The security excesses of the G20 summit in Toronto last summer are still an ongoing concern for the 1,000 peaceful protesters and bystanders who were arrested, handcuffed and held in steel cages.
For many other Canadians, though, the summit’s protests and policing tactics became an unfortunate historical footnote not long after the security fences came down.
Last week, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association made a compelling case before a Commons committee that the security and policing concerns raised during the summit are far from over. The group urged that we hold a public inquiry to learn from the many mistakes, lest we repeat them. Among the concerns:
Laws were changed without public input; the public was misinformed about broadened police powers; unconstitutional searches occurred across the city; excessive force was used to disperse peaceful protesters; and, ultimately, more than 1,000 people were arrested, held in an overcrowded detention centre and not allowed to call their family or a lawyer. More than 900 of them had not done anything wrong and were subsequently released without charge.
As CCLA general counsel Nathalie Des Rosiers told the committee: “Either we will emerge (from the G20 weekend) with stronger democratic institutions . . . and better policing or we will have tolerated mass violations of civil liberties with callous indifference.”
So far, Ottawa and Queen’s Park have taken the latter course. Rather than calling a broad public inquiry, they point to various and sundry mini-reviews already underway. Each will shed light on a certain aspect of the G20 weekend, but none has the necessary mandate to link all the political and police decisions or the power to compel evidence under oath.
Certainly, the first two days of public hearings on the G8/G20 summits do not provide confidence that the Commons public safety committee will be the vehicle to get to the bottom of this affair. Indeed, with every dodge and weave at the committee last week, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews proved yet again why a public inquiry is needed. For example, he assured the MPs that there were “compelling” reasons to locate the G8 and G20 summits in Muskoka and Toronto, respectively, but he was unable to recall those reasons.
Government advisers and a top RCMP official were scarcely more helpful. When questioned about the mass arrests or the conditions in the detention centre, the answer was, invariably, that someone else was responsible for that.
It will take a public inquiry to follow the decision-making trail and find the answers.
An editorial from the Toronto Star