First United Church Group Submission

Presentation of First United Church, 397 Kent St. Ottawa

Rev. Sharon Moon

Thank you to the panel for creating the space for these stories to be heard, and to all the volunteer citizens who are working behind the scenes to make this possible.

I am a United Church minister, from First United Church in Ottawa where I have been an active community leader for 17 years. I am here with members of my congregation tonight, because we were among the protesters at the peaceful march on Saturday morning, Nov. 17 and we witnessed first hand, police intimidation and violence that appeared unprovoked and was deeply disturbing. Our congregation was also involved in a ministry of hospitality in response to requests from the Housing and Food committee of the GDO, and some of our members are here to speak about that.

My personal story is in the written submission, but to avoid duplication, I have brought with me some of the 30 or more people from our congregation who were involved, which included youth, grandmothers, and grandfathers, even a new born child, and lots of middle aged folk. They will share in telling our story.

I would like to introduce: Kathryn Fournier Chair of our Social Justice Ministry will situate this work in the larger United Church context.

Kathryn Fournier

My name is Kathryn Fournier and I am a member of First United Church. I have been active in United Church and ecumenical work in Canada and internationally for a number of years and have been particularly involved in issues of social and economic justice. It was as part of this work that I, and my two teenaged children took part in the march in Ottawa on Nov.17. I would like to set the context for our involvement in the march – and the involvement of a considerable number of us – by explaining the work that the United Church of Canada has done in the area of globalization and international economic justice.

Let me begin with the definition of globalization that appears in this document Starting with Women’s Lives, which the United Church helped to fund. It explains: Trade Agreements like NAFTA remove trade regulations, thus Corporations can invest or de-invest anywhere, so that they may move to countries with the lowest taxes, lowest wages, lowest labour and environmental standards. Governments are pressured to lower wages, labour and environmental standards in order to attract business and then to reduce their own spending by cutting social programs and privatizing services. The result is that the decisions that affect all of our lives are increasingly being made by corporations.

The United Church of Canada has followed up in this understanding of the important issue of global economic justice with workbooks like this one and the very recent To Seek Justice and Resist Evil: Towards a Global Economy for God’s People which provide resources for people to understand the issues both in their own lives and around the world. The United Church of Canada has also over the years passed a number of resolutions at its national General Council meetings which help to guide its policy and activity in this area. A sampling of its most recent resolutions on this issue include ones dealing with: global partnerships, gender injustice, ethical investment, fairly traded products, debt, structural adjustment programs, re-regulation of transnational corporations and the impact of trade agreements. Each of these resolutions calls for study, action and responsibility on the part of United Church members and provides a forum for the United Church to work more broadly with governments and civil society – as was the case with the Canadian Ecumenical Jubilee Initiative, which was instrumental in getting Finance Minister Paul Martin to change some of his views on forgiveness of debt in the most heavily-indebted countries.

All of this, I hope, clarifies for you that for many of us, the march on Nov.17 was an integral part of ongoing, comprehensive, and well thought-out work on one of the most crucial social and economic issues of our time. We may not all agree with each other, but we have in Canada, I believe, a system which allows for and encourages dialogue—even dissent. Many of us saw our presence on Nov. 17 as an important witness to our convictions-we lose the opportunity to engage all sectors of our society in this important debate at real peril to the very principles of our country.

I’d like to introduce Pat Logan, a member of the First United Church Council, who also attended the march.

Pat Logan

I went to the gathering on Lebreton flats on November 17, 2001, for two reasons: (1) I wanted to educate myself about globalization issues, and (2) I wanted to show by my presence that it is important to question accepted values and to try to find more equitable ways for sharing life on this planet. I had nothing to do with organizing the event and had not been at Quebec City.

The gathering took place far away from the G-20 meetings downtown at a spot used previously to host a papal visit, summer music festivals, and a circus. In fact, the crowd was much like one you would find at those events: parents with babies in strollers, family groups with children, middle-aged people like myself, seniors, people in wheelchairs, and young people deliberately dressed to distinguish themselves as a group and probably to try and alienate middle-aged people like myself. I was with other members of First United Church who rallied under a banner "Proclaiming a radical, passionate living vision of hope" that expressed our commitment to justice, liberty, and an end to oppression. I listened to the speeches from religious, academic, and activist perspectives, the moving testimony from a South American farmer whose village had been deprived of drinking water because water systems had been privatized, and the songs of The Raging Grannies.

