Canadian Court Rules it Was Legal To Deny Unvaccinated Person Organ Transplant

The laminated Charter of Rights and Freedoms is seen on the ground during the clean up of Wellington Street in front of Parliament Hill, previously occupied by the Freedom Convoy, in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, on February 20, 2022. - The last big rigs were being towed Sunday out of Canada's …
ANDREJ IVANOV/AFP via Getty Images

A judge in the Canadian province of Alberta has ruled that a woman did not have her rights violated when she was denied an organ transplant due to not being vaccinated against the Wuhan coronavirus.

Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Paul Belzil ruled that Edmonton, Alberta woman Annette Lewis had not had her fundamental character of Rights and Freedoms rights violated by being denied an organ transplant over her vaccination status.

According to Justice Belzil, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has no bearing on the treatment decisions of doctors for organ transplants, despite the transplant being diagnosed by medical professionals as the only way for Ms Lewis to survive a progressive disease she suffers from, broadcaster CBC reports.

Doctors diagnosed Lewish with her disease in 2018 and in 2020 urged her to receive various vaccinations, which she agreed to, however, she did not agree to receive the Wuhan coronavirus vaccine and was told without the vaccine she would not receive her potentially life-saving transplant.

“Taking this vaccine offends my conscience,” Lewis said an a sworn affidavit and added, “I ought to have the choice about what goes into my body and a life-saving treatment cannot be denied to me because I chose not to take an experimental treatment for a condition — COVID-19 — which I do not have and which I may never have.”

While Justice Bezil agreed that Lewis was the sole arbiter of what she put into her own body, he claimed that no one has an inherent right to an organ transplant.

“The proposition that treating physicians exercising clinical judgment would be subject to the charter would result in medical chaos with patients seeking endless judicial review of clinical treatment decisions,” he added.

The court ruling is not the first involving the rights of unvaccinated people in Canada in recent months. Last December, a father had his visitation rights with his daughter suspended in the French-speaking province of Quebec after a judge ruled he could not see his daughter due to his vaccination status.

“It would normally have been in the best interests of the child to have contact with his father, but not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is not vaccinated and is opposed to sanitary measures in the current epidemiological context,” Superior Court Judge Jean-Sébastien Vaillancourt said in his ruling.

In February Court of Queen’s Bench Judge Nathalie Godbout issued a similar ruling temporarily denying a father custody of his three children because he was also unvaccinated.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has defended vaccine mandates and other restrictive measures, arguing in an interview last month, “It was their choice and nobody ever was going to force anyone into doing something they don’t want to do.”

“But there are consequences when you don’t. You cannot choose to put at risk your co-workers. You cannot choose to put at risk the people sitting beside you on an aeroplane,” he added.

Follow Chris Tomlinson on Twitter at @TomlinsonCJ or email at ctomlinson(at)


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.