Under Occupation: Toronto G20 Operation

1. Follow Up Information Under Occupation: Toronto G20 Operation

2. We Want Answers..... • In the aftermath of the Toronto Summit there were people demanding answers • Questions arose about the Public Works Protection Act including how it affected security, how it was passed, and how information about it was presented to the public • Inquiries into the police conduct during the Summit were conducted by Toronto Police Services and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association • Both inquiries published their findings and recommendations though to date there has been little in the way of punishments handed out to police officers

3. Public Works Protection Act • The Public Works Protection Act was originally passed in 1939 at the outbreak of World War II • It is mostly used to conduct searches of people entering government buildings and courthouses • It outlines what is considered a Public Work, outlines who is given authority/power to protect those works, and what they may do to enforce protection

4. Public Works Protection Act • Definitions • 1.In this Act, • “guard” means a guard appointed under this Act; (“gardien”) • “public work” includes, • (a) any railway, canal, highway, bridge, power works including all property used for the generation, transformation, transmission, distribution or supply of hydraulic or electrical power, gas works, water works, public utility or other work, owned, operated or carried on by the Government of Ontario or by any board or commission thereof, or by any municipal corporation, public utility commission or by private enterprises, • (b) any provincial and any municipal public building, and • (c) any other building, place or work designated a public work by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. (“ouvrage public”) R.S.O. 1990, c. P.55, s. 1. It was using Subsection C that the police had the Convention Centre deemed a public work to allow the security greater powers

5. Public Works Protection Act • Powers of guard or peace officer • 3.A guard or peace officer, • (a) may require any person entering or attempting to enter any public work or any approach thereto to furnish his or her name and address, to identify himself or herself and to state the purpose for which he or she desires to enter the public work, in writing or otherwise; • (b) may search, without warrant, any person entering or attempting to enter a public work or a vehicle in the charge or under the control of any such person or which has recently been or is suspected of having been in the charge or under the control of any such person or in which any such person is a passenger; and • (c) may refuse permission to any person to enter a public work and use such force as is necessary to prevent any such person from so entering. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.55, s. 3. • Arrest • (2)A guard or peace officer may arrest, without warrant, any person who neglects or refuses to comply with a request or direction of a guard or peace officer, or who is found upon or attempting to enter a public work without lawful authority. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.55, s. 5.

6. Regulation 233/10 • Regulation made on June 14th and published on e-Laws this designated the streets and sidewalks inside the security perimeter • The public was not notified of the expansion of police powers until just before the start of the Summit • The situation was made worse by the fact that the Chief of the Toronto Police Services mistakenly informed the public via the media that the new Regulation gave police the authority to search and demand identification from anyone found within five metres of the security fence • This was enforced by the police officers and the error was not corrected until June 29th (after the Summit was over) when the Chief conceded that the “five metre rule” never existed • There were also reports of police officers using the authority of the PWPA to search people far away from the security fence

7. Ramifications • Members of the public were left confused and misinformed about some of their most fundamental legal rights • Including the right to be free from arbitrary detention and unreasonable search and seizure • This may also have served to dissuade some people from exercising their democratic right to protest outside the convention centre • Whether all this was done intentionally or not will never be known

8. Toronto Police ServicesAfter Action Review • Introduction by Chief William Blair • On June 29, 2010, I announced that a report would be prepared on the actions of the Toronto Police Service during the G20 Summit, focusing on what we did and how we did it. I felt it was essential we take a comprehensive look at what went well and what did not. • We are fully accountable to the people of Toronto. Whatever other reviews are underway, and we are cooperating fully with all of them, we owe it to the people we are sworn to serve and protect to take a hard look at ourselves. There are many questions about Summit events in Toronto last June. The people of this city are entitled to ask tough questions, and they have. We must do our best to answer those questions. • I must take this opportunity to commend the men and women who came together, from 26 police agencies, with a fraction of the normal planning time, to face challenges unprecedented in Toronto’s history. The overwhelming majority of them responded magnificently, very often facing danger and extreme provocation. I am proud of them.

