Document
1 – Ontario Human Rights Commission Deputation
Ontario
Human Commission ontarienne
Rights
Commission des droits de la personne 
Deputation by Renu Mandhane, Chief Commissioner
Ontario Human Rights Commission
to the Ottawa Police Services Board
On the OPS Traffic Stop Data Report Deputation to OPSB
November 28, 2016
Check against delivery
Introduction
·
Thank you for the
opportunity to talk about the OPS’s Traffic Stop Race Data Collection Project.
·
My
deputation will be available online this afternoon, and the Ontario Human
Rights Commission’s full report with our analysis of the findings will be
available on our website tomorrow.
·
This
project was based on a 2012 settlement between the Ottawa Police Services Board
and the Commission, after Chad Aiken, a young Black man, filed a human rights
complaint alleging racial profiling.
·
As
part of the settlement, the OPS agreed that its officers would collect
race-based data on traffic stops for two years beginning in 2013.
·
The
OPS fully complied with the settlement and even went beyond what was required
in its data collection efforts, resulting in a comprehensive police data
collection initiative.
·
But
collecting data is just one part of the story – and it is secondary to the
devastating personal experiences of people like Chad Aiken whose rights are
often ignored, and who face great personal risk, all because of the colour of
their skin or their religion.
·
Racial profiling can cause trauma and lasting damage…
o
There
is no pleasure in simple tasks like driving to the corner store or walking down
the street when you know there is a good chance that you will be pulled over or
stopped, even if you have done nothing wrong.
o
There
is a pervasive fear and anxiety that takes hold when police look at you with
suspicion – again even if you have done nothing wrong.
o
And
you are hesitant to challenge the way you are being treated, or even to come
forward to report crimes, because police hold the power in your interaction.
·
All
too often when people like Mr. Aiken come forward to speak about racial
discrimination, they are dismissed as being overly sensitive or not having
enough proof that their experience is systemic – the “a few bad apples”
defence.
·
This
quick dismissal or denial of the lived experience of racialized and Indigenous
people has resulted in a renewed focus on human rights data collection as the
means to prove that “racism is real.”
·
That
is why it is so disappointing to the Commission and racialized communities,
when institutions continue to deny the existence of systemic racism in the face
of clear quantitative data – data that supports the qualitative data like Mr.
Aiken’s personal experience.
Results suggest racial
profiling
·
And
that’s why we are disappointed by recent comments that the OPS data does not
“prove” racial profiling.
·
Especially
when considered together with the personal accounts that led to the data being
collected in the first place, the findings are alarming, are entirely
consistent with racial profiling, and cannot and should not be easily explained
away.
·
The
researchers found that Black and Middle Eastern people experienced
disproportionately high incidences of traffic stops, just as Mr. Aiken alleged
in his human rights application.
·
Black
drivers were stopped 2.3 times more than you would expect based on their
driving population, and Middle Eastern drivers were stopped 3.3 times more
often.
·
In
fact, even “Middle Eastern” female drivers were stopped almost three times more
than representation in the driving population.
·
This
was the highest disproportion of any of the women included in the review.
·
Young
male Black drivers aged 16-24, were stopped 8.3 times more than would be
expected based on their driving population.
·
And
young male Middle Eastern drivers were stopped 12 times more.
·
Another
concern is the result of the traffic stops of Black, Indigenous, Middle Eastern
and other racialized drivers.
·
The
researchers concluded that “there was a greater propensity that these four
racialized minority groups were traffic-stopped for nothing serious enough to
be warned or charged, when compared with the White group.”
·
We
see this as another indicator that systemic racial profiling may be at play.
Does the data “prove”
racial profiling?
·
The
OPS and others have asserted that the researchers’ findings do not “prove”
racial profiling.
·
However,
the research was not designed to prove causation, nor could quantitative
research on its own generally prove that systemic racism is the cause of
disparities.
·
But
the significant degree of disproportions uncovered by the data – especially
when combined with the accounts of Mr. Aiken and many other racialized people –
cannot be explained away by non-discriminatory factors alone.
·
The
results from the OPS data collection project must be interpreted in the context
of the historical relationship between police and racialized and Indigenous
communities in Ottawa and in Canada more generally.
·
In
many recent cases, courts and tribunals have found racial profiling to be
behind seemingly neutral police interactions with racialized and Indigenous
peoples.
·
They
have accepted that racial profiling can rarely be identified by direct
evidence, and will more often be established by circumstantial evidence and
inference.
·
The
high disproportionalities found in this report are just the kind of strong
circumstantial evidence decision-makers are talking about when looking at
racial profiling.
What does “consistent with
systemic racial profiling” mean?
