Yes, I would see that as protected elsewhere, as for example, in the provisions between 265 and 268, which deal with assault. It would depend on the manner in which an individual is seeking to prevent the priest from administering those rights. If it's a physical blocking of the path or if there is any unwanted touching, that would be an assault. If there is a disruptive event that happens in a hospital hallway, that would be dealt with under section 175 of the Criminal Code. There are numerous provisions in the Criminal Code that would afford and offer that protection to an individual seeking to provide last rites.
If an individual was seeking to engage in some sort of sacred ceremony and they're not determined to be somebody who's an officiant under this provision, then they are not protected. One of the concerns is that the provision is simply under-inclusive. As was suggested, we would not be opposed to a provision that protects people engaged in religious acts and religious practices, but to protect specific individuals forces the court into a fact-finding expedition that requires minority religious practices to endlessly engage in an exercise of determining whether or not they count. What I would suggest that would be appropriate is a provision that allows for the fact that they already count.