The Dominion - Toronto

Mining Companies Feel Heat in the Ring of Fire

taramichelle — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 09:25:16 +0000

Assembly of First Nations backs evictions from northern Ontario

TORONTO—In late July, hundreds of First Nations chiefs from across the country backed a moratorium on mining and development in an area of Northern Ontario known as the "Ring of Fire." They also called for the eviction of companies operating in the mineral rich area, which has been described as "Ontario's oil sands".

The province has called the Ring of Fire "one of the most promising mineral development opportunities in Ontario in almost a century." The area contains the largest chromite deposits in North America, as well as gold, nickel, copper, platinum and palladium. Opening the area to development has become a major focus for the Dalton McGuinty government.

The moratorium demand and eviction notices were voted on by the hundreds of First Nations chiefs gathered in Toronto for the Assembly of First Nations' (AFN) Annual General Assembly. The AFN is the largest First Nations advocacy organization in the Canada.

"It is solidarity," said Sonny Gagnon the Chief of Aroland First Nation, whose community would be impacted by the development. "We need the support. If and when we need to go on the land to enforce the evictions notice…we will have 633 First Nations that will be behind us."

Over 20 mining companies have claims in the Ring of Fire; however a major impediment to these projects is that there is currently no ground access to area. Several companies are now competing to build road or rail access.

Proposals from two of these companies, Noront Resourses and Cliffs Natural Resources, have entered the province's Environmental Assessment stage. This has lead First Nations to believe that the projects are moving ahead without obtaining their "free, prior and informed consent," as laid out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

In late June, the Matawa First Nations Council, which is made up of nine first nations communities, announced an “immediate moratorium on all mining exploration and development…unless, and until, Ontario and Canada come to a government-to-government table with a mandate to negotiate fundamental questions of First Nations jurisdiction…and real resource benefits and revenue sharing for our First Nation.”

"We hope that the Matawa Tribal Council communities will reconsider this action and come to the table to discuss their concerns with us," said Andrew Morrison, a spokes person for the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, in an email to the Toronto Media Coop.

"We recognize that there are differing views and positions on First Nations’ jurisdiction and rights. Those differing views do not diminish Ontario’s commitment to working constructively with First Nations and industry to achieve practical outcomes and results," explained Morrison. "Through good will, mutual respect, and ongoing dialogue we are confident that we can resolve these concerns in a positive, productive and meaningful way."

Chief Gagnon sees the province's dealings with First Nations very differently. "They just seem to want to come into my community, stand on a podium and preach to our people as to how they are going to develop this land. No, no, no. We have got to have dialogue."

He believes that for First Nations to be treated as equal partners they need to be provided with the resources to hire lawyers, geologist and other consultants that the government and mining companies are able to afford.

Cliffs Natural Resources and Noront Resources were among the companies that were issued eviction notice in late June 2012. Both companies refused to respond to a request to comment in this article.

Gagnon said that an action plan to enforce eviction notices was being developed, but would not reveal any of the details.

Tim Groves is a toronto based researcher and journalist, to get email updates on his stories fill out this form.

Chief Sonny Gagnon of Aroland First Nation

Two-Tiered Justice

taramichelle — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:24:53 +0000

Action ahead of rally to support security certificate detainee Mohammad Mahjoub

TORONTO—On the morning of Saturday, June 16th, several posters were illegally mounted on the walls and fences outside of a Toronto prison, Toronto West Detention Centre. The posters concerned Mohammad Mahjoub, a former detainee at the facility who has spent nearly twelve years in detention and on house arrest despite never having been charged with any offense.

In June of 2000, Mr. Mahjoub was arrest on a security certificate— a controversial mechanism which allows the Canadian government to detain and deport non-citizens living in Canada without charging them with a crime. The Government claims that Mahjoub is a threat to national security and have tried to link him to terrorism.

Mr. Mahjoub and his supporters deny this claim, asserting that the government has not presented any evidence that Mahjoub is a threat or pressed charges against him. They see Security Certificates as illegitimate and arbitrary. Issuing one only requires the signature of the Minister of Public Safety and can be based on secret information.

"It is a system of two-tiered justice, because Security Certificates can only be issued against non-citizens," said Syed Hