Baffling — it’s the only word to explain the state of “carding” policy at the Toronto Police Service. With two announced deadlines for reform already missed, a mediator is now working with Chief Bill Blair and the civilian oversight board serving as his boss to “resolve outstanding issues” on this policy.

But there is only one issue here: Who is in charge of Canada’s largest municipal police force?

On paper, it’s supposed to be the Toronto Police Services Board, a seven-member civilian body assigned the specific task of overseeing the service.

In performing that role, the board passed a new policy on “carding” last April requiring officers to have a valid public safety reason for stopping people and asking a series of often-intrusive questions. This was typically done simply to amass information, without any intention of making an arrest.

The board also ruled that, even when stops happen for justifiable reasons, these interactions must not be prolonged by officers fishing for information. And people stopped were supposed to be informed of their right to refuse to answer an officer’s questions.

Rather than swiftly acting on the board’s policy directive, and translating it into procedures guiding officers’ behaviour on the street, Blair waffled and failed to enact key changes.

Confronting this intransigence, the board reaffirmed its commitment to fix carding in December and set a deadline of Feb. 19 for Blair to create reformed procedures. The chief suspended the practice of carding as of Jan. 1, but a new date had to be set for instituting a replacement process. A revamped carding system was finally to be revealed this past Monday, March 2. But then that, too, was cancelled.

Instead, the board issued a cryptic news release last Friday announcing that former chief justice Warren Winkler was serving as a mediator between the chief and the board and that all were “continuing to work diligently” in search of common ground.

The board added it would make no further comment during mediation. And that “a media blackout is in effect.”

This begs an obvious question: If the board’s role is to “oversee” the Toronto Police Service, and the chief’s job is to implement its policy directives, what is there to mediate?

Instructions have been issued by a duly empowered civilian oversight body. If the chief finds them impossible to carry out — if they’re in some way at odds with provincial law, or technically in violation of policing standards — Blair should say so. That’s not normally a matter for “mediation.”

If the board’s instruction would be detrimental to law enforcement, or violates some personal ethical standard, Blair should make that clear.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

But he hasn’t done so. And he hasn’t enacted reform.

Summoning a mediator is a troubling step because it implies that clear instruction from the board isn’t something the chief is obliged to carry out. Rather, it’s a matter for him to discuss. It shows a board directive needn’t be obeyed. And that doesn’t bode well for the principle of civilian oversight of police.

Read more about: