6/23/10

When it comes to summit security, police answer to no one

Peacenik just finished photographing the riot police presence in Queen's Park. Two buses full. Plus assorted mini-vans full. Peacenik may also have seen a couple of "undercover" bicyclists. They were dressed in normal clothes and riding regular bikes but emerged from a crowd of officers. Then there was an earthquake registering 5.5 5.1 5.0.

Peacenik's building shuddered. Peacenik was rattled and confirmed the reality of the earthquake with these same riot police. So they performed a public service act while waiting for protesters to come along (none have so far).

Peacenik's place of employment is closing for the duration of G20. Peacenik will monitor events from a remote, secure, location. Peacenik wishes everyone all the best for the weekend.
Update: Peacenik just checked and the riot police have left Queens Park for now. Peacenik guesses they got bored.


Police make their presence known Tuesday on the streets of Toronto.


With neither legislation nor precedent to limit their powers, the rights of Canadians come off second best

Adam Radwanski
It's known as the “red zone.” But given the extent to which police are being left to their own devices in locking down a large swath of Toronto for the G20, the “grey zone” might be more apt.
The federal government did police and local residents few favours by sticking the summit smack in the middle of downtown. That it’s in an area more difficult to secure than other available locations, such as the city’s Exhibition grounds, forced more heavy-handed enforcement than should have been necessary.

But it doesn’t help that, as officers are expected to balance security with civil liberties, there’s neither legislation nor clear legal precedent specifying what they can and can’t do. From the handling of protesters to the requirement of identification to enter public spaces and private homes, it’s left to their discretion.

Since each summit is different, there’s no choice but to be somewhat ad hoc in handling them. But civil liberties experts argue that it didn’t need to be quite this ad hoc.