A coalition of more than 300 active and former members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) who claim to have been injured by Covid-19 vaccine mandates have filed a class-action lawsuit against the top brass of the Canadian military requesting $500 million in damages.
"The CAF shirked its own purpose and rushed an untested product onto its members, mislabeled this experimental gene therapy a 'vaccine,' knowingly made false statements of safety and efficacy, and facilitated its mandate with no option to refuse except for mandatory permanent removal from service," reads the statement of claim that was filed with the Federal Court on June 21.
"The actions of the CAF and CDS [Chief of the Defence Staff] has resulted in injury to the Plaintiffs, who have consistently worked to prevent this abuse of power from occurring and to protect the members and their families who are experiencing coercion, discrimination, and threat of loss of career and benefits in all instances," it continued.
The lawsuit was filed against Chief of the Defence Staff General Wayne Eyre, Vice Chief of the Defence Staff Lieutenant-General Frances Allen, former deputy minister of national defence Jody Thomas, and Minister of National Defence Anita Anand, among others.
In the fall of 2021, the CAF implemented a compulsory Covid-19 vaccine mandate with non-compliance forcing out members of the military either through voluntary release or expulsion under code 5(f) which states that such troops would be "unsuitable for further service," dishonourable discharge would be given to those with "personal weaknesses" or other problems that put an excessive burden on the CAF.
In October 2022, the CAF removed having a Covid vaccine as a condition for service, however, it remained mandatory that soldiers receive primary injections for several operational roles within the military.
According to the lawsuit, the CAF abused its power by disregarding clear legislative limits on its actions, which allowed for the physical and/or psychological torture of unvaccinated members of the military under the command of CAF-commissioned officers. The lawsuit also claims that the CAF ignored established laws on privacy rights and the right to choose medical treatment and also for ignoring laws regarding informed consent and religious and spiritual beliefs.
Also among the discrepancies listed are deliberately failing to ensure that officers were completely and accurately briefed on the legal and policy issues related to the vaccine mandate and that the grievance systems were deliberately misused as a way of indefinitely delaying or stopping altogether relief sought by military service members.
According to the lawsuit, the CAF focused on "political agendas and taking direction from political leaders that are detrimental to operational readiness and effectiveness" when it created the vaccine mandates. It argues that the CAF limited the plaintiffs' ability to comply with the mandates by writing the directives in a way that blocked compliance with them.
The statement of claim also alleged that the CDS used administrative means to punish members who did not comply with the mandates rather than following the legal process laid out as part of the National Defence Act that would have allowed service members to have their cases heard and examined in independent hearings, according to ZeroHedge.
The lawsuit also argues that Eyre claims to have received orders from the Canadian government to enforce the vaccine mandate, which it states is unlawful.