One day after six people pleaded guilty to encouraging vandalism at last year’s G20 summit, the undercover operation that made the case has touched off a debate about whether such resource-intensive tactics were worthwhile.
Two police officers infiltrated activist communities in Southern Ontario for a year and a half to glean intelligence about the group’s plans for the summit, employing techniques used to bust biker gangs and terrorist networks.
Lawyers and criminologists say the case should be subject to civilian oversight to ensure the money spent on it – hundreds of hours of officers’ time courting activists, buying them beer and ferrying them to meetings – was warranted and determine if similar investigations should be approved.
Constables Brenda Carey and Bindo Showan befriended anarchists in Guelph and Kitchener, reporting their plans to an RCMP-led Joint Intelligence Group monitoring threats to the G20. Constable Carey also wore a wire to the group’s final planning meeting.
In agreed statements of fact read out in court, protest organizers admitted drawing up a list of targets for demonstrators and talking about cutting the security fence and “de-arresting” – grabbing people under arrest at protests and pulling them away from police.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association renewed its call for a public inquiry Wednesday based on revelations about the infiltration, arguing allegations police helped anarchists plan protests should be investigated.
“We understand that it’s important for infiltrators to blend in, and if they are part of a gang of Hells Angels, they may need to break the law to actually do their work,” said CCLA general counsel Nathalie Des Rosiers. “In this context, where is the line and who has approved the tactics being employed?”
Edward Sapiano, a Toronto criminal defence lawyer, said there are guidelines on what police are allowed to do undercover. They can provide suspects the opportunity to commit crimes if the crimes are ones that would have been committed otherwise. They are also permitted to break the law, but the offences must be less severe than the ones under investigation.
Infiltrations are costly because every time an undercover officer meets with the people being spied on, several others monitor.
“They require back-up officers in direct visual contact as much as possible,” he said. “In addition to that, other officers are sitting in cars a block or two away, ready to come running if anything happens.”
The accused in the G20 case argued police misunderstood anarchist organizing by trying to cast a small group of people as ringleaders.
“You think of all the expense and effort that went into this, and what they found is what? These people talking about smashing windows and de-arrests? So did thousands of other people,” said Peter Rosenthal, lawyer for two people charged with conspiring to commit mischief at the summit. “What happened at the G20 wouldn’t have changed without this investigation.”
But University of Ottawa criminologist Michael Kempa said there was more at stake than vandalism.
“[Police are] making sure there’s no ties to deeper, darker networks of serious terrorist players. Because how else do you investigate these things? They’re deeper, darker networks for a reason,” he said. “I don’t think that the real value of the investigations comes from the six [convictions].”
Chris Mathers, a former undercover RCMP investigator, said such techniques are useful in gathering information that is harder to obtain by other means, such as a wiretap. Police must balance the need to bolster the credibility of their fake persona with the requirement they not do anything that could harm the court case.
He dismissed any suggestion people are targeted for ideological reasons.
“The police don’t consider this a political investigation – they’re investigating criminal activity,” he said. “They’re catching guys who are breaking the law. Period.”
And as far as criminals go, Mr. Sapiano said the six convicted Tuesday were on the low end.
“The resolution of the G20 case shows that whatever they were, they weren’t much,” he said. “They certainly weren’t anything near what they were portrayed to be by the police, by the media at the outset.”
Origin
Source: Globe&Mail
Two police officers infiltrated activist communities in Southern Ontario for a year and a half to glean intelligence about the group’s plans for the summit, employing techniques used to bust biker gangs and terrorist networks.
Lawyers and criminologists say the case should be subject to civilian oversight to ensure the money spent on it – hundreds of hours of officers’ time courting activists, buying them beer and ferrying them to meetings – was warranted and determine if similar investigations should be approved.
Constables Brenda Carey and Bindo Showan befriended anarchists in Guelph and Kitchener, reporting their plans to an RCMP-led Joint Intelligence Group monitoring threats to the G20. Constable Carey also wore a wire to the group’s final planning meeting.
In agreed statements of fact read out in court, protest organizers admitted drawing up a list of targets for demonstrators and talking about cutting the security fence and “de-arresting” – grabbing people under arrest at protests and pulling them away from police.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association renewed its call for a public inquiry Wednesday based on revelations about the infiltration, arguing allegations police helped anarchists plan protests should be investigated.
“We understand that it’s important for infiltrators to blend in, and if they are part of a gang of Hells Angels, they may need to break the law to actually do their work,” said CCLA general counsel Nathalie Des Rosiers. “In this context, where is the line and who has approved the tactics being employed?”
Edward Sapiano, a Toronto criminal defence lawyer, said there are guidelines on what police are allowed to do undercover. They can provide suspects the opportunity to commit crimes if the crimes are ones that would have been committed otherwise. They are also permitted to break the law, but the offences must be less severe than the ones under investigation.
Infiltrations are costly because every time an undercover officer meets with the people being spied on, several others monitor.
“They require back-up officers in direct visual contact as much as possible,” he said. “In addition to that, other officers are sitting in cars a block or two away, ready to come running if anything happens.”
The accused in the G20 case argued police misunderstood anarchist organizing by trying to cast a small group of people as ringleaders.
“You think of all the expense and effort that went into this, and what they found is what? These people talking about smashing windows and de-arrests? So did thousands of other people,” said Peter Rosenthal, lawyer for two people charged with conspiring to commit mischief at the summit. “What happened at the G20 wouldn’t have changed without this investigation.”
But University of Ottawa criminologist Michael Kempa said there was more at stake than vandalism.
“[Police are] making sure there’s no ties to deeper, darker networks of serious terrorist players. Because how else do you investigate these things? They’re deeper, darker networks for a reason,” he said. “I don’t think that the real value of the investigations comes from the six [convictions].”
Chris Mathers, a former undercover RCMP investigator, said such techniques are useful in gathering information that is harder to obtain by other means, such as a wiretap. Police must balance the need to bolster the credibility of their fake persona with the requirement they not do anything that could harm the court case.
He dismissed any suggestion people are targeted for ideological reasons.
“The police don’t consider this a political investigation – they’re investigating criminal activity,” he said. “They’re catching guys who are breaking the law. Period.”
And as far as criminals go, Mr. Sapiano said the six convicted Tuesday were on the low end.
“The resolution of the G20 case shows that whatever they were, they weren’t much,” he said. “They certainly weren’t anything near what they were portrayed to be by the police, by the media at the outset.”
Origin
Source: Globe&Mail
No comments:
Post a Comment