·
In some cases, the
racial disproportionality in traffic stops could be explained by individual
officer bias, whether implicit or explicit.
·
Implicit
officer bias stems from unconscious stereotypes, and explicit bias arises from
conscious stereotypes.
·
Courts
and tribunals have recognized that racial stereotyping will usually be the
result of subtle unconscious beliefs, biases and prejudices.
·
Less
well understood is that racial profiling often arises from systemic or
institutionalized discrimination.
·
The
results are more likely explained by systemic racial profiling.
·
When
the Commission talks about systemic racial profiling, we are talking about
policies and practices, and organizational culture that are part of the social
or administrative structure of an organization.
·
These
may appear neutral, but may result in situations where racialized or Indigenous
peoples tend to be singled out for greater scrutiny.
·
These
policies or practices may be the product of unconscious racial biases.
·
While
these practices may not have been designed to specifically target
particular racialized groups, the data shows that this was the outcome.
·
Examples
where bias could be at play include routine or “normal” policing practices,
such as officer deployment, intelligence gathering activities, and stopping people
who are perceived to be “out of place” in a neighbourhood.
·
For
example, suggestions that the deployment of more officers is needed in
“highcrime” areas or that residents in priority neighbourhoods want police to
be active and visible cannot justify stop practices that have a disparate impact
on racialized people.
·
In
short, when communities ask you to be present in their neighbourhoods, this
cannot result in over-broad policing of innocent people, and it cannot lead to
fishing expeditions.
·
In
fact, a police deployment strategy that leads to greater traffic stops for
racialized people in “high crime” areas is likely itself be a form of systemic
racial profiling.
·
Greater
numbers of traffic patrols in racialized neighbourhoods means that racialized
people are more likely to be targeted for minor offences, such as traffic
offences, compared to White people in other neighbourhoods who may be
committing the same offences.
·
These
actions, especially when repeated regularly, can have a disturbing impact on
the dignity of racialized people – as we saw with Mr. Aiken’s experience.
·
We
simply cannot cause some of the most marginalized people in our society to live
in fear and hopelessness.
Misconceptions about
racial profiling, systemic racism
·
Our
opinion about the data is based on our deep experience working on the issue of
racial profiling in policing for more than decade.
·
Throughout
this time, there have been many misunderstandings about what racial profiling
actually means.
·
When
we talk about “systemic racial profiling,” police leaders sometimes think we
are calling police officers racist.
·
We
are not.
·
The
Commission defines racial profiling as any action undertaken for reasons of
safety, security or public protection that relies on stereotypes about race,
colour, ethnicity, ancestry, religion or place of origin rather than on
reasonable suspicion, to single out an individual for greater scrutiny or
different treatment.
·
Racial
profiling is a particularly damaging form of racial discrimination; and it
undermines the relationship between police and racialized and Indigenous
individuals, families and communities – just as Mr. Aiken’s trust was
undermined.
·
Lack
of trust in policing has negative implications for the justice system,
including the risk of people not reporting crime and not cooperating with
police.
·
In
short, racial profiling has a huge potential to undermine public safety.
Strategic planning
·
As
part of our own strategic planning process, the OHRC recently consulted nearly
300 individuals representing more than 80 community and advocacy groups across
Ontario, independent officers of the legislature and other stakeholders.
·
Throughout
this process, we consistently heard concerns about systemic discrimination in
policing, especially related to African Canadians, Muslim and Arab Canadians,
other racialized communities, Indigenous peoples, and people with mental health
disabilities.
·
So
we are making work related to removing systemic discrimination in the criminal
justice sector one of our priorities.
Others are also concerned
about racial profiling: U.N.
·
And
we’re not the only organization that is concerned about racial profiling in
policing and the criminal justice system in general.
·
I
note that the African Canadian Legal Clinic is also before you today to speak
about systemic racism in policing.
·
And
the United Nations Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, who
visited Ottawa last month, found “clear evidence that racial profiling is
endemic in the strategies and practices used by law enforcement.”
·
The
working group urged the Government to “develop and implement an African
Canadian Justice Strategy to address the anti-Black racism and discrimination
within the criminal justice system.”
Tulloch review
·
The
Ontario government is also concerned about what’s happening in our communities,
and has appointed Justice Tulloch of the Court of Appeal for Ontario to review
the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, Special Investigations
Unit and the Ontario Civilian Police Commission.
·
The
government’s appointment of Justice Tulloch was called in part in response to
growing concerns about the increasingly strained relationship between police
and community.
·
Concerns
that are being heard loud and clear in Ottawa in light of recent high-profile
incidents.
Need for action now
·
Although
other decision-makers are at various stages in their work on systemic racial
profiling, there is some work that the Ottawa Police Service needs to do now.
·
The
results of the data report highlight the need for all police services across
Ontario, including the OPS, to put in place meaningful and effective measures
to prevent and eliminate all forms of racial profiling.
·
And
the OPS needs to step up and acknowledge that something is wrong, and commit to
doing something about it.
·
Positive
change must come from the police themselves, from the chief and board on down.
·
Police
chiefs and boards must…
o
Acknowledge
systemic discrimination in policing
o
Collect
data to identify the many circumstances where racial profiling occurs
o
Enact
policies and procedures to eliminate discrimination
o
Encourage
independent monitoring and accountability
o
And
discipline officers who engage in discrimination.
·
These
are the steps I’m urging you to take today.
·
I
encourage you to re-conceptualize your idea of community policing.
·
Holding
meetings is not enough – you also need ongoing, frequent and meaningful
dialogue between officers specifically attached to specific areas and the
residents who live in them.
·
Ideally,
these officers would reflect the communities they serve.
·
This
will require targeted recruitment of racialized and Indigenous officers.
·
In
this way, crime prevention would be centered around partnerships with the
community and shared goals.
·
While
community consultation is important, it does not replace actively reassessing
core policing activities that result in the kind of disproportions we see in
the data report.
·
So
beyond the steps the OPS is proposing, it needs to dig deeper to examine itself
and reassess its activities.
·
For
the required systemic change to happen, it is important that police services
don’t focus their efforts on denying racial profiling and managing community
expectations.
·
Instead,
they must publicly commit to changing their practices, developing a human
rights organization change plan, and then doing the hard work required to make
that happen.
Accountability throughout
the system
·
Police
services can only succeed if they have the support and the trust of the
communities they serve.
·
The
Data Collection Project provides evidence of inequitable practices that are
likely eroding that trust.
·
As
members of the Ottawa Police Services Board, you are in the position to put a
vision in place for respecting human rights – and to hold officers accountable
when they are not respected.
·
At
the board level, I call on you to mandate human rights-based data collection,
like the traffic stop data, to measure and evaluate the extent to which the OPS
is meeting its human rights obligations.
·
It
is critical for the Board to set up an independent monitoring committee to look
at the OPS’s compliance with its policy on racial profiling, and evaluate the
OPS’s progress as a measure over time.
·
I
call on you to take corrective action to address systemic discrimination.
·
Pursuing
accountability is not about placing blame.
·
Powerful
institutions must accept responsibility when things go wrong – this is a key
way to rebuild trust and make our communities safer.
Accountability – Sjaarda
·
I’m
not asking for anything new here.
·
The
OPS has a history as a leader in collecting human rights-based data to build
accountability.
·
For
example, also on the agenda today is discussion of data collected as part a
human rights settlement relating to gender equity in the service.
·
We
were pleased to see that the OPS has conducted a gender audit which reaffirmed
that it has work to do to improve women’s equality in the OPS and identified
areas of particular concern.
·
Gender
audits and similar initiatives allow organizations to determine if there are
systemic barriers affecting Code-protected groups and to identify what
they are.
·
Perhaps
what we are most pleased about is how the OPS has acknowledged that it has
systemic issues to address to ensure gender equality.
·
The
OPS has met the requirements of the first deadline in the Minutes of
Settlement, and has made a clear commitment to fulfill the remaining
requirements.
·
We
call on the OPS to take the same steps in dealing with the Traffic Stop Data
Report.
·
We
urge you to look beyond the numbers to the systemic issues that are clearly at
play.
·
We
urge you to acknowledge and be accountable for your policies, procedures, and
operations which are making it possible for racial profiling to happen.
·
And
we urge you to look at your organizational culture to make sure it is a culture
of inclusion, not one of inadvertent exclusion.
·
The
Commission is actively monitoring the steps that the Ottawa Police Service is
taking to deal with the issues of racial profiling.
·
As
always, we would be happy to provide strategic advice to help you meet your
legal obligation to provide non-discriminatory police services to the diverse
community you serve.
·
It’s
the least we can do for Chad Aiken and everyone else who has not enjoyed the
same rights that all Ontarians are entitled to.
·
Thank
you.