9. Breach of the Peace: Public Hearings • ON NOVEMBER 10th, 11th and 12th, 2010, the National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) invited members of the public to participate in public hearings regarding police action during the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto. • The event, titled A Breach of the Peace: G20 Summit: Accountability in Policing and Governance consisted of two days ofhearings in Toronto and a single day of hearings in Montreal. • Over the three days of hearings, NUPGE and the CCLA heard from over 60 members of the public. • This group consisted of people who had witnessed a range of policing incidents during the G20 Summit and people who were directly affected by G20 security, including numerous individuals who had been unlawfully detained, searched and arrested. Several lawyers and academics also participated in the hearings and offered commentary on the events of the G20 from a legal and/or policy perspective.

10. Prisoner Processing Centre PlansAccording to the AAR • Designed to hold 500 people at any given time but could accommodate 750 if necessary • 51 ‘bull pens’ and 25 individual cells used for people who may require segregation from others • Would be operated for the most part by court officers (transportation and management experience) • Differences in procedures between the court officers and the police (booking, telephones, access to lawyers) led to lengthy delays

11. Prisoner Processing Centre FindingsAccording to the AAR • Of the 1118 people arrested 885 were taken to the PPC • Flex-cuffs put on prisoners were supposed to be removed by court officers but did not always occur due to shortages of steel cuffs • Prisoner time of entry was not always recorded properly due to high volume resulting in people being detained for longer hours than intended (more than 24 hrs) • “Attempts were made to ensure that prisoners were given reasonable use of the telephone and the opportunity to speak to legal counsel.” • Delays in checking in and speaking to the Officer in Charge delayed this

12. Prisoner Processing Centre FindingsAccording to the AAR • 12 telephone booths were available and 4 duty counsel lawyers were on site from 10 am to 10 pm • Female, male and youth prisoners were placed in separate bullpens • There were a few instances where youths were accidentally placed in cells with adults • Prisoners were given food and water at all stages of their detention. • The large volume of prisoners made it difficult to record each prisoner’s feeding • Protests that occurred in front of the PPC on Sunday delayed the release of some prisoners as the facility was placed in a ‘hold and secure’

13. Prisoner Processing CentreAccording to the BOP • Many of the Breach of the Peace hearing participants reported inappropriate and, in some cases, unsafe conditions of confinement at the temporary detention centre: • Overcrowded cages with concrete floors • Chain link walls and limited toilet facilities • Many arrestees had plastic wrist ties on during detention • Observed a lack of organization and substantial backlogs in the processing and release of arrestees • Food and water were reportedly scarce • In many cases people were not able to use a phone • Lawyers had trouble getting access to clients

14. Prisoner Processing CentreAccording to the BOP • Report of denied medical attention • “One of the people in our case was a diabetic. We literally begged for medical attention for him for hours, which was refused until he passed out, at which point he was given medical attention, which meant that he was taken out of the cage, given what I assume was insulin and a little bit of juice, and then brought immediately into the cage” • Concerns about how youth were treated • “They searched me as a level 3 security risk, which was the term that they called it, which meant that I would be naked on either the bottom or on top at all times...I was 17 years old and I was searched by two males officers and duty counsel was completely disgusted by that”

15. Prisoner Processing Centre • Many of those detained in the Eastern Avenue facility were not charged with criminal offences • They were deprived of their constitutional rights and in some cases, subjected to degrading and dehumanizing comments and treatment and privacy violations

16. Conclusions and Recommendations • As of May 1, 2011 there have been 286 complaints made to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director regarding conduct and services of police during the Summit • 90 of those have been referred to the Professional Standards Unit • 18 complaints have been made directly to the Toronto Police Service seeking financial compensation

17. Conclusions • The TPS formed a g20 PRS Investigative Team to conduct a proactive, investigative review of G20 Summit materials (video and photographs) • Attempting to determine if officers made any attempt to disguise their identity, used unnecessary force or seriously breeched any rules/proceedures • Results of investigation • 108 officers have received disciplinary action (for removal of identification) under the Police Services Act • One officer was charged under the Criminal Code for Assault with a Weapon

18. Conclusions • Only 317 people were charged with summit-related criminal offences. • And of those, 187 have seen their charges withdrawn, stayed or dismissed, according to statistics released by the Ontario attorney general’s ministry. – ALMOST 60% • Just 24 pleaded guilty.