Justice Committee on May 1st, 2012

[Chief Jamie Graham]

I think the exemption for officers in these kinds of cases is covered in existing Criminal Code sections.

I don't put a lot of faith in the argument that this kind of law would apply to police officers. Officers either working on emergency response teams or in these kinds of situations have their faces covered for a very legitimate reason, and it's because of the counter-surveillance and proactivity by organized criminals and gangs on the officers who are identified and their families. So, in certain cases, they keep anonymous for a very legitimate reason.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

I have a second question. In law, what are the differences between legitimate demonstrations, violations of the peace, unlawful assemblies and riots? Do you think the legislation needs to be clarified with respect to these differences?

[Chief Jamie Graham]

I would simply encourage the committee to seek that kind of answer from a legal scholar; I am not.

I will simply use the common sense approach that was used by your colleague, I think, when describing the escalation of a gathering to a public disturbance, to an unlawful assembly, or to a riot. I will simply use the common sense definition, from my perspective, that this law applies to unlawful assemblies and riots.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

I have another question. I asked it already, but I'll ask it again. If someone wears a gas mask during a legitimate demonstration, should a riot break out and tear gas be used, would that person be subject to the new offences?

[Chief Jamie Graham]

It depends on the circumstances surrounding one's wearing a gas mask. If one shows up at a lawful demonstration with a gas mask, it sends a message that perhaps one is expecting further trouble. So at this stage you couldn't answer that, but in the middle of a riotous situation or an assembly, that certainly could be an offence under this bill.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Do you think the new offences would only target people who try to conceal their identity to avoid being detected by the authorities responsible for enforcing the act? Would a person who tries to hide his or her identity from another rioter or even the media be subject to that offence?

[Chief Jamie Graham]

I'm not sure, but I don't think the legislators should have a lot of sympathy if the defence for wearing a mask is that one doesn't want to appear on camera or be captured by photography. Everywhere a police officer goes nowadays....

I'll give you my own example. Every time I am downtown and step out of a car, I am continuously being filmed by people with cellphone cameras. It's the reality of the way we live. But giving any consideration to a person who is participating in an unlawful assembly with their face covered because they don't want to appear on camera doesn't carry a lot of weight with me.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

Mr. Seeback, as I pointed out before, the clock is out a bit, so you have about three minutes.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Great, thank you.

Mr. Gauthier, have you had the opportunity to discuss with any other business associations whether or not they would consider this legislation and be supportive of it?

[Charles Gauthier]

No, I haven't had discussions with other organizations, primarily because we were the organization that literally dealt with the aftermath of the riot. It impacted our members, and frankly, when we do that, the other organizations—I don't know if the Board of Trade took a position—understand that we were sort of on the front line in dealing with our members. I'm not aware of whether or not they support the bill.

But again, we did this independently, and it's not uncommon to do that. In the city of Vancouver there are a number of different business organizations that exist.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Thanks.

Chief, we've heard a little bit about whether or not we're going to need some clarity with respect to unlawful assembly and riot, and how we sort of parse those differences. Do you think there is any need for additional clarity as the law stands, or do you think that's something we might want to look at in conjunction with this legislation?

[Chief Jamie Graham]

I like the way the bill is drafted now, to include unlawful assemblies and riots. I personally don't think it needs further clarification.

If I could jump on the answer from my colleague, the Downtown Victoria Business Association simply verbally has agreed with the position that Charles has put forward.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Great.

Under the Criminal Code, wearing a mask or disguise with intent to commit an indictable offence, so that currently exists.

I know you talked about that briefly today, but explain to me why this is so much better than the existing laws, because it seems like that might have some sort of coverage.

[Chief Jamie Graham]

There are occasions when officers, patrolling a crowd prior to an unlawful assembly or as one is about to erupt, will come across individuals with masks, large groups of masks, for no legitimate reason. There is that fine line between encouraging someone not to wear a mask to then their engaging in an unlawful act where you can act.

But you can use certain provisions of the Criminal Code to prevent offences. If officers were to come across a knapsack, which happened in Vancouver, full of masks—well known, he was part of a group—ink-filled eggs, marbles, all the tools of a riotous individual, the officers would be permitted to act where they couldn't under existing law, in my view.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Very good.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you, Mr. Seeback.

I'd like to thank Mr. Gauthier for being with us, and Chief Graham.

I would just give a little plug for all of the crown attorneys across the country. They all do a great job. I appreciate that the ones in British Columbia do it differently, but I think they all do a great job.

Those of you who are visited by members of the Canadian association of police will find out today that they're talking about six hours for paperwork with regard to impaired drivers. It's something we all need to be cognizant of. The paperwork is starting to overwhelm, I think, the policing community.

Thank you again, all of you, for being here.

With that, the meeting is adjourned.