Alex Neve

The debate about security and human rights is not just about insidious practices like extraordinary rendition and infamous prison camps like Guantánamo Bay.  It is not only about the tension between counter-terrorism laws and practices on the one hand and human rights protection on the other.  In fact, governments have used arguments about security as a justification or even a pretext for human rights violations in a multitude of different contexts long predating September 11^th and having nothing to do with terrorist cells and suicide bombings, for decades.

That has come into sharp focus in Canada in the aftermath of the many human rights violations that took place as part of the police operation meant to ensure the security of the recent G20 Summit in Toronto.  On the one hand, thousands of ordinary citizens are crying foul – having experienced or witnessed harsh police tactics, a dramatic loss of civil liberties, and unparalleled mass arrests.  On the other hand, police, politicians and various pundits argue that given the acts of vandalism and other violence they were faced with alongside and even intermingled with the demonstrations and other public events taking place in the city, they did the best they could.  They make no apologies.

The numbers are staggering.  We are told that the combined security costs for the initial meeting of G8 leaders north of Toronto, followed by the G20 gathering of 20 world leaders and invited guests from six other nations, exceeded $1 billion.  It is almost inconceivable to imagine how costs could have spiraled to that level.  20,000 security personnel were deployed between the two summits – a number that easily surpasses the size of the armed forces of many countries around the world.  The scale of the operation, the resources brought to bear and the weapons and technology put at the disposal of these many thousands of police were unprecedented.

All of this yet the outcome was dismal both with respect to security and human rights protection.

From a human rights perspective it was already very worrying in the lead up to the Summit.  The many days of talk about the police build-up; the rhetoric and warnings from senior police and government officials, sometimes bordering on fearmongering; and eventually the inescapable, overwhelming police presence on practically every street corner in downtown Toronto cast a marked chill over the demonstrations and other public events scheduled throughout the days of the Summit.  Many people who would have otherwise wished to come out and take part, chose instead to stay away – intimidated not by the possibility of a run-in with a rock-lobbing anarchist but rather of the police who were arguably there to keep them safe.

We saw this play out even at our own Amnesty International Annual General Meeting, held in Toronto the same weekend to make it easy for human rights activists from all corners of the country to take part in the various popular events being organized to coincide with the Summit.  But on Saturday afternoon, when thousands of peaceful protesters took to the streets of Toronto to share their concerns and messages for G20 leaders, many of our own activists opted to stay at the meeting site, deterred by the menacing police presence they saw at every intersection.  A disconcerting blow for such fundamental human rights as the freedoms of expression and assembly.

Then there is the worrying puzzle of the policing strategy that followed.  Mid-afternoon on Saturday, a relatively small number of vandals appeared from the midst of the throngs involved in peaceful protest and begin committing a range of criminal acts – notably damage to private property and police vehicles.  But inexplicably the police strategy was to sit back and leave the vandals undeterred for over an hour.  There has yet to be a convincing explanation for the police inaction.

And then things swung to the other extreme.  For the rest of the day on Saturday and continuing through Sunday, police rounded up dozens, then hundreds and ultimately over 1,000 individuals, sometimes more than 100 at a time.  Eyewitnesses and personal testimonies make it clear that the overwhelming majority of those arrested were not involved in anything criminal but were in fact legitimately protesting or were simply passing-by or watching.  Some were journalists reporting on the events.  It is the largest number of individuals arrested in connection with a single event in Canadian history.   And almost all, it would appear, should not have been arrested at all.

Add to this a growing number of reports of people who allege that they were beaten, harassed or threatened by police officers when they were arrested.  Then add to this the descriptions detainees have provided of harsh, overcrowded detention conditions.  Add further the troubling legal framework used by police in some of the arrests – relying on a secretive designation by the Ontario provincial government of the summit security zone under the Public Works Protection Act.  The designation gave police wider powers of arrest but we now know that the police appear to have misstated just how wide those powers really were.

It all adds up to a serious of deeply disturbing questions; questions that absolutely must be answered.

That is why Amnesty International, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, federal opposition parties and thousands upon thousands of Canadians have called on the federal and provincial governments to launch an independent review or public inquiry – to examine what went wrong, provide accountability for those whose rights were violated and learn lessons for the future.

We have yet to hear any response from the federal government.  They hosted the event.  They chose the location, Toronto; and the venue, a convention centre right in the heart of the downtown core.  But they seem content to leave provincial, municipal and policing officials alone on the hook when it comes to answering questions about how security was handled.

The Ontario government quickly and unequivocally indicated that they do not intend to convene an inquiry and have yet to back down from that rash decision.

Meanwhile, though, a number of assorted review processes have been announced by others.  The Toronto police are carrying out their own internal review – neither public nor independent.  The Toronto Police Services Board has launched an independent review of the oversight, governance, coordination and transparency of the security operation.  They will not be looking into specific concerns about police tactics or individual instances of arrest and detention.  And most recently there is news that the Ontario Ombudsman is carrying out a review looking at the use of the Public Works Protection Act.

All of these reviews are commendable.  And there may yet be more to come.  But it leaves us with the prospect of a number of disconnected review processes, each looking at a specific and limited piece of the security operation.  They may compete with or even contradict each other.  Some will be independent others not.  Some will be open to the public others not.  And there will almost certainly be key players whose actions are not at all examined through an independent process that reports to the public.  Among others, for instance, no one is looking into the role played by federal government officials, including the initial decision taken as to location and venue.

If you have not yet added your voice to the many thousands of Canadians clamoring for an independent review, do so now.

And do continue to find ways to press for action on the many human rights, environmental and other concerns that were drowned out by the focus on vandalism and police abuses.  G20 leaders should have heard from us about a range of crucial global problems. We cannot let them off the hook.

For forty-eight hours at the end of June, security trumped human rights on the streets of Toronto.  It is only through a meaningful independent review process that we can ensure that does not happen again.

Alex Neve is a lawyer, with a Masters Degree in International Human Rights Law from the University of Essex in the United Kingdom. He has served as Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada’s English branch since 2000. In that role he has carried out numerous human rights research missions throughout Africa and Latin America as well as within Canada.