What this was — in plain language
The convoy raised most of its money through online
crowdfunding — first on
GoFundMe, then on GiveSendGo — plus
some cryptocurrency. As the occupation went on, that
money was cut off and frozen. But it is easy to blur together three
very different things, so this page keeps them apart.
Three separate tracks. First, the
platforms’ own decisions: GoFundMe and GiveSendGo
chose, under their own terms of service, to stop and refund donations.
Second, the civil courts: an Ontario judge issued a
Mareva injunction — a private-lawsuit order — freezing
assets so they could be preserved for people suing for damages. Third,
the federal government: under the Emergencies Act, the
Emergency Economic Measures Order let banks freeze accounts
without a court order. Only the third is the
Emergencies Act; only the third is what the courts later ruled
unconstitutional.
The platforms. GoFundMe raised about
CA$10 million, released $1 million, then on February
4–5 removed the campaign — citing its rules and police reports the
demonstration had become an occupation — and refunded the rest.
Donations then moved to GiveSendGo, which drew
113,152 donors and about US$9.8 million;
roughly 93% was ultimately refunded.
The civil freeze. An Ottawa resident, Zexi Li,
launched a proposed class action on behalf of residents and businesses
(filed Feb 4, 2022). A Mareva injunction first granted
in early February — freezing up to $20 million in
assets, including, for the first time in Canada,
cryptocurrency — was extended (about 60 days) on
February 16–17, 2022. The judge was
explicit: this was about preserving money for possible civil damages,
not a criminal or Emergencies Act measure.
The federal freeze. On February 14 the government
invoked the Emergencies Act. Its Economic Order let banks freeze the
accounts of people tied to the blockades without a warrant, and required
crowdfunding and crypto platforms to register with the financial-crime
agency FINTRAC and report large or suspicious
transactions. Finance officials told MPs that up to about
210 accounts holding roughly $7.8 million
were frozen, and that most were already being released as people left.
The Emergencies Act freeze lasted nine days and ended when the emergency
was revoked on February 23. But two things outlasted it: the
crowdfunding reporting rules were made permanent in
April 2022, and the courts later found the account-freezing power
breached the Charter — a ruling that, as of
June 19, 2026, the government is asking the Supreme Court to overturn.
What happened, track by track
each claim links its source GoFundMe — the platform’s own cutoff
The "Freedom Convoy 2022" GoFundMe raised about
CA$10 million (roughly US$7.8M). GoFundMe released an
initial $1 million to organizers early that week, then
on February 4–5, 2022 removed the fundraiser, citing
its Terms of Service (Term 8, prohibiting the promotion of violence and
harassment) and police reports that the demonstration had become an
occupation. It ultimately refunded all donations automatically.
GoFundMe ↗
This was a private platform decision under its own
rules — it predates the Emergencies Act and the federal freeze, and is
legally distinct from both.
GiveSendGo — donations migrate, then a court order
After GoFundMe’s cutoff, fundraising moved to
GiveSendGo. Its Freedom Convoy campaign received
donations from 113,152 donors totalling
US$9,776,559 (about US$9.8M). Roughly 93%
of donations were ultimately refunded; whether a given donor’s money was
refunded or instead remained part of the ~CA$3.4 million
frozen for the class action depended on the donation date.
CBC ↗
On February 10, 2022, Ontario’s government obtained an
Ontario Superior Court restraining order to freeze access to the
GiveSendGo funds. The platform said it would
not comply with Canadian jurisdiction, and later told
the court it was refunding donations.
CBC ↗
The GiveSendGo data breach
On the morning of February 11, 2022, GiveSendGo’s site
was redirected to "givesendgone.wtf" with a message condemning the
convoy. A subsequent leak, distributed via Distributed Denial of
Secrets, exposed donor data — self-reported names, email addresses, ZIP
codes and IP addresses. Reporting put the exposed campaign at
~92,845 donations/records in the leaked dataset (not
necessarily unique donors), with about 55.7% of
donors from the U.S. and roughly 39% from Canada.
TechCrunch ↗
Several named donors subsequently reported harassment and professional
consequences after the breach — a privacy and chilling-effect concern
that applied to ordinary donors, not only organizers.
Wikipedia ↗
(How many donors pursued legal action, and the leak’s full downstream
effects, remain only partly documented — see the open questions.)
The Mareva injunction civil, not the EA
The Mareva injunction was first granted in early
February in the proposed class action that Ottawa public servant
Zexi Li filed on February 4, 2022
(counsel: Champ & Associates; motion by Lenczner Slaght). On
February 16–17, 2022, Ontario Superior Court Justice
Calum MacLeod extended it (about 60
days), restraining convoy leaders and fundraisers from dissipating up to
$20 million in worldwide assets — bank accounts,
fundraisers and cryptocurrency. The order named organizers including
Tamara Lich, Patrick King, Chris Garrah, Nicholas St. Louis and Benjamin
Dichter, plus entities such as GoFundMe Inc. and Adopt-a-Trucker. Lawyer
Paul Champ called it the first Canadian use of a Mareva
order to freeze cryptocurrency.
