Man unlawfully detained in psychiatric unit for tweets, Supreme Court rules

A Happy Valley-Goose Bayman who was heldin a psychiatric unit because of his tweets was unlawfully detained, the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labradorruled on April 27.

The ruling marks an end to a long legalbattle for Andrew Abbass, but could also open up the possibility of another a civil suit.

"'It took quite a while, longer than Iwas initially expecting when the process started, to be honest," Abbass told On The Go on Thursday.

That process started on Apr. 7, 2015, when Abbass was escorted by RNC officers to Western Memorial Regional Hospital in Corner Brook, where he lived at the time, and was involuntarily detained under the Mental Health Care and Treatment Act in a psychiatric unit for six days.

Abbass hadtweeted his anger about the fatal RNC shooting of Don Dunphyin Mitchells Brook, N.L. two days earlier, which led the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary to go to his home.

His tweets were comments on the shooting, he said, and expressed the anger he was feeling.

"That whole story was upsetting to hear," he said of Dunphy's death, whichwas later the subject of a judicial inquiry.

Reading Dunphy's tweets, Abbass said he didn't find anything in themthat went beyond anger with the provincial government and WorkplaceNL.

"'I've been on Twitter a little while now, and I've met a lotof angry people, spoken to a lot of angry people. His Twitter style did not strike me as a person who was angry."

Two days later, Abbasshimself would be detained because of histweets about Dunphy'skilling,posts he says were taken out of context.

Effects of detention continue

The involuntary psychiatric detention lasted for six days, but Abbass says the effects on his life continue today.

His detention gave police grounds to come into his home and his common law partner at the time, who was five months pregnant, was arrested. Work on a business he was developing in Corner Brook was put on "indefinite hold," he said.

He left Corner Brook, first going to Nova Scotia and then to Labrador, after he received threats of violence against him and his family.

• Corner Brook man files appeal after being detained for tweets
• N.L court defends political dissent in case of man hospitalized involuntarily

Abbass became a father in July 2015 and says the detainment followed him through that process as well.

"Anybody that had access to the Newfoundland and Labradorhealth records, there were just flags that would be associated with the detention that they would be privy to that Iwas unaware of at the time, and it caused a lot of difficulty," he said.

The situation strained his relationship with his partner, leading to a breakup.

Long legal process after detainment

Abbass initially challenged his detention in the provincial Supreme Court, but the judge declined jurisdiction and dismissed the application.

In April 2017, the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal found that the lower-court judge should not have declined jurisdiction and ordered a new trial.

• Joe Smyth used 'appropriate force in self-defence,' says report into Dunphy shooting

"The courts must always be there for the vindication of the citizen with what he or she views as the wrongful exercise of authority. Mr. Abbass was denied his day in court. He should have had it," the three-judge appeals court said.

The appeals court also found that the two certificates for involuntary admission relied on second-hand facts and did not identify a particular mental disorder.

In last month's judgment, Justice Brian Furey found that the two doctors Abbass saw didn't receive information that established that two certificates of involuntary admission should have been issued, and his liberty and freedom of movement were affected when he was detained.

Fureyalso found that those certificates, and the hospital records, don't provide evidence thatAbbasshad a mental disorder.

Abbass believes he has grounds for a civil suit but seems uncertain about whether or not he will pursue that path.

"That's a whole other legal process that would have to be started here."

One thing hasn't changed throughout the ordeal, he says he still expresses his opinions on social media.

"This is a freedom of speech issue at this point. Ihave a right to my opinion.If Ijust shut up after this happened they would have won."