On Day 26 of the Emergencies Act hearings testimonies revealed that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoked the Act on the advice of the Clerk of the Privy Council and not based on a detailed threat assessment of the Freedom Convoy by law enforcement authorities.

Clerk of the Privy Council, Janice Charette, was asked by Commission lawyers to describe the document Trudeau signed to adopt the emergency powers. It was titled, Memorandum for the Prime Minister: Invoking the Emergencies Act to End Nation-Wide Protests and Blockades.

The document lays out the history of the Emergencies Act, the legal threshold required for the government to invoke it and Charette’s opinions as to why it was justified. The document was provided to the Prime Minister on February 14th.

The document states, “While the demonstrations started out relatively peaceful, they have grown more complex and have expanded into multiple locations in the country. The movement is considered to be highly organized, well financed and is feeding a general sense of public unrest that could continue to escalate with severe threats to public security, economic stability and international relations…a more detailed threat assessment is being provided under separate cover.”

Commission counsel then asked Charette, “can you tell us about that threat assessment?”

“When we got to this point, it would have been reasonable to expect that we would have been able to include as part of the package going to the Prime Minister, ‘here’s a threat and risk assessment’ – that was not ready by the time this memo was being sent,” Charette told the Commission.

“We have gone back and searched all our records. We have not been able to find that, to the best of my knowledge. There was no written detailed threat assessment provided under separate cover.”

Commission counsel replied, “so this was not actually a threat assessment that was ever produced. It was an aspirational threat assessment, it was one that was supposed to be produced but wasn’t in the end?”

“I think we hoped for it. To the best of my knowledge, to the best of our records, we don’t have a detailed threat assessment written that was provided to the Prime Minister under separate cover.”

The memorandum document reads: “PCO (Privy Council Office) recommends you approve [redacted] declaring a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act.”

You can read the entire document prepared for the Prime Minister on February 14 below.


Commission counsel then asked Charette if Cabinet was aware that CSIS had determined that there was no threat to the security of Canada prior to the invocation of the Act.

“Was the cabinet aware that CSIS had assessed that there was no threat to the security of Canada under Section 2 of the CSIS coming out of the protests?” Commission lawyers asked.

“Cabinet was aware that CSIS had not assessed a threat to the security of Canada necessary to trigger their authorities under the CSIS act. To the best of my knowledge, to this day, there was no CSIS investigation of the protest,” Charette replied.

According to the Clerk of the Privy Council, prior to invocation of the Emergencies Act, Cabinet was aware CSIS did not assess the Convoy to determine if it was a threat to national security as defined by Section 2 of the CSIS Act.#POEC pic.twitter.com/34Q6FP1wNd

— True North (@TrueNorthCentre) November 18, 2022

An email between RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki and deputy minister of public safety Rob Stewart indicates that Lucki wanted to make it clear that not all tools had been exhausted by the RCMP to deal with the Freedom Convoy prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act.

Commission counsel asked Charette if Cabinet had been made aware of Lucki’s comments and knew that law enforcement officials felt that existing tools could still be used.

“I think it’s fair to say that cabinet was briefed that there were tools and authorities in many organizations that had not been fully deployed,” Charette said.

Clerk of the Privy Council Janice Charette says cabinet was briefed “that there were tools and authorities in many organizations that had not been fully deployed” prior to invoking the Emergencies Act.#POEC pic.twitter.com/VtHCXtEaic

— True North (@TrueNorthCentre) November 18, 2022

Testifying before Charette was the deputy secretary of emergency preparedness Jacquie Bogden.

Under questioning from Convoy lawyer Brenden Miller, Bogden repeatedly refused to answer basic questions about the text of the legislation in the Emergencies Act and the definition of a threat to national security.

Canada’s deputy secretary of emergency preparedness Jacquie Bogden refuses to answer questions about the government’s justification for invoking the Emergencies Act.#POEC pic.twitter.com/bfzAeDtAct

— True North (@TrueNorthCentre) November 18, 2022

Democracy Fund lawyer Alan Honner addressed a separate document prepared for ministers at the February 13 cabinet meeting from the office of the National Security and Intelligence Advisor to the Prime Minister.

The memo reads that the majority of events across the country have been peaceful and the disruption to government activities is “so far minor”.

It also claims under a subsection titled “CSIS” that there were “no concerns at this time.”


What happens next?

Hearings resume on Monday, November 21 with the Commissioner and senior members of CSIS. Commissioner Rouleau determined that CSIS testimony would be heard in private to protect intelligence which could harm the security of Canada.

Scheduled to testify next week are senior members of the federal cabinet including Justin Trudeau, Chrystia Freeland, Marco Mendicino and Bill Blair.

True North will continue to provide daily coverage of the ongoing Public Order Emergency Commission.



We have officially been registered as a corporation.  Our legal name is


Incorporation Number:


Business Number

74909 0544 BC0001

For those that do not know why we did this, let me explain.   We are going to start using corporate clout to tackle some of the companies that are violating our rights.  Our first target is Facebook Canada for the unlawful censorship, banning, and shadow banning of Canadian Citizens.  Facebook is a platform, not a publisher.  They can write all the mumbo jumbo they want into their terms and conditions, but it does not excuse them from medical liability if people are harmed by them censoring doctors, and lawyers about what is really going on with Covid.

As a registered member of Awake Canada, if we push to class action, you will be automatically entered into this class action and dismissed if you have not ever had a facebook account.   My lawyer will inform me on this as we move to this process.  We are going to start by placing an injunction on my personal account, removing all bans, and shadow bans, and the Awake Canada facebook page.  Any action they take against this page or the content, will be challenged legally.  Be sure you are a member of that page if you are not.   You can join our Facebook Here.We are temporarily going to pause donations, until the registration process is complete and a new bank account for Awake Canada is setup.  Separating my personal affairs from this corporation is KEY to being successful in our campaigns.

Help us spread the word, by sharing these vital links below:

To see Bonnie Henry’s emails proving knowledge of harm of vaccines:

To see the legal challenge that is happening worldwide:

To see hundreds of hours of doctors speaking out:

Important legal documents to your rights as Canadian citizen:

The most important documentary on what is happening in the world right now:

Proof of Genocide:

Dr. David Martin lays it out for you:

The only proof anyone should need:

Alarming uptick in cancers since jab rollout:

3 times more covid deaths since vaccine rollout:

One America Insurance CEO reports 40% increase in death claims since vaccine rollout: