Presentation by Rev. Neil Wallace. March 2 2002

I want to thank the members of the panel for volunteering to engage in this citizen's review and I want to thank them, as well for listening to my presentation today. I went to Le Breton Flats on November 1 17th 2001, expecting to participate in a peaceful and orderly public demonstration focussing on the G-20 meeting. Having walked in the peaceful march at the Quebec Summit in Quebec City, where some 35,000 people marched without incident and with virtually no police presence, I was very surprised on November 17th with the large number of police decked out in riot gear and with police dogs.

As far as I knew from public announcements, this demonstration and march was a legal demonstration and yet the presence of the police in such numbers with riot gear and with police dogs presumed violence and illegal activity. Realizing full well the responsibility of the police to protect public safety and private property, I feel the numbers of the police and theirnot gear were inappropriate for the occasion. Their presence gave me a feeling almost immediately that public dissent was being "criminalized"

One detail which fostered a sense of fear was the lack of insignia on these riot police. It-was unclear whether they were Ottawa Police, O.P.P or R.C.M.P. I found this disturbing. Every Citizen has a right to know who it is that is protecting him or her, and in the event of inappropriate conduct or behaviour, every citizen has the right to know to which force that police officer is accountable. This was certainly not clear on November 17th

In addition, on that day, it was not clear to me which police officer was in charge. I have a military background and I tend to take note of chain of command and in the case of the police forces on November 17"', this chain of command was not easily discerned. If this was police strategy to protect the squad leaders, then the strategy worked, but this strategy also succeeded in diminishing trust from the very citizens that the police are supposed to serve and protect and to which the police are ultimately accountable.

One incident of police behaviour and police tactics which I witnessed and which I find completely immoral and reprehensible is that of "targeting" protestors or demonstrators. As I was walking in the procession,a young male protestor near me was pulled from the crowd and set-upon by a couple of riot police and a police dog. This young man had done absolutely nothing to warrant this attack. Certainly from my vantage point it appeared random and arbitrary. The Young man managed to free himself and, in fact, a couple of police officers pulled the officer with the police dog back, seemingly calling him to back off and cool down. In his brief statement to the Police Services Board on Monday, November 26th, Chief of Police Vince Bevan said, "This joint security operation was intelligence-lead Information from a variety of sources was used in determining a specific course of action at any given moment. Our "measured response" approach enabled us to react effectively to the situation as it evolved Interventions taken by police officers during the protest were based on reliable information we obtained from several sources. Actions taken were not random and escalated and de-escalated in response to what was happening at the time within the crowds"

I want to register at this point my strongest objections and protest for this kind of policing. As mentioned earlier, I come from a military background, and one thing I learned m the military is that intelligence reports are not always accurate. In crowd situations the risk of mistaken identity and of targetting the wrong people is very high. Not only that, but the danger to innocent bystanders and onlookers is very likely. Even in the wake of the events of September 11th and Canada's subsequent anit-terrorist legislation, this tactic violates fundamental democratic human rights regarding the freedom to public dissent without fear of unprovoked attack by police. The targetting of individuals based on so-called intelligence reports is something we puts all citizens in danger, and certainly creates a climate of fear and mistrust.

I want to repeat today what I said in my presentation to the Police Services Board on November 26il1 that, in my opinion, the actions of the Police on November 17th were provocative rather than preventative. The only provocations which I witnesses that day were on the part of the police and the only violence which I witnessed that day was on the part of the police. As a veteran of many peaceful demonstrations in this city, this is the first time that I have witnessed this kind of behaviour from our Ottawa police force. I agree with many others who believe that on this occasion the police acted inappropriately and that public trust and confidence has been broken.

Let me conclude with a brief summation and some comments about what I would like to see coming out of this Citizen's Review.

1. I would like to see an accountability report of the Ottawa Police through the Polices Services Board with a public acknowledgement that the numbers of police officers, the use of police dogs, and the tactics used on November 17th were excessive and inappropriate for the peaceful demonstration.

2. Since I believe that public demonstrations are to be valued in a free and open democracy, and that public participation, including dissent, should be encouraged and empowered rather than discouraged and even criminalized, I would like to see more open and honest dialogue between individual citizens and community groupsl and the Ottawa Police force and the Police Services Board. There will always be, I am sure, public demonstrations in this City of Ottawa, and in this post 911 world there has to be a will on the part of citizens and members of the police community to ensure that our hard-won rights to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, the right to peaceful dissent without the fear of attack, the right to legal counsel, and other rights, are honoured and maintained. I believe that this Citizen's Review is one small step in this process and I want to thank you for listening to my concerns today.