Judicial inquiry into protester arrests rejected
Police board says review falls outside its mandate and points to existing avenues of oversight
The Hamilton Police Services Board says it does not support a judicial inquiry of police actions during arrests of encampment protesters last year, and that such an inquiry is outside the scope of its mandate.
In a statement released Monday afternoon, the board said it felt compelled to speak out given there has been “much written and questions raised” regarding whether the board will ask for a judicial inquiry.
Calls have been growing for the board or province to launch a judicial inquiry since police arrested six Hamilton Encampment Support Network (HESN) protesters on Nov. 24, at J.C. Beemer Park and Nov. 26 outside the Hamilton police central station. Photos and video of the arrests show a police officer pinning a Black protester down — with his knee on the protester’s neck, says the woman involved, but police called it a “shoulder pin” — and tackling protesters to the ground.
The J.C. Beemer arrests followed protesters breaching a police perimeter.
“The Board is a governance body that does not have investigative powers,” read the board statement. “A Public Inquiry is beyond the Board’s powers and mandate. The ability to establish a Public Inquiry rests with the provincial Lieutenant Governor in Council.”
The statement listed factors relating to the board’s “consideration” of the judicial inquiry issue:
Hamilton police are subject to oversight, “including, but not limited to the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) and the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD) … They are equipped to investigate matters within their respective mandates;”
The matters in question are before the courts;
The police chief has kept the board up-to-date on the J.C. Beemer and central police station incidents; The board’s final point reads: “We need to acknowledge and understand the past, but more importantly, we must spend our time and energy on making a better future. The Board and the Service are committed to effecting change together with the communities we serve.”
“After considering all of these factors, the Board does not support any additional review of these incidents beyond what is currently underway,” the release states.
The Spectator requested comment from HESN and the Hamilton Centre for Civic Inclusion — which had hoped to speak to the board during its Monday meeting — but did not hear back.
In a statement, the Ministry of the Solicitor General said it is not aware of any requests relating to a judicial inquiry.
The Ministry of the Solicitor General advised members of the public with concerns to contact the OIPRD, the arm’s-length oversight agency of the Ministry of the Attorney General that deals with police officer conduct complaints.
“The Ministry of the Solicitor General does not have the authority to direct police in their day-today operations and does not have a mandate to investigate any situation or to direct an investigation by an outside agency,” said spokesperson Stephen Warner.
The Ministry of the Attorney General said it couldn’t comment as the matter is currently before the courts.
Last week, the SIU dropped its probe into a report of a “serious injury” sustained by a protester during a Nov. 26 arrest, saying it didn’t mean the threshold for “serious.”
The police watchdog investigates police interactions with the public resulting in allegations of serious injury, death or sexual assault.
Protesters and their supporters continue to demand the criminal charges against the six people arrested be dropped. Their next court date is Feb. 7.