Monday, July 20, 2015
Dear Hamilton Police Services Board Member,

On Thursday June 25, BBRLM made a deputation to the Hamilton Police Services Board.
The overwhelming presence of community members at this meeting is a testament that many
people resonate with our call for an end to carding and our other recommendations that seek to
safeguard Hamiltonians from encroaching policing practices.
BBRLM believes in the important functions of the HPSB as the employer of the Hamilton Police
Service and as the civilian body governing the Hamilton Police Service. We are also pleased to
note HPSB‟s statement of commitment is to foster a strong culture of human rights and
inclusiveness in the HPS.
The recommendations we brought before you on June 25 fall squarely under human rights and
inclusion concerns. We hope that you will give our recommendations the seriousness they
deserve.

Carding is a Human Rights Concern
This practice, also known as street check or police check, refers to when police initiate contact
with law-abiding civilians outside of an investigation or arrest for the purpose of data-collection,
ID‟ing, and, if the officer feels they have „reasonable suspicion‟, a pat-down. Ultimately, the
purpose of this „proactive policing‟ practice is to find something of an incriminating nature on
civilians such as persons breaching a court condition or for leads on a number of criminal
offences.
This is unconstitutional for it violates civilians Charter of Rights and Freedoms, particularly:
 the right to be free from arbitrary detention, and
 the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure.
What is a detention? Detention happens when the actions of an officer or multiple officers
cause a civilian to believe that they are not free to walk away. Telling a person „don‟t move‟ or,
more subtly, blocking their path or when a group of officers surround a person are few examples
of how officers are trained to make people feel physically and psychologically detained.

Page

It is with a heavy heart that we say that many Hamiltonians have been illegally detained. What is
more, we are upset that Hamilton police officers do not inform persons being carded that they
have the right to not answer any questions, to not offer ID, and to leave an interaction when they

1

By law, the police are only allowed to detain a person when they have „reasonable grounds‟ to
suspect that this person is engaged in criminal activity or has committed a crime. If there are no
such grounds, the detention is illegal and any evidence obtained during this detention may be
excluded at trail.

 are being detained outside of an investigation or a crime. In fact, it is only last February,
following our first meeting with Chief De Caire that these civilian rights were added in the
Hamilton police pamphlet.
Together, these two red-flags indicate that our local police depend on people‟s lack of
information about the law, on their vulnerability, to do their work. In effect, by withholding our
rights, officers are breaking the law to enforce the law. This is an irony. What is also an irony is
that criminals under arrest are immediately told their rights (e.g.: the right to remain silent) but
law-abiding citizens who are being detained are not told their rights.
Street check, or what the Police Association of Ontario calls police check, is the formal name of
carding. This practice ought to be limited to people under arrest or investigation, but
unfortunately, as the Police Association of Ontario has admitted, it also happens in non-criminal
encounters.

Carding in Hamilton
The Hamilton Police engages in carding, and their justifications that it is a form of „proactive
policing‟ or that it helps with „building contacts‟ and „fostering community relations‟ does not
make it any less unconstitutional.
Page four of the HPS Action Strategy Annual 2013 Report includes 'ACTION Street Checks'.
From May 2012 to March 2014, 18,569 street checks were performed. If these are of different
persons, it would account to 28% of Hamiltonians; more than a quarter.
During the deputation, Chief De Caire also said: “we talk to people, we talk to all the people…
and collect the evidence”. This is an admission that the police stop, question, and ID people who
are not suspects or under arrest and collect that information. Indeed, on page eight of HPSB's
April 15 2013 public meeting notes, the ACTION Team mandate reads that “ACTION Officers
are encouraged to talk to everyone, letting the public know about their community focused
mandate.”
Talking with the public is fine. However, Officers do not engage with people merely for small
talk and general pleasantries but mainly for the purpose of decreasing crime. This is where our
concern resides, when police initiate contact during non-criminal encounters for the purpose of
detaining and collecting information and ID‟ing people. Anecdotes of such encounters are
disheartening. Officers also fail to mention that participation in such encounter is voluntary in
the fear that persons will exercise their right to not engage.

Page

Carding is Tainted by Racial and Class Bias

2

The Law Union of Ontario and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association have mentioned that
carding also occurs under the guise of vague terms such as „reasonable grounds‟, „suspicious
activity,‟ or „public safety‟. It is important, as stated in our recommendation below, that we
assure that this abuse of power does not occur.

 Mayor Fred Eisenberger has stated that he would be concerned if it was found that carding
targets certain groups of people. We are pleased that the Mayor opposes what we interpret to
mean racial profiling. However, we do want to be clear that random carding is not any less
unconstitutional than targeted carding. More bluntly as an analogy, random sexual harassment is
no less problematic, damaging and unconstitutional than targeted sexual harassment. Both are
vile.
It is true that carding is tainted by the racism prevalent in policing, which Chief Glenn De Caire
admitted exists during the deputation. Indeed, the Toronto Star and other research groups such as
the Community Assessment of Police Practices have shown indisputable evidence of racial bias
in carding. It is for this reason that carding also violates our right to equality before and under
the law and the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination.
The disproportionate but not exclusive targets are the general working class, homeless persons,
and persons of colour other than white. The crux of the problem, however, is that its targets are
people who are not under investigation or arrest. Many people experience these non-criminal
police encounters as a form of harassment and fishing expedition (undertaken with the unstated
hope of discovering information or something else) especially when they have been carded
multiple of times.

Our Recommendations:
In light of your statement of commitment to human rights and inclusiveness, we ask that the
Board takes the lead and put into motion the following recommendations in their next board
meeting:
BBRLM asks the Board to request the HPS:
1. To terminate the practice of carding. We ask that HPS officers cease stopping,
questioning, and ID‟ing people who are not suspects, thus are not under investigation,
and who are not under arrest and collecting the shared information.
2. To substitute vague terms with specific and justifiable reasons for detaining people.
Driving infractions such as „DUI‟, „speeding‟, „illegal parking‟, and „ignoring traffic
lights‟ are specific and leave no room for intuition, guess-work or hunches. We ask that
officers have similar specific reasons when detaining actual suspects. We also call for an
end to carding people for non-crimes such as loitering, walking through a high crime
area, changing direction when seeing police, or stopping in a secluded area.

Page

4. To provide detained suspects with receipts. This was implemented by the TPSB for
several months and resulted in a decrease in carding. This receipt should at the very least
include the identity of the officer, specific reason for detainment, location detained, and

3

3. To request its officers to immediately upon detaining a suspect inform them of their
rights to know why they are being detained, to remain silent, and to ask for counsel
including access to Legal Aid.

 the racial self-identification of the person detained. The purpose of racial selfidentification is to monitor potential racial bias in police and community interaction.
5. To create incentives to hire already qualified white-shirt police officers of color from
other cities, which is the same way the Chief was hired to the HPS; by an incentive that
had him go from being a Superintendent straight to Chief, and skipping the Deputy
position. The hires should be required to have a strong track-record in anti-racism and
anti-discrimination theory and practice, and committed to implementing them in the HPS.
6. BBRLM also asks the Board to commission bi-yearly studies on the experience of
people’s experience with street checks and community contacts. This study should not
be conducted by the HPS, the HPSB, the HPA or any of their affiliates but by a trained,
third-party researcher(s) from McMaster University and community groups or
organizations specializing in data collection. This study should employ both quantitative
and qualitative methods. BBRLM should be consulted on the planning and execution of
this study.

Sincerely,

Page

4

BBRLM