CCLA Defends Landmark Court Decisions on Racial Profiling at the SCC

OTTAWA – The Canadian Civil Liberties Association filed arguments at the Supreme Court of Canada defending the Quebec Court of Appeal’s landmark decision declaring suspicionless roadside stops unconstitutional.

CCLA argues that both the trial judge and the Quebec Court of Appeal were correct in declaring that the power to conduct arbitrary roadside stops fuels systemic racial profiling and violates Charter rights. “The evidence is clear: allowing police to stop individuals without cause is not only ineffective, but it also disproportionately harms Black and racialized communities in Canada”, said Harini Sivalingam, Director of the Equality Program at the CCLA.

This case is an opportunity for the Court to revisit the 1990 decision in Ladouceur, which upheld the constitutionality of random stops, in light of today’s social and legal realities. For decades, this discretionary police power has been used as a pretext to racially profile Black people, especially young men.

While this case highlights the disproportionate impact of racial profiling on the Black communities, we recognize that these arbitrary police powers also harm Indigenous people and other racialized communities.

Howard Sapers, CCLA Executive Director, added “Only by rendering this provision inoperative can we begin to undo the harms of racial profiling and protect the rights of all people in Canada from arbitrary state intrusion. The outcome of this case could have a sweeping impact on police powers, civil liberties, and equality rights across Canada.”

CCLA is grateful for the excellent legal representation in this matter by Bruce Johnston, Lex Gill, and Louis-Alexandre Hébert-Gosselin of Trudel Johnston & Lespérance.