It was only when we left the flats to walk up Booth Street that I saw for the first time a large group of riot police massed at Booth and Scott, all in black, with helmets, visors, and shields. I was completely surprised by their presence at a peaceful rally and I couldn't help but be worried, even though we had done nothing but listen to speakers and singers. Their very presence in such numbers and such garb immediately changed the tenor of the event. As we got closer I could see that they were armed with a kind of long, smooth gun that I had never seen before, wore bulging packs on both hips, and were accompanied by large, barking dogs. As we moved along, on the right a dog attacked a young person and got him down on the ground. A seasoned demonstrator beside me said, "Oh, oh-there's trouble; keep moving." That frightened me. We were then forced to walk through a black, forbidding police gauntlet one by one. On my left stood the Reverend Howard Clark who was singing "Amazing Grace" to strengthen us as we had to pass through the police ranks. I had to almost brush against men in shields and visors and carrying guns. Telling myself that I had done nothing wrong nor seen anyone else do anything wrong and that I had nothing to fear, I tried to look into the eyes of the people behind the visors, make a human contact. But I couldn't see anything, nor any badges to identify them. I opened my mouth to join in the singing-I'm a choir member-but no sound came out. At that point I realized how physically traumatized and terrified I was. My terror must have shown on my face, because a man I didn't know threw his arm around me asked me if I was all right. Then two women I did know took me by either hand as we walked along Laurier Avenue. I was shaken by fear and also outrage at the subverted use of an army of heavily armed police against me and other innocents.

Our group from First United was loosely gathered at the rear of the crowd as it made its way along Laurier Avenue and so we could not see why the march suddenly came to a stop. Apparently up ahead more riot police had blocked the route. We could not move forward; the north side of the street was lined by a high wire fence; the south side had concrete walls or highrises. We were penned in. I looked behind me and was shocked to see police with shields and batons running down the slight incline of the street, charging us in formation. They ran right into the crowd, attacking individuals. Ahead of me to my left a young man was thrown to the ground. I had witnessed no provocation, heard no threats, seen no weapons. After about a block I detached myself from the march to return to my car alone because I had no way of knowing what violence the police might do next. It was the most terrifying experience of my life.

The gathering was peaceful and lawful. The audience at a music festival on the flats could well have been more unruly and threatening. Yet we were subjected to violence, terror, and infringement of our rights. Looking back, I believe that it was utterly predictable that the police would inflict violence at this peaceable event, given the disproportionate number of police, their cloak of anonymity, their provocative and menacing attitude, their guns, shields, visors, batons, and dogs, and their mentality. It didn't matter that we had done nothing. They were all psyched up and ready to do battle. All dressed up with nowhere to go.

In September of 2000, I wrote to Chief Vince Bevan to praise the help I had received from the police when our home was broken into. I went to the trouble of finding out the names of all involved and cited their specific role. I commended them for being patient, helpful, and courteous and said, "This is the first time that I have ever been the victim of a crime, and I found the response by our community police service very reassuring. I was impressed." My encounter with police in November 2001 was very different-they were not identifiable individuals with badges but were anonymous, heavily armed, threatening soldiers that looked like Darth Vader. They did not treat me as someone affected by a crime, but-with no supporting evidence-as a criminal.

I was not physically assaulted on the march: I was not bitten by a dog or punched in the face, as others were. However, grievous injury was done. I lost my trust in my police force. I have not been able to look at any police officer with the same respect and confidence that I had before November 17. If my experience is magnified to the community level, it indicates a serious problem for future relations between citizens and their police force. Public trust is the foundation of policing. That trust now has to be won back by a police force that is accountable and open, negotiates in good faith, and respects individual and group rights.

I would like to introduce Mariel Angus, an active member of our congregation.

Mariel Angus

My name is Mariel Angus and I am 16 years old. I have been a member of First United Church for10 years and I am involved in many social justice activities in the community. I would like to share with you my experience as a young person at the G20 protest march on Nov. 18th.

I attended this march to protest the G20’s role in the direction that globalization is taking. I expected to be participating in a peaceful march that ensured the safety of both the protesters and the police. Instead I came away with a very different and very negative impression. I was present in the crowd that gathered at Lebreton Flats on the 18th. The crowd included many young people, some of whom I knew personally. I listened as the organizers reminded the crowd more than once that the march was to be a peaceful one. But as we began walking I was forced to avoid the row of riot police spanned out across the street, some of whom were holding submachine guns or police dogs. A few blocks onward, I saw riot police marching up from the opposite side streets of the intersection as I passed through. As I was on the other side of the intersection, I was not able to witness the actions of the police through the crowd.

As a young person, I remember being taught in elementary school not to be afraid of police officers, that they were there to protect you and keep you safe. I did not feel safe at that march specifically because of the actions of the police that were present. The rows of riot police seemed like an excessive display of force to me, and made me feel as if the protesters weren’t being trusted to be able to keep the peace, that we needed to be visually intimidated as well. The police breaking through the crowd at the intersection and the actions that followed made me feel powerless and very afraid for the people in that part of the crowd, especially because they were citizens of all ages present, including young children. The actions of the riot police seemed senseless because the ‘preventative measures’ that they took succeeded only in breaking the trust between many people in this community and the police force.

I was aware that the heightened security measures was partially a result of the events of Sept. 11, to prevent terrorism. But I think that the security forces forgot exactly who they were protecting from terrorism when they disrupted and intimidated the march.

I am comfortable with police officers being present at demonstrations to help maintain the peace, and I recognize the importance of their role. However, I do not see any reasoning behind a peaceful crowd being intimidated or disturbed by riot police unless there is another purpose for the police being there than to keep the peace.