Document 2 – African Canadian Legal Clinic
Deputation
Deputation
to the Ottawa Police Service Board
November
28, 2016
Established in 1994, the
African Canadian Legal Clinic (“ACLC”) is a community-based
not-for-profit organization with a mandate to combat anti-Black racism in
Ontario. The ACLC strongly denounces the researchers’ reluctance to conclude
that the Ottawa Police Service (“OPS”) is engaged in Anti-Black racial
profiling – a fact which is borne out in the findings of the Traffic Stop Race
Collection Data Collection Project (“TSRDCP”)
Racism, and in particular
anti-Black racism, is one of the many barriers to substantive equality in
Canadian society. Anti-Black racism is any conscious or unconscious feelings,
attitudes, and behaviours, that subject African
Canadians to greater scrutiny, negative treatment, and harassment based on
race-based stereotypes and prejudices. One of the most insidious practices of
anti-Black racism is racial profiling. Racial profiling occurs when police
officers use race as a marker of distinction in the exercise of their statutory
discretion. As a consequence, Black communities are over-policed and their
members over-charged, prosecuted, convicted and incarcerated because of
stereotypical and prejudicial enforcement strategies.
Racial profiling, it is
submitted, is an investigate tool utilized by the OPS in its dealings with
Black Ottawans. This conclusion is
consistent with the TSRDCP, despite the researchers’ reluctance to determine
causality based on the data. It is intellectual dishonesty to draw any other
conclusion. The ACLC submits that the data highlights that the OPS is engaged
in anti-Black racial profiling. The time for pedantic academic debates on the
contours of racial profiling must come to an end. Furthermore, scholars and
academicians do not have a monopoly on defining racial profiling. Anti-Black
racism, particularly racial profiling, is an experiential phenomenon, thus it
is the observations and perceptions of the targeted group that must be tabulated
and analyzed. The TSRCDP researchers, however, relied on the observations and
perceptions of the police. Police officers in uniform do not experience racial
profiling. They do, however, mete it out at alarming rates. It is time for a
methodological shift. Anti-Black racial profiling by the OPS is a reality.
It is submitted that the
researchers’ reluctance to conclude this from the data does not erase this
evil; instead it minimizes and trivializes it. Arguably, the researchers’
reluctance may actually serve to bolster and justify racial profiling. The OPS
can now tout that this is proof that its officers engage in bias-neutral
policing. This is simply not the case. Anti-Black racial profiling has existed
in Ottawa for decades a fact which is borne out in the data. There is also
ample anecdotal and qualitative evidence to substantiate same. Mr. Chad Aiken’s
case merely shone light on a practice that existed in the dark and almost
exclusively in ‘darker’ communities.
The researchers used the
“commute-to-work” population as the benchmark for measuring incidences of
traffic stops, despite the obvious under-representation of Black Ottawans in the labour force. What is noteworthy
is the fact that even with this questionable benchmark, the data still
disclosed disproportionately higher incidences of traffic stops among
racialized Ottawans, particularly Black drivers. One can only imagine what a
true benchmark, particularly one that included pedestrian stops would reveal.
Racial profiling is not
just experienced by Black motorists, as Blacks in any form of movement are
subject to race-based policing. Stacy Bonds, a Black woman, who was savagely
beaten and strip searched in front of male Ottawa police officers is a case in
point. Ms. Bonds was merely standing up in the market district in downtown
Ottawa when she was detained and questioned for, of all things, being
intoxicated. When she dared to ask why she was being detained and questioned,
she was arrested and brought to the police station where she was beaten and
humiliated; all of which was caught on camera. And to further dehumanize her,
she was charged with assaulting a peace officer - a charge that was ultimately
thrown out by the court. Ms. Bonds’ story is not remarkable, it is a frequent
occurrence.
In conclusion, the ACLC
would submit that the researchers’ reluctance to conclude that the data points
to racial profiling sets a very dangerous precedent. It absolves a Police
Service that, according to the researchers’ own data, disproportionately stops
Black motorists, and in many cases with no final action. Essentially, a
disproportionate amount of Black motorists are stopped based on police
suspicion, and when that suspicion bears no fruit they are ‘let go’ without any
final action – i.e. traffic tickets, Criminal Code charges, etc. If the
data is not conclusive proof of racial profiling by the OPS, then the
researchers’ are either inept, or worse ‘milking’ this issue to secure further
opportunities to research and consult on their recommendations. Only when the
OPS acknowledge that its officers engage in anti-Black policing will there be
any meaningful changes.
Recommendations
- The
ACLC would recommend that the OPS Board, despite the researchers’
insistence, conclude from the data there is enough evidence that
anti-Black racial profiling is a reality within the OPS.
- Secondly,
that the OPS engage in a genuine and extensive study that includes
pedestrian stops.
- Thirdly,
it is recommended that the OPS undertake to institute mandatory anti-Black
racism training to all front line police officers.
- Fourth,
it is recommended that the OPS engage in a transparent disciplinary
process that aims to ameliorate the obvious anti-Black racial profiling
within its ranks.
And
lastly, institute meaningful sanctions that, inter alia, remove officers
engaged in racial profiling off the front lines until they have achieved the
requisite cultural competency required to police Blacks and the neighbourhoods that many of them reside
in.