CBC ↗
Justice MacLeod was explicit that this order is separate from
the Emergencies Act bank-account freeze: it concerns civil
damages, not criminal proceedings. Frozen and escrowed assets (managed
by Bobby Kofman of KSV Advisory) included more than
$290,000 in bitcoin and cash, with the court hoping to
receive about $10M of GiveSendGo funds and another $1M of GoFundMe funds
traced to an organizer’s account. Reporting on the broader crypto
fundraising effort also pointed to ~146 cryptocurrency
wallets tied to convoy donations being identified in the course
of the freezing efforts — a complementary figure to the escrowed sum, not
a substitute for it.
CBC ↗
The Emergency Economic Measures Order the EA freeze
The Order was in effect February 14–23, 2022. It let
financial institutions freeze the accounts of people
connected to the blockades without a court order, with no civil liability
for compliant institutions. It also extended Proceeds of Crime (Money
Laundering) and Terrorist Financing reporting obligations to
crowdfunding platforms and payment service providers,
including digital assets / cryptocurrency, requiring them to register
with FINTRAC and report suspicious and large-value
transactions.
Mondaq ↗
At a Commons finance committee on February 22, 2022,
Isabelle Jacques, assistant deputy minister of finance, said up to about
210 bank accounts holding roughly
$7.8 million had been frozen — and that most were
already in the process of being released as people left the blockade. She
noted that more than 200 frozen accounts did not
necessarily mean more than 200 people lost access to funds. The RCMP said
it provided banks only the names of organizers and truck
owners who refused to leave, and that it did
not release an exhaustive list of donations; the
government chose to act under the Emergencies Act rather than existing
terrorism / financial-crime freezing powers.
CBC ↗
The exact final tally is unsettled. Figures shifted day-to-day
(variously cited as 76, then ~206/210/219 accounts, and ~$3.2M–$7.8M at
different moments); the POEC exhibit record is the place to look for the
authoritative final number. Whether any ordinary donors — as
opposed to designated organizers / truck owners — nonetheless had
accounts frozen remains disputed.
FINTRAC — the rule that became permanent
The crowdfunding and payment-service reporting duties did not end with
the emergency. The government published permanent
regulations in April 2022, replacing the temporary Economic
Order.
CBC ↗
FINTRAC’s own notice confirms crowdfunding platforms and certain payment
service providers were made permanently subject to registration and
reporting (as money services businesses), with rules covering virtual
currency; the amendments were registered and in force as of
April 27, 2022.
FINTRAC ↗
The courts: the account-freezing breached the Charter
In Canadian Frontline Nurses v. Canada (AG), 2024 FC 42
(Jan 23, 2024), Justice Mosley found the Economic Order’s freezing of
bank accounts and disclosure of financial information was a
"seizure" under Charter s.8; financial records, he held,
are part of an individual’s "biographical core," in
which affected people had a strong expectation of privacy.
Torys ↗
The seizures were held unreasonable because there was no
prior authorization by a neutral arbiter and no guidance to financial
institutions on the standards for releasing protesters’ financial
information. The breach could not be saved under s.1, and the regulations
failed minimal impairment — they were nationwide when
tailoring to Ontario and Alberta would have sufficed, and the
Federal Court found the measures captured people who were
peacefully protesting.
Osgoode ↗
On January 16, 2026, the Federal Court of Appeal (2026
FCA 6) dismissed the government’s appeals, upholding that the invocation
was unreasonable and ultra vires and infringed s.2(b) and s.8 — with the
s.8 violation attaching specifically to the economic /
bank-freezing measures. The government filed for leave to appeal
to the Supreme Court on March 17, 2026; as of June 19, 2026 the Court has
not decided whether to hear it.
2026 FCA 6 ↗
Why this matters
The money around the convoy was shut off in three different ways, and they
are not the same thing. The platforms acted under their own rules; a civil
court acted to preserve assets for people seeking damages; and the federal
government, for the first time, used the Emergencies Act to let banks freeze
accounts without a warrant. It is that last measure — and only that one —
that the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal have found breached the
Charter’s protection against unreasonable seizure.
Whatever one thinks of the convoy, that finding is now part of the legal
record, and it turns on a question that outlasts this case: when, and with
what safeguards, may a government reach into people’s bank accounts in an
emergency. The Supreme Court of Canada may have the final word — if it
takes the case. As of June 19, 2026, it has not yet decided.
The aim of this page is the same as the rest of the archive: keep the three
tracks straight, state the documented facts with dates and sources, mark
clearly what is still unresolved, and let the records carry the weight.