I want the safety of myself and the people around me to be ensured at demonstrations, but also to lie in balance with being allowed to protest peacefully without harassment.

I would like to introduce Deb Byrnes.

Deb Byrnes

I'll speak from my perspective as office administrator at First United Church.

Within days of the announcement that a last minute change of venue would bring the G20 meetings from India to Ottawa, a couple of organizations and groups had called the church looking for meeting and gathering spaces: The Council of Canadians, Living River and others. We at First are always willing to open our doors with love.
As a justice seeking community, First United decided to house those who fed the hungry – like the People’s Potato and Food not Bombs and those who healed, like the medics.

The phone at First really began to ring! There were so many calls in fact, that a number of congregants volunteered to help with the phone calls from: Organizers looking for billeting. Yes, we could provide sleeping space for 40 on the floor of the lower hall. Would we ask the congregation to help with individual billeting? Yes. Would we march with our banner? Yes, absolutely.

From an administrative capacity facilitating the billeting of the medics consisted of a handful of phone calls back and forth, a few emails, permissions sought and received from Church Council. Everyone agreed.

We were also contacted by Food Not Bombs asking use of our kitchen space. They, along with The People’s Potato, prepare, cook and distribute thousands of meals for the poor and street-cultured each week in our city. Over the weekend, these not-for profit groups distributed thousands of free meals.. Audrey from Food Not Bombs is a gifted organizer. Together, First and Food Not Bombs sought donations of food and volunteers to help cook & by November 14th food started pouring in the door, amazing quantities of food, boxes and boxes of it, enough to feed an army. Pegi Caesar, Joanne Harvey, Giselle Lamontagne of First's congregation stepped forward to guardian the church over the weekend, to ensure someone from the church would always be present.

I was stunned by the efficiency. Overwhelmed by the sense of good will. We are at these panel hearings to learn about policing and the community, and it is the policing that will receive the most attention and I thought it would be helpful to describe the community the way I saw it as office administrator. What a shock to discover the way the media portrays these youthful idealists and the part they play in the protests.

I would like to introduce Joanne Harvey, who helped with hospitality at First.

Joanne Harvey

I am proud and grateful to live in a country where freedom of expression and the right to gather is enshrined in law and human rights.

Big business, globalization's focus is on profits. My focus is on world peace and adequate social safety nets for the well-being of all peoples.

At times things are so big that we are hushed into silence, overwhelmed. But, if everyone stood for their beliefs, and made a contribution, however small, the world would be a better place.

My contribution to the G20 weekend, was to welcome and facilitate three groups of individuals that share my ideals.

My experience with these young people was a wonderful one. We are conditioned to view our young folks, especially ones with punk hair, etc., in a negative light. Well, let me tell you, I have never met groups more organized, task oriented, hard working, respectful of people and property, as the folks from PEOPLE'S POTATO, and FOOD NOT BOMBS, and all the MEDICS.

The food was organized upon arrival of each donation, they all had their assigned task from chopping onions to peeling vegetables, cooking, washing and drying dishes, washing floors, they were packaging and organizing the food for distribution, and this was done with impressive order and responsibility. They were grateful for our welcome, and donation of space to prepare the food that they then proceeded to distribute to thousands gratis.

The medics were also very polite, and very focused on their responsibilities. They were very serious about attending to folks who may be in need of medical attention.

These young people with their positive, sincere energy was awe-inspiring and we made a positive, constructive, peaceful contribution to democracy in Ottawa.

I’d like to introduce Pegi Caesar, who volunteered to supervise billetting overnight.

Pegi Caesar

When the call went through the congregation for someone willing to stay overnight and take responsibility for the church, I volunteered. I thought it was something I could do to show my support for peaceful and creative expressions of dissent around some of the issues that were being raised but not being addressed around globalization and free trade. We were living freshly in a post-September 11 world and the talk was thick about the introduction of Bills C-36 and 42 and how they could affect the march. Also troubling was the broadening of the word terrorist and I was very afraid because while I was not born a skeptic, I have had enough run-ins with the police during the disenchantment of my youth to feel that any wide-sweeping changes without police training would mean trouble. Still I volunteered.

My church is a very special place and I must say that the defining moment for me, the moment when I knew I was in the stream was when the head of Sunday school gave me her permission to use the thickly carpeted children’s area for medics sleeping quarters.

Folks started to arrive around 9pm. Food Not Bombs was already cooking and the place was warm and inviting with tantalizing smells wafting from the kitchen. The medics were a tired, bedraggled lot; they had spent an entire day traveling and an entire night at briefing and organizing meetings and safety workshops. And so they came in twos and threes and fours, and as they came I welcomed them and led them into the basement where tables were set up with coffee and tea, cake, cookies and food if people were hungry.

Finally at a little past 10pm a car pulled up and three very tired but jovial people got out and I immediately found myself shaking hands with Charles, a paramedic from Ohio, Dana and one other. Because they had a car, they had brought a number of medic backpacks with them. I called into the church for help and as Charles looked on, Chris, Dana and I started to unload the car, fireman style.

