Throughout February 2022, Ottawa was besieged by a “Freedom Convoy” of groups opposed to Canada’s vaccine mandates. Thousands of protesters obstructed major streets, whilst others blocked trade routes between Canada and the US. After several weeks, the eventual crackdown by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau compensated for its delay through its sheer brutality.

In spite of the heavy-handed police response, most stunning was the ease at which the government froze the bank accounts of protesters and some of their supporters. The measure exposed a terrifying truth; our transition to a cashless society has come at the price of expecting the power brokers of our financial systems to protect our right to protest. 

It is necessary to explain why these protesters, intent on shunning their public health responsibilities, deserve our solidarity. The justification is twofold. Firstly, the protests were a response to some of the most stringent restrictions imposed globally. Unvaccinated Canadians aged 12 and above could not travel by train, eat in restaurants, attend funeral-related “social gatherings,” or leave the country.. The bodily autonomy of the individual is a fundamental tenet of any liberal democracy and no one should be denied a meaningful existence because they refuse an injection. This should not be controversial. Those of us who got vaccinated out of a sense of collective responsibility must respect the democratic function these protests served by upholding the rights of the individual against draconian state policies.

Secondly, as Shanice McBean notes; it is the state that has a monopoly on violence; as such, the need for solidarity between non-state actors is axiomatic. Whilst the Freedom Convoy indisputably exceeded the parameters of reasonable protest, the Canadian government’s punitive financial measures expose a grave threat to human rights globally. Even if your loyalty is borne from nothing more than self-preservation, the rationale behind offering your solidarity to the protesters should be evident. 

The actions of the Canadian government can be distilled as such: the Emergency Powers Act was triggered, granting the authority to freeze the bank accounts of 206 individuals that acted in the protests or aided those who did. Whilst the Canadian government denied targeting indirect supporters, an MP confirmed that one of his constituents, a young single mother, was locked out of her bank account for donating C$50 to a crowdsourcing page. Whilst all the accounts are purportedly now unfrozen, financial experts are emphasising the long-term harm of these individuals being kept on bank databases that prohibit financing to “flagged” customers.

The effectiveness of the measure is indisputable; protesting costs money and by prohibiting the Freedom Convoy from accessing millions of dollars, the government ensured they could not pay for food, accommodation, or even bail. It is frightening to think that the government can so easily flick the switch on our right to be outraged, to be vocal, “to care”.

The financial woes of 206 people across the Atlantic might seem like an esoteric concern but, as the UK marches towards a cashless society, are we not just as vulnerable? When transactions were handled only in cash, the vast majority of transactions escaped the purview of financial institutions. In contrast, now that our banking is almost entirely virtual, these powers oversee our every purchase. In our pursuit of ease, we have absent-mindedly adopted a childlike dependence on profit-driven entities to ensure access to our money, should we need to defend our most basic rights. The answer is, of course, not to retreat from technological progress, but to establish appropriate safeguards.

In response, some have highlighted decentralised financial architecture as a means to prevent government overreach. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin responded to the Canadian government’s actions by proposing that cryptocurrencies would bring back the rule of law. Yet, we cannot forget that Trudeau targeted digital assets and the UK Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, is already proposing a centralised, digital currency to keep power concentrated under state control. What more did we expect from the party responsible for the authoritarian Police, Crime and Sentencing, and Courts Bill? Moreover, it is inevitable that these financial restrictions will always fall hardest on those with the least to lose, low-income households and marginalised communities, rather than those with diverse revenue streams.

Surely, one would argue, the government would only freeze the bank account of that vague other, the dangerous criminal looking to harm the innocent and undermine “British values”? Yet, once the precedent is set, these measures will be just another tool in the government’s arsenal. Look no further than the Prevent programme. These invasive powers were sold to the public as a means to address radical Islamic terrorism, but are now routinely used against Black Lives Matter and environmental activists. Elsewhere, financial tools are already being used to undermine just protests, such as in Nigeria in 2019.

The reality of our situation is especially disheartening as virtual banking should be a means of strengthening global democracy. This week, the invasion of Ukraine was met with GoFundMe links and other crowdsourcing URLs being widely shared across social media. As public donations pour into these pages, we are witnessing more than mere generosity, but the exercising of precious freedom to promote the values and practices that embody the world we want to create.

The situation is scary, but the solution is simple. We must demand that governments and the international banking industry enact safeguards to guarantee that no government can ever freeze the bank accounts of protesters. The right to protest must be interpreted broadly as not only the right to assemble and disrupt but also the right to access the practical and economic scaffolding upon which we exercise our other rights. Only then will our right to challenge the government and shape our world be truly protected.

Charlie recently graduated from the University of Bristol LL.B. programme and served as a UN Youth Delegate at COP26. He will undertake an LL.M. in international human rights and environmental law at NYU Law School from September 2022.

Linkedin