What message is Canada trying to send when peaceful protest organizers face longer potential prison sentences than many violent offenders? That’s the question that looms over the latest legal development in the case of Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber.
On July 19, Lich took to X (formerly Twitter) to inform the public that Crown prosecutors are now seeking 7 years in prison for her and 8 years for Barber a sharp escalation from the two-year sentence the Crown had previously indicated. Barber reposted her statement without adding a comment. While the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General hasn’t responded publicly, the implications of such a sentence are deeply troubling for anyone who values civil liberties in Canada.
To be clear: Lich and Barber were not charged with or convicted of violence. They were found guilty of mischief not terrorism, not assault, not arson. Barber was also convicted of counselling others to disobey a court order after a TikTok video where he encouraged honking as police approached. Other charges, including intimidation and obstruction, were either dismissed due to lack of evidence or stayed at the Crown’s own request.
Yet here we are talking about multi-year prison sentences in a federal penitentiary for organizing a protest that, for all its disruptions, was largely peaceful and supported by thousands across the country.
The Freedom Convoy was undoubtedly polarizing. It brought downtown Ottawa to a standstill in early 2022. It sparked frustration, fear, and political outrage. But it also gave voice to a swath of Canadians who felt unheard during the COVID-19 pandemic and opposed vaccine mandates. Whether you agreed with the convoy or not, the right to protest is enshrined in our democracy.
What’s more alarming is that police officers reportedly helped coordinate the protest directing vehicles where to park and even providing maps, according to Barber’s lawyer, Diane Magas. Barber is now being punished for following instructions that appeared, at the time, to be legitimate and sanctioned. Magas also argued in a recent stay-of-proceedings application that Barber received erroneous legal advice from both police and his former lawyer. But the Crown pushed back, saying no official directly advised Barber of the legality of his actions. The court ultimately denied the stay application on July 17.
This case is no longer just about mischief or honking horns. It’s about the criminalization of dissent. When nonviolent protesters are treated more harshly than actual violent criminals as pointed out by Conservative MP Dean Allison something is clearly wrong.
“Steal a car, no problem. Home invasions, no problem. Murder a grandmother, no problem. Exploit children, no problem,” Allison wrote on X, in a scathing criticism of the federal government’s priorities. It might be hyperbolic, but the point resonates. Why are peaceful demonstrators facing harsher sentences than some repeat offenders of violent crimes?
The Liberal government, while claiming neutrality in judicial matters, is under increasing pressure to reform bail laws and sentencing for violent crime. But if they truly care about justice, they also need to ensure protest rights aren’t trampled under the weight of political retaliation or public anger.
In the background of all this is a $290 million class-action lawsuit against Lich, Barber, and other convoy participants, launched by Ottawa residents and local businesses. Legal retribution is stacking up on every side. But when the state begins to make examples out of protest organizers rather than applying justice equitably, we risk entering dangerous territory.
Canada must ask itself: do we still believe in the right to protest especially when that protest is unpopular? Or are we becoming a nation where peaceful opposition is punished more harshly than crime?
The sentencing hearing is set for July 23. Whatever the outcome, the precedent it sets will ripple far beyond Ottawa.
