In response to Elspeth Weisberg’s critique of Sophia Cannonier, published in The Royal Gazette on March 22, 2025, we would like to offer a broader perspective on the concerns raised regarding Ms Cannonier and her family’s defiance of pandemic regulations in July 2021.

We agree with several examples used in Ms Weisberg’s Letter to the Editor to support the idea that, for society to flourish, each of us must make sacrifices, and likewise concur that governments have a role in enacting laws to protect the public. We also appreciate that, during the height of the Covid-19 crisis, fear and uncertainty were widespread. However, it is essential to thoughtfully consider the implications of civil disobedience in such extraordinary times.

The pandemic presented a unique global challenge requiring swift government action. Yet the urgency with which measures were enacted sometimes came at the cost of transparency, public engagement and consistent guidance — and at great potential risk to the wellbeing of the public. At times, policies changed rapidly without clear explanations or supporting evidence. This left many citizens unsure of what guidance to follow and raised legitimate concerns about how best to protect both public health and civil liberties.

Civil disobedience, when carried out thoughtfully and peacefully, has long played a crucial role in challenging governance and defending rights. While we are not equating Sophia Cannonier’s defiance with the life-risking actions of historical icons such as Harriet Tubman or the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr, her resistance reflects a spirit of principled dissent that has shaped progress in democratic societies. Throughout history, individuals have taken bold stands against laws or policies they believed to be unjust — not out of defiance for its own sake, but out of a commitment to justice and truth.

In this light, labelling Ms Cannonier’s actions as simply “reckless” risks overlooking the courage it can take to question authority in times of widespread fear. Her actions were based on credible laboratory results, decades of experience as a wellness practitioner, and her sincere belief that what she was doing was in the best interest of her family and community. Unlike reckless behaviour that places others in clear and immediate danger, her defiance was rooted in informed judgment and expressed peacefully.

Ms Weisberg’s analogy, equating Ms Cannonier’s defiance to speeding, reduces the complexity of civil disobedience during a public health emergency by using an overly simplistic comparison. While reckless driving endangers others directly, civil disobedience in this context involved nuanced, ethical considerations around evolving science, personal responsibility and constitutional freedoms.

To be clear, we recognise the importance of co-operation during public health crises. However, democratic societies are strengthened, not weakened, by individuals who voice concerns and challenge policies that may infringe on basic rights. The communal nature of a pandemic does not eliminate the need for transparency, accountability and open debate.

Sophia Cannonier’s defiance should not be seen as an affront to society but as an opportunity to reflect on how we balance urgent public health measures with the protection of civil liberties. Moving forward, it is essential that we develop better emergency-response frameworks that protect public wellbeing while upholding democratic principles. This means ensuring that laws enacted in crises are both effective and just — and that they invite scrutiny, not silence.

Respecting individual autonomy while protecting community health is not mutually exclusive; it is the hallmark of democracy, and mature and effective leadership.

• Eugene Dean is a trustee of the Collective Action Solidarity Trust, which was formed out of concern that Bermuda’s dominant authorities are ill-equipped to represent the broad concerns of the “silent majority” for national unity and solidarity