It was on one of those trips into the church and out again that I saw the police, two officers, directly in front of Charles. I immediately stopped to hear what was going on and the officer was taunting Charles, asking “that’s not a bullet proof vest you’re wearing is it?” He was saying things like “no, you wouldn’t do that, would you?” while putting his hands inside Charles’ coat and feeling his body. Charles said “c’mon, man” in a pleading way and said that it was just a cloth vest with pockets that he put his med supplies in.

Satisfied, they left. Shaken, we continued to unload the car. This time we were definitely in a hurry to get the gear and go inside but again we were confronted by another four police officers who, while being a little less aggressive, still wanted to get any information they could from us. They asked the medics what they were doing here? The medics said they were there to provide emergency care if anyone got hurt during the protest. The officer replied, “protest, what protest? What do you know about a protest?” At which I the medics all just groaned.

It was then that I got my voice, realizing that nothing good would be served here and urged everyone inside. I said, “Officer, these are my guests, they are staying here tonight”. Then they turned to me and asked me how many people were inside. I said I did not know, that I had not done a head count but had expected 40. He asked who I was and I said a member of this church and a volunteer. He asked me how many other churches were ‘involved” and I said I didn’t know but I hoped it was lots.

Later on we noticed a black police van parked across the street from the church and the atmosphere inside became chill.

I’d like to bring it back to my minister, Reverend Moon

Reverend Sharon Moon

At one of the meetings we had to debrief our experience, we discussed the main points and suggestions we wanted to make to you. They are as follows:

1. We look to police to protect us not to attack us. Police need to realize that many of those who feel betrayed and angry at police action on Nov 17,are not people who came to the demonstration with a chip on their shoulder against police. They are people used to believing the Ottawa police slogan “Working together for a safer community”. We have been used to a community policing model. But that is not the kind of policing that happened on Nov. 17th. The police need to hear that people DO feel betrayed, that many people feel betrayed. Organizers who had information used against them feel betrayed, but so do many community leaders who were there, and the members of my community who were involved.

Trust is essential between police and protesters, and indeed police and the whole community. There is a serious issue of broken trust here that needs to be healed. It cannot be healed as long as there is no accountability by police; as long as there is no acknowledgment that harm was done by the police tactical decisions that were made that day.

I am pleased that the Deputy Chief of police, Larry Hill, has been assigned to these hearings, but I hope that there will be something more than listening that happens. I hope that there will be concrete policing changes, for future demonstrations because of the stories that are shared here.

2. As a community of faith we work with principles of restorative justice. These include truth-telling; inclusivity which means that all affected get a voice; accountability for actions; reparations-making amends; and then healing.
Healing cannot happen without the foundational pieces being in place.

We know that when harm occurs the first step is up to the perpetrator to take responsibility for the fact that their actions have caused hurt. It is not appropriate for victims to be blamed. Without acknowledgment that there were even any problems, it is very hard for those victimized to feel any trust is possible. So far, there has been no recognition of responsibility or harm, or even regret in anything that has come out of the police department.

In restorative justice, the next step of restoring relationship is a willingness to take action that demonstrates changed behaviour. This could involve transparent reporting of the internal review, (letting the community know what changes the police would recognize as necessary for the future),transparency around command structure, and an explanation of why decisions were taken as they were. It could also involve commitment to open communication with protest organizers to help create a safe environment for everyone.

The third step of restoring relationship is an ongoing "walking the walk." Showing by actions that become cumulative that things really have changed, and a willingness to work together in a new way. It takes time for trust to be rebuilt.

3. Police need to realize the huge power imbalance there is between protesters and riot-clad police with the whole armoury of gases, rubber bullets, water cannons, and the power to arrest and detain. Anyone with this kind of power needs to use it responsibly, and respectfully.

4. Rather than a new model of policing, we need police to follow their own policies. Their job is not only to protect the dignitaries, but also to protect those who are in the streets in democratic protest. While the police may have acted as a buffer at the convention centre, on the Lebreton march we were attacked aggressively. Police should act as a neutral buffer in protests, according to their own policies.

From the draft policy on demonstrations:

Members of the OPS remain neutral and take action only after the situation has been carefully assessed.

When assigned to the scene of a protest or demonstration, members shall maintain a position of impartiality in dealing with all parties involved.

Upon receiving notification of a protest or demonstration ....the Supervisor shall...emphasize to personnel assigned the need to act in an impartial manner.

5. Dogs should not be used in crowd control. Many police forces will not use them, and indeed the RCMP after the St. Sauveur investigation has determined never to use dogs in crowd control. Indeed the Ottawa Police’s own policy on dogs In regards to Crowd Control was not followed. It states. ...”canine will be used only in a defensive support for crowd control and will not normally be released in a crowd control situation.

The Canine Coordinator/Supervisor shall.... offer reasonable assistance to anyone bitten by a police dog and encourage them to receive medical attention regardless of injuries”
This did not happen. I witnessed personally a young man with 2 dogs attacking him. My friend Normand Pellerin, who has worked for our laundry coop, and was there marching with members of Foyer Partage, Roman Catholic housing for physically disabled, tried to pull one of the dogs off the kid, about 18 years old who was screaming and whose pants were down. The police told the young man to go. Somehow he ran across the street in front of me, and I saw him on the ground with his thigh badly wounded by huge dog bites. He was in tears, totally traumatized. So were we.

6. Save the riot squad for riots. There was no riot on Nov. 17. The breaking of 4 MacDonald windows on Friday, though I do not agree with that form of protest, is a symbolic act, not a riot, and not a reason to overthrow human rights of thousands. Keep the public order units in the background to be brought out only when required, as was done at the DFAIT demonstration a few months before- a totally peaceful demonstration where the rights to protest, and the protection of officials was kept in proper balance. Whatever was happening at the conference centre itself, riot squads with guns and dogs were the first line of action in the Lebreton March.

Again following their own policy:

From the draft policy on demonstrations.

Upon receiving information that a potentially violent protest or demonstration is to take place, the Supervisor shall...arrange to have additional personnel on standby in the vicinity of the protest or demonstration, but out of view

From the Ottawa Police Public Order Unit policy

Public Order Unit members shall.... when responding to a crowd management situation, initial response should be Soft Tact and only when civilians involved are becoming progressively more hostile/threatening is
an escalated response by the Public Order Unit is warranted.

7. Police should be learning peace-keeping tactics? Our nation is known for its peace-keeping. Surely there are resources to train the police in keeping peace not in escalating violence.

8. Don’t keep trainers in non-violent civil disobedience out of the country, or arrest them when they come in. It is to the advantage of the police and of demonstrators for as many people as possible to be trained in non-violent civil disobedience as a way to express dissent. In his report to the Police Services Board, Chief Bevan seems to confuse civil disobedience with violence. They are not the same thing.

Police need to realize that those trained in civil disobedience and non-violence are often acting within the crowd to help keep the peace. Groups like the Non-violent Peace force, or the Living River pagan group, and the Raging Grannies were very effective in affecting the peaceful tone of the march. Police intelligence gathering seems not to have to noticed this peace-keeping that was very visible in the march.

9. All police should be identifiable so that if there are problems to report, or videos of police misbehaving it is clear where the problem is. This protects other police who are doing their jobs with integrity from being labeled with the faults of some.

10. Perhaps our most important recommendation is that there be sensitivity training for police that is ongoing, to form a healthy police culture around the role of policing in a democracy. Some key issues might be the essential role of dissent in a democracy, why people are protesting (especially on globalization), theories of crowds that show violence begets violence. W e need to break down an us and them mentality, where one is treated as a criminal for participating in legal demonstration. Police have had to do this around racism, homophobia, women’s issues in the past. We feel it is essential that this happen in all forces around globalization and protest and dissent in these times. This is all the more important because we are in Ottawa the capital of the nation.

11. While we are grateful to the panel we feel that the community should not have been forced to set up such a panel. There should be a built-in transparent mechanism of debriefing major police actions that facilitates public consultation and response.

Society can’t exist when power reacts out of fear as I believe it did on Nov. 17. We get repression and end up creating a world where no one is safe.

Appendix 1

Written submission by Mr. Dave Henderson

As commitments preclude testifying before the panel, I want to tell you a bit about myself. I just turned 44 years old. I am a husband and parent. I gleefully pay my taxes because I believe that I have been blessed with the means to do so. I contribute to my church, my community and my city not out of duty but out of love. I feel blessed to live in such privilege and that such a gift demands of me a vigilance to declare myself on behalf of justice and equality, not just here but around the world. This is the reason why I have become involved in issues of social justice, why I marched at the G-20 and the reason for making the following submission to the panel.

What is your favorite choice of activity on a blustery, cold fall Saturday morning? I bet that huddling on the cold windswept plains of Lebreton flats is not one of them. Well, that is where I was called to be that Saturday - to march in solidarity with fellow church goers at First United in an advertised, non-violent protest to show our collective concern over the momentum of elitism and inequality stoking the fires of global economic agreement driven the corporately-motivated members of the G-20. I felt it especially important to declare myself that day in the wake of September 11th, to exercise my right to show my dissent over pending government bill drafted to intimidate and legislate against the democratic involvement of its citizenry.

After the usual inspirational rally, we set out along a prescribed path that would lead ultimately to the grounds of the Supreme Court. Not ten minutes into the march, we were confronted by a phalanx of black clad, armoured, humourless police who with impunity cherry-picked and brutalized (with dog and jackboot) selected marchers. At that point, I realized that this non-violent, peaceful march was not to be and that it had been transformed into a test of will and resolve.

My submission will not concern itself with the litany of abuses I witnessed (I am sure that these will be well documented by others testifying) but with the feelings that reside with me to this day as a consequence of that march.

Earlier that morning I considered taking my three-year-old daughter to the march and decided at the last minute (with my partner Janet) that the weather was too cold for her. I wanted to expose her to my passions, pageantry and the feeling of collective commitment that is normally abundant in these sorts of events. The question that resonates with me today was how would I have kept Sophie safe, comforted her in the face of such brutality and tried to explain to her that those who would turned stick and dog on innocent marchers, were the same policemen that we have repeatedly told her are to be trusted. I shudder to think of what it was like for those whose children witnessed such brutality.

The memories and feelings of that day remain fresh. The joy of marching, singing blunted by the fear and anger of being herded like livestock down my beloved streets. The bullying, intimidation, open display of aggression by the police and the snapping, loosely tethered dogs. The incredulity of wondering if this was my Ottawa and not Jakarta or Quito. I saw my anxiety mirrored in the faces of young officers behind their face shields as they shuffled nervously in lockstep along the either side of the route - what had driven them to consider me as such a threat?

My experience of the march was that at no time were the G-20 delegates and or the police in jeopardy of any physical harm, therefore I cannot understand what could have justified such a display of aggression. At no time did I see any black clad youth or any fellow marcher act in an aggressive manner towards the police. What had driven the police to dress so provocatively like they were going into battle - where was the trust in their choice of garment to show that they believed this to be a peaceful march? Was this all the result of a few broken windows at McDonalds the day before? A misguided fear that a few kids in black would act aggressively under the cover of a peaceful march? On the other hand, more sinisterly, was it simply that in the wake of September 11th, the police knew that politically they could send a clear message with impunity and get away with it?

What I find most disturbing in the aftermath has been the general lack of accountability and insensitivity for the welfare of its citizenry displayed by local and federal political leadership. I consider myself as a citizen yet, in the aftermath I have been classified by my political leaders, the the police and the media as a malcontent. The same people who declared open season that morning on a peaceful demonstration, are those who owe their reputations and professions to the citizenry and to democratic principles that nurture liberty and freedom to dissent. And yet, in the face of a perceived (and imaginary) threat, those same individuals felt justified to use pre-emptive brutality rather than maintain trust with march organizers. I am left with a troubling question - Do our police serve only those who have an economic stake in the community or do they serve those who exercise a democratic right to dissent?

There are two instances in my 20 years as a citizen of this fine city when I believe we lost our collective innocence. One was the senseless drive-by shooting of Nicholas Battersby; the other was the brutality by the police and subsequent lack of accountability a consequence of the actions surrounding the G-20 march. The shame of the latter is that it was an avoidable over-reaction by an institution that I trust to keep the peace, which is at the crux of this betrayal of innocence.

That Saturday a covenant was breached, - a trust was eroded with those I support to care for my family. Since then, there has been nothing but token gestures by the police and local/federal authorities to address this breach. It is as if in the minds of Chief Bevan, the Mayor and others that this was an aberration and that in time those demanding accountability would simply go away. The citizenry of Ottawa deserve to know who and what was behind the unwarranted aggression by the police that day and what would be done in the future to ensure that this never happens again.

I applaud the Citizen's Panel for elevating these concerns and putting this item back on the public agenda. I wish them God's speed in the deliberations.

Appendix 2

Submission by Dr. Christopher Shaw

To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Christopher A. Shaw. I am an Associate Professor of Ophthalmology and Neuroscience at the University of British Columbia. I teach in the Medical School at UBC. I am also a member of the Army Primary Reserve where I serve as an officer in an field engineer unit.

I am trained as a street medic/first responder currently holding a Workers' Compensation Board 'C' Ticket and have taken additional course in CPR, trauma treatment, etc. I served for 2 years as an infantry medic in the Israel Defense Forces in the late 1970s. I acted as a street medic during the FTAA demonstrations in Quebec City in April 2001, at the Whistler protest (June 2001) and most recently at the G8 Meeting in Ottawa in November 2001. The letter appended below, originally addressed to Rev Sharon Moon, details some of my experiences in the November 2001 G8 events.

Sincerely,

Christopher A. Shaw, Ph.D
Associate Professor

From: Chris Shaw
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 16:31:59 -0700
To: Sharon Moon

Hi Sharon:

I don't believe we met as I did not return to the Church on Saturday night until quite late having been with the demos most of the day and night. No, I was not the medic harassed outside the church on Friday night although I witnessed the event. The medic in question was 'Charles' from Ohio (the cops did not know where he was from before harassment commenced). He and I and some others were unloading medic kit on Friday night (approx. 9pm when we were approached by 2 Tac Squad members. They asked what we were doing and without further ado reached into Charles' medic vest without his permission claiming to have to determine if it contained 'kevlar body armour'. They were rude and confrontational, but left when they could not find anything further to harass us about; in the meanwhile I was continuing to unload medical kit into the church and emerged a few minutes later to find 4 different Ottawa police officers again questioning our medics in front of the church. These officers were more polite and did not interfere with our unloading of kit.

The next morning was quite revealing about police attitudes toward protestors and medics. My team was headed across the bridge toward Ottawa Univ. (not sure which one but to the right of Ministry of Defense as you head for Ottawa Univ.) and we were stopped by cops on the bridge who demanded that they be allowed to search our kit for 'rocks' in order to allow us to proceed. We were told that no search meant no passage across the bridge even though were clearly identified by First Responder badges and red crosses as medics. We were duly searched and allowed to cross over. Other medic teams, coming a few minutes later had their respirators (Canadian tire painting masks,etc.) confiscated as 'illegal' and their protective liquid materials (Maalox for eye wash, water, mineral oil, apple cider vinegar) poured on the ground. It seemed the cops were making up 'law' as they saw fit and applying it at whim. Perhaps one difference is that my team looked very 'straight', all of us with short hair, somewhat older; the teams most harassed were younger and counter-culture. Then again, it could just have been random.

Another point: I am in the military reserve and know something about weapons. The police in front of Parliament and at various routes had, in addition to ARWEN plastic bullet guns, tear gas canister guns and multibarreled tear gas guns. Some officers were also carrying automatic weapons including military C-7 assault rifles and what appeared to be submachine guns, both with magazines in. I presume they were loaded with ammunition. I used binoculars to view the roof of the convention centre later in the day and saw other officers carrying rifles.

All in all a fairly shocking performance by previous standards in a presumed democracy. However, after Quebec City (I was there as a street medic) and with C-36 now making its way through Parliament, nothing about democracy in Canada is assured.

Regardless, many thanks to you and your congregation for providing a safe space for the medics. We don't always find this and as you likely know, medics in Quebec were actually targeted by the police. It was also encouraging to see members of your church living their religion by joining the protest. Such action gives me the greatest hope for a broadening of the antiglobalization movement and a peaceful outcome in the future.

Christopher A. Shaw, Ph.D

Appendix 3

Sharon Moon

A Statement by Rev. Sharon Moon to the Police Services Board re Policing of November 17th

Dear Members of the Police Services Board:

I am a United Church minister, from First United Church in Ottawa where I have been an active community leader for 17 years. I was one of the protesters at the peaceful march planned for Saturday morning, Nov. 17 and witnessed first hand, completely unprovoked police violence of the sort that I never thought I would see in Canada.

I was the first speaker at Lebreton flats where various speakers spoke about why were were marching-including to call for cancellation of debt to the poorest nations, in accordance with the Jubilee 2000 demands; a call to end secret closed meetings where issues of concern to the public are not dealt with; a call for an end to World Bank and IMF policeies that hinder people¹s access to food, clean water, shelter, health, and education.Many were concerned to stop the kind of globalization that destroys the environment, and puts water, and other natural resources at risk. The issues were important.

I began marching with 25 or more, of my congregation-(youth, grandmothers, and grandfathers, even a new born child, lots of middle aged folk). We ended up near the back of the march and found ourselves surrounded by riot clad DarthVader-garbed police with machine guns and some with barking dogs on long leashes. Most of these police did not have any way of identifying them, though some police did have numbers on their hats in other parts of the demonstration. Someone a few yards from me was snatched out of a crowd after doing nothing that I could see.

Vicious police dogs were barking and jumping on people and those who tried to move to protect them were treated like criminals. The woman who was the MC of our gathering, Denise Veilleux was arrested for trying to protect a young person being attacked. Parade marshalls encouraged us to continue marching, reminding us that this was a legal, peaceful demonstration, and that we should not let the police keep us from marching peacefully. We had a right to be there. Our people broke spontaneously into singing Amazing Grace and had to walk through a wall of police, perhaps 12-15 long on both sides, not having any idea what was happening to those detained, or to other members of our group from whom we had been separated by the police action. Though I tried to look into each police person¹s eyes to see the human behind the mask, it was a terrifying experience. This was unnecessary force and intimidation wehich terrified and disorientated the good people of my congregation. A few moments later, after turning the corner, the march came to a halt, because, as we discovered later, police had moved across the street to prevent people from moving in an attempt, I assume to split up the march.

Suddenly police ran up at the side of the march and snatched another protestor about 3 people from me, He was clad in black, and had done nothing. They put 2 dogs on him. A friend, Normand Pellerin tried to pull a dog off the kid, about 18 years old who was screaming and whose pants were down. Somehow he ran across the street in front of me, and I saw him on the ground with his thigh badly wounded by huge dog bites. He was in tears, as were some of those in our group who were totally traumatized.

From the rear, a line of about 20 darth-vader clad police with guns and dogs were in formation and began to charge us and run toward us. We were trapped. The march had stopped because of police action at the front of the line. There were police with dogs on the side of the street. There was a group of police in black riot gear running toward us from behind. I had been separated from my partner back at the first encounter with police and did not know where he was. It was terrifying. This scene repeated in nightmares every day for two and one half weeks following that day.

This was a peaceful march, with a route which police had been informed of. Those who had met with the police had been told there would be minimal police presence, and they had a right to march peacefully.
Mayor Chiarelli had assured people that Ottawa was not going to be like Quebec. There would be no fence. We were going to show the world a different way, and that the security would be no more than was the case for any Canada day. He assured people that anyone who wanted to protest peacefully would be safe and free to do so. That was not the case.

When I came back to the church, I heard that on Friday night in front of First United, one of the medics who were staying at First as part of the billeting we had offered to house people who needed it, was also searched. My understanding of the law leads me to believe that this search was illegal.

Police have claimed that they protected the public. They did not protect me and my civil right to protest peacefully. They did not protect the democratic right to dissent and freedom of association. They criminalized dissent, by arresting people who had done nothing. They terrified the good people of my congregation who were doing nothing more than expressing our desire for peace, for a just sharing of the earth's resources, who want people, put ahead of corporations in the globalization agenda.

I was in Quebec City as part of the peaceful, non-violent demonstation. Yes there was tear gas wafting down from the wall. But about 40,000 people marched with no visible police presence, no violence, no property damage. I did not feel in personal danger. I did not have that right in Ottawa on Saturday, Nov. 17. I did not have the right to march in peaceful, non-violent protest which is still a fundamental democratic right. The violence on the march came all from the police side.

Staff Seargent Janveau, in an interview in All in a Day on Monday following the protest said that the police are accountable for their actions. I truly hope this is the case. Because from the press conference the mayor and police chief gave at the end of the weekend Mr Chiarelli said that the police had acted with restraint and had done a good job. I would not call the police action I witnessed restrained. I would call it intimidation, brutality, a dangerous overreaction.

I want accountablity and a full public enquiry. I want to know how police can possibly justify the use of police dogs in crowd control. I want to know why the dogs were called out. Do all police use dogs in crowd? My understanding is that they do not.

I want to know why police carried machine guns in the streets in a peaceful demonstration.

I want to know why there was such police brutality. On what basis could they possibly justify the use of such violence. To my knowledge on Friday a window was smashed, some spray-painting of a bank was done. I do not condone this kind of action, but frankly, I have seen more property damage at sports events. This does not justify the violent behaviour on Saturday. I want to know why people were searched illegally. I want to know why people who were arrested were detained for hours and not allowed to contact their lawyers.

I attended a meeting with Mayor Chiarelli and Chief Bevan after Sept 11th when religious and community leaders came together and we committed to work for a safe, healthy community for everyone. How can we continue to talk about harmony in the community, and police working with the community, when the police behave as they did on Saturday? How can we expect people who are minorities in Canada to feel safe to speak out when this kind of police violence occurs.

I have been an advocate and supporter for 20 years of the hard and faithful work Ottawa police have done to create an environment for community police relations. That has all been destroyed for me after Saturday. How am I supposed to teach the children of our congregation that the police are our friends and helpers, when they might wonder if the policeman they see on the street was one of the frightening people they saw behind the black masks and shields hitting on their shields yelling at people to move.

There must be a full enquiry into these actions. An internal police inquiry is not enough. There must be accountability, and any inquiry must deal with these questions:

KEY QUESTIONS:

1 Why there was such police brutality. On what basis could police possibly justify the use of such violence?

2 Why were some police identifiable and others were not?

3 How can police possibly justify the use of police dogs in crowd control. Why were dogs allowed to attack people. Do all police use dogs in crowd? My understanding is that they do not.

4 I want to know why police carried machine guns in the streets in a peaceful demonstration. What is the criteria for carrying machine guns by police in the streets?

5 Why were there arbitrary arrests where all (I believe) of the people have been released with no charges? Why were people not allowed to speak to their lawyers when they were arrested?

6 Why did police charge and surround a peaceful demonstration that was legal?

7. On what possible intelligence criteria could the police have justified the huge show of force?

8. Why were there arbitrary searches some of which I believe to be unlawful?

9. And especially perhaps, How can we possibly talk of harmony and working together in community in Ottawa with the police when community is attacked in this way?

Appendix 4

Written submission by Ms. Janet Creery

I was one of the lucky ones. When the police officers in riot gear swarmed out from behind and surrounded us, I was merely terrified. I stared in fascination as they froze into action-poses from some bad Hollywood movie. But I could see that, further back, some real damage was being done by their colleagues.

It crossed my mind just to try to get out of there. But to my left there was a particularly frightening robocop, holding a very mean, barking dog on a leash. The officer had looped the leash and held it short - but could easily release it and grant the dog's clear wish of taking a good bite out of anyone in its vicinity.

Two men just in front of me pulled out their cameras, wanting to get some visuals of this rather unexpected turn to an entirely peaceful demonstration. They weren't trying to be heros, they were careful to stay well back from the snarling dog - but that wasn't enough. "Get out of here, get out of my face," snapped the cop, stepping forward to push one of the cameramen away.

Shaken, I sat down on the ground and joined in the "so-so-so, solidarité" - the chant never sounded so good as in that full frontal blockade. To our great relief another group of protesters soon swarmed in from behind the line of policemen, and the terrifying robo-cops filed out like obedient school-children, leaving us to continue our march.

What I saw and experienced was nothing compared to what many others did. Nonetheless, it was enough to scare me out of my wits and leave me shaken for weeks after. There is no reason why I, and those around me, should have been terrorized by police for participating in legal protest march.