlemen with integrity.

  22. This is cutting-edge stuff. Hope it results in the criminals instigating the tyranny being held to legal account!

  23. This is so encouraging and heart-warming, to know that this country still has some that will fight for all the things we have been so “proud of” for so many years. Something that our veterans will be grateful for and appreciative to see, as there are many still with us today, that fought in a different type of war for the same freedom that is so easily being thrown away today.
    I am disgusted in the way the Canadian citizens have been acting towards one another through these tough times. We are supposed to be on the same team, however, those of us who are not just following the crowd/orders, (most of which have far more sufficient evidence and proof backing our valid points) have become the enemy, when it should be simple to see who the real enemy is here. I, as well as many others in my life, are 100% behind you on this and cannot wait to see the end results. You were doing a wonderful thing, and in my books you’re a hero. It takes a confident and very brave man to go to the lengths youve gone. It shouldnt be difficult to win when you have truth on your side! Keep going all the way to the top… You got this 🙂

  24. We are all following this challenge very closely with hope and prayer. We have lost trust and faith in our judicial system but are still hopeful and pray for a win that will bring an end to this global nightmare and greatest injustice and crimes against humanity ever perpetrated.

  25. Vaccines that have dozens of deadly side effects – like brain and spinal cord inflammation, heart failure, strokes, extreme allergic reactions, seizures, heart attacks and many more and which have skipped all necessary safety testing (which usually take 5-10 years), are forced or coerced on entire populations. Experimental gene technology, undisclosed genetically modified organisms, material from aborted babies and animals, and a great variety of toxic chemicals and metals are injected into millions of healthy humans including children and pregnant women. Meanwhile every safe, inexpensive and 100% effective cure for Covid is suppressed by so called ‘health organizations’ and banned by governments. Millions have died needlessly because they were never told about the safe, and effective cures. Medical doctors who successfully treated thousands of Covid patients are censored all around the world. Their voice may not be heard, because humanity must believe that this ultra-dangerous vaccine is the only solution to this so called ‘deadly disease’. In addition no mention of natural immunity that has already taken place and had taken place months ago since back in May of last year 2020. We need for this truth to be told in court. The government is not ignorant of 100% safe and effective treatment for Covid that they have deliberately suppressed and have not only censored doctors by threatening, intimidating, coercing them to keep them silent and have bribed the media to keep them from covering the truth but have banned it. They have banned doctors from using these life saving treatments. By law a doctor has the right to prescribe whatever he/she considers best for their patient. The government has banned FDA and Health Canada approved medications such as Invermectin. Their public health officer has never advised people to take vitamins C and D, why not? We know why Pharmaceuticals do not want that, they want vaccines like Bill Gates. This is deliberate and these are crimes against humanity because these approved and safe and effective treatments that are banned could have saved millions of Canadian lives. Michael Swinwood I know that you have the courage to bring all that out in court about our government. It needs to be brought out for the record and for humanity. This is more than about our constitutional rights to keep our business open. This is about a government who deliberately serves the best interests of pharmaceuticals for personal profit at the expense of lives for decades and throughout history. This is the truth that needs to be brought out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *