Young Canadian forced to disclose vaccination status without legal counsel

R. v. Sly-Hooton

Young Canadian forced to disclose vaccination status without legal counsel

R. v. Sly-Hooton

Elim Sly-Hooton returned to Canada from the Netherlands on July 30, 2022, landing at Toronto Pearson International Airport. A resident of British Columbia, he chose not to disclose his Covid vaccination status via ArriveCAN, believing that his personal medical information should remain private.

In response, Peel Regional Police and Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) surrounded him. He asked, “Am I being detained?” A police officer answered in the affirmative. Under pressure and without counsel, Mr. Sly-Hooton broke down and revealed his vaccination status. He received a $5,000 ticket for violating the Quarantine Act and was ordered to quarantine in his home for 14 days. Mr. Sly-Hooton was not symptomatic for Covid and had natural immunity to Covid. In fact, he provided PHAC agents with a certificate of recovery from Covid issued by the Government of the Netherlands, which certified that he had previously tested positive for Covid in May but that he had officially recovered. 

Lawyer Chris Fleury stated, “The requirement for unvaccinated Canadians to lock themselves in their houses for 14 days following international travel was the height of the federal government’s unscientific and irrational response to Covid. By the summer of 2022, it was widely understood that the vaccines did not stop the spread of Covid, even among vaccinated individuals. Mr. Sly-Hooton’s detention in his own house was entirely arbitrary where it provided no public health or other benefit.”

With help from the Justice Centre, Mr. Sly-Hooton launched a constitutional challenge against ArriveCAN, citing his right to liberty, his right to be protected from unreasonable search and seizure, his right to be free from arbitrary arrest and detention, and his right to counsel after arrest and detention – all protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

On March 1, 2024, lawyers provided by the Justice Centre appeared at a judicial pre-trial to schedule a trial date for Mr. Sly-Hooton and to agree on witnesses and procedures for his upcoming trial.

That trial never occurred. On July 11, 2024, City of Mississauga prosecutors withdrew all charges against Mr. Sly-Hooton. At the same time, prosecutors withdrew similar charges against Mark Spence, Aaron Grubb, and Evan Kraayenbrink. Like Mr. Sly-Hooton, each were charged after refusing to provide personal medical information via ArriveCAN and were ordered to quarantine for 14 days. Prosecutors withdrew charges against these four Canadians because they believed it was not in the public interest to expend further resources at trial.

This outcome follows a similar pattern of ArriveCAN-related charges being dropped before their trials in what appears to be an attempt to shield the controversial program from constitutional scrutiny. In other words, charges are being dropped before courts have the chance to hear the merits of constitutional challenges to ArriveCAN.

Beside the constitutional question, ArriveCAN has been dogged by bad publicity since its implementation. Canada Border Services Agency launched ArriveCAN in April 2020 in response to the World Health Organization’s declaration of a global pandemic. ArriveCAN was mandatory for all air, land, and marine travellers between November 2021 and October 2022.

ArriveCAN has cost Canadians an estimated $59.5 million (not counting in-house costs), according to the Auditor General of Canada in her February 12, 2024 performance audit report. The program erroneously ordered 10,000 Canadians to quarantine in a significant breach of the Privacy Act, according to a 2023 report from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. The program violated many of the rights and freedoms protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Lawyer Chris Fleury stated, “This outcome is bittersweet for each of our clients. It is positive for each of them personally. On the other hand, they were deeply interested in seeking a determination of the constitutionality of the irrational and unscientific decision forcing unvaccinated Canadians to quarantine. The federal government has again escaped accountability for Covid policy decisions that breached Canadians’ Charter rights.”

Share this:

Associated News Releases

Related News