🎥 WATCH & SHARE VIDEO: https://docs.google.com/videos/d/1sBSkxz1nxjpy62lQRDSdy99O9zqjc7u6CxQsz5ojaX8/edit?usp=sharing
📄 FULL ARTICLE WRITTEN: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iMSH8CcFlHE3MuR6w8YW0YpQnnOLy0xbueExRwli-PU/edit?usp=sharing
In the wake of COVID-era policies, two very different models have emerged for examining what took place in Canada:
The National Citizens Inquiry
The concept of a Grand Jury examining alleged criminal wrongdoing, including serious offences such as treason
Both involve citizens. Both gather evidence. Both claim to seek truth.
But they are not doing the same job.
1. The National Citizens Inquiry
A Review of Science and Policy “Reasonableness”
The National Citizens Inquiry was structured to examine whether COVID-19 measures were:
Scientifically justified
Proportionate
Reasonable under the circumstances
Its core mandate:
➡️ Evaluate public health decision-making
➡️ Weigh scientific evidence and expert testimony
➡️ Assess whether policies made sense based on available data
What this turns into:
A broad, often intense debate over science and policy, including:
Competing expert opinions
Conflicting interpretations of data
Retrospective judgments about what should have been done
The underlying question:
“Were these measures reasonable?”
The Problem with This Approach
“Reasonableness” is not a fixed standard.
It depends on:
Which experts are believed
Which data is prioritized
What assumptions are made
That means:
Two experts can reach opposite conclusions
Two panels can issue completely different findings
The outcome remains arguable, not decisive
👉 It becomes, in effect, a public health science contest—important for discussion, but limited in terms of accountability.
2. The Grand Jury (Criminal Lens)
A Breakdown of Conduct Under Law
A grand jury, rooted in common law traditions tied to foundational principles like those recognized in the Magna Carta, operates in a completely different domain.
It does not ask whether decisions were reasonable.
It asks whether they were lawful.
Its core mandate:
➡️ Examine conduct under criminal law standards
➡️ Determine whether legal boundaries were crossed
➡️ Break down actions into specific potential offences
This includes analyzing:
Abuse of authority
Breach of trust
Coercion
Misconduct in public office
In extreme allegations, offences such as treason
What It Actually Does
Instead of debating policy, it:
Takes actions piece by piece
Compares them to legal definitions of offences
Examines intent, authority, and outcome
The underlying question:
“Did this cross the line into criminal conduct?”
3. The Role of Public Participation
Two Very Different Functions
In the NCI:
Public participation means:
Giving testimony
Sharing experiences
Contributing to a public record
The public helps tell the story.
In a Grand Jury Framework:
Public participation can be broader—but more structured:
Evidence can be gathered from the public
Information can be organized and analyzed
Input can be reviewed through a separate consultation or evidence-gathering process
But the key difference is this:
👉 The public contributes to evidence formation, not the final legal determination.
The ultimate role is:
To inform the legal analysis, not replace it
4. The Fundamental Divide
What Is Being Evaluated
National Citizens Inquiry
Science
Policy decisions
Outcomes and impacts
Grand Jury Approach
Legal authority
Actions taken
Criminal thresholds
What Standard Is Applied
NCI
➡️ Reasonableness
➡️ Proportionality
➡️ Scientific justification
Grand Jury
➡️ Lawfulness
➡️ Criminal definitions
➡️ Evidence of wrongdoing
What Kind of Result Is Produced
NCI
Reports
Criticism
Recommendations
Grand Jury
Legal findings (in systems where formally applied)
Identification of potential offences
Movement toward accountability mechanisms
5. Why the Difference Matters
The distinction is not academic—it determines whether the process leads to:
Debate… or Accountability
The NCI Path
Leads to:
Ongoing disagreement
Competing narratives
Public awareness
But ultimately:
No binding consequences
The Grand Jury Path
Leads to:
A structured legal breakdown
Clear thresholds (met or not met)
A pathway toward consequences
Because it shifts the focus from:
➡️ “Was this a good idea?”
to:
➡️ “Was this legal?”
6. Getting to the Heart of the Matter
If the goal is to understand what happened, both approaches can contribute.
But if the goal is to determine:
Whether authority was abused
Whether laws were broken
Whether individuals should be held responsible
Then the analysis must move beyond:
Scientific disagreement
Policy critique
…and into:
Legal examination of conduct
Final Conclusion
The National Citizens Inquiry operates in the realm of:
➡️ Public debate and policy evaluation
A grand jury framework operates in the realm of:
➡️ Law, liability, and accountability
They are not competing versions of the same thing.
They are different tools for different purposes.
And understanding that difference is essential—because only one of them is designed to answer the question that ultimately matters
*******************************************
SUPPORT THE GRAND JURY ON TREASON
Registration for the Grand Jury Pool is now closed as of April 20, 2026.
The pool of individuals eligible for selection has been finalized, with a total of 330 participants. The Grand Jury—comprised of 23 jurors and 7 alternate jurors—will be drawn from this established pool using a fair and transparent selection method agreed upon by participants on April 20.
While the jury pool is now closed, ongoing support remains essential to the success and integrity of the Grand Jury process. Individuals who wish to contribute may still volunteer in support roles.
Support is needed in the following areas:
• Fundraising to meet the operational needs of the Grand Jury process
• Public awareness and outreach to inform the public about the initiative
• Expert consultation and opinions, including legal and medical expertise
• Identifying and coordinating witnesses willing to provide testimony
• Data collection, organization, and secure storage of materials
• Security and logistical support
To volunteer or donate please visit: grandjuryrising/grandjurysign-up
For questions or further information, please contact: grandjuryrising@proton.me
SIGN GRAND JURY PETITION: https://www.change.org/GrandJuryPetition
********************************************
✅Sign the petition to stop Bill S-206 digital prison: https://www.change.org/Kill_Bill_S-206
✅ Take the National Digital ID Poll here: https://forms.gle/jEsYnfZWVvCfas5g8
📣 JOIN THE TRUTH & ACTION SHARE CLUB on line at: https://www.grandjuryrising.ca/sign-up-to-truth-action-club
Commit to share 1 post for fifteen minutes a day. That’s the movement. If you sent a request to join and do not receive a confirmation email in 24 hours please notify us again.
Operation Truth And Action Share Storm was started on March 23 and there will be updates every Monday on this operation which aims to inform the public of the shift in governance from democratic to administration governance including to loss of the court system and our civil liberties.
