LIVE COVERAGE: Justin Trudeau Testifies Before Rouleau Commission | Live broadcast

The Prime Minister’s testimony is interrupted for a dinner break. To the questions put to him this morning, Mr. You can read Trudeau’s responses Our report.

Judge Paul Rouleau condemned the “inappropriate” reactions of the public and asked the audience to refrain from making comments and laughing when the witness answered questions.

Rob Kittredge from the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms questions the Prime Minister. Mr. Kittredge asked if the law was enforced to force the use of tugs to evacuate convoys. Some companies have Prefers to avoid interference While blocking.

Justin Trudeau explains that the dredging companies were forced to do their job under the law, but an emergency was not declared for this reason.

Cross-examination begins by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, represented by Ewa Krajewska. It notes that the RCMP’s big boss, Brenda Luckie, had a plan to get the protesters out of downtown Ottawa.

Ms. Lucky assessed on February 13 All tools are available Not over yet by the police to end the occupation.

“I disagree,” replied Justin Trudeau. According to him, the proposed plan was not enough to end the protests by any means.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s testimony resumes.

Commission lawyer Santona Chaudhary reminds him of the criticism that the government was “overzealous” in declaring a state of emergency. A law exists because it has been debated and passed in ParliamentHe responds, reminding us that it is a tool that the government has to respond to situations National emergency The safety of Canadians could be compromised there.

The group takes a 15-minute break.

The Prime Minister wonders about the slippages that would have occurred if he had waited longer before implementing emergency legislation. “Unthinkable things could have happened,” he says. As Prime Minister of Canada, Mr. Trudeau believes.

The Prime Minister indicated that by taking the decision to declare a state of emergency, he was aware that the commission would have to justify it later. Considering the discussions that took place before reaching this conclusion, he says he felt comfortable enough. “We were able to resolve the situation, there were no deaths or serious violence” and “such illegal encroachments” have not been repeated since then, he observes.

I’m not saying it was the only thing that prevented it, but it did.He decides. I am completely calm and convinced that I made the right choice by implementing the Emergency Measures Act.

Justin Trudeau said he would not have declared a state of emergency on February 14, 2022 if he was confident other tools would be sufficient to remedy the situation. not that [une décision] taken lightlyHe insists.

Was consensus reached in the Incident Response Team that met after the convoy on the way to interpret the Emergency Act and its provisions? “Yes,” Justin Trudeau says without hesitation.

“Without sharing advice [qui ont eu lieu le 13 février]I can say that we have come to a clear consensus and I will continue with the next phase of consultation with the Prime Ministers. [provinciaux]With the possibility of implementing the Emergency Measures Act,” he explains.

However, he said he did not need a consensus to move forward. Trudeau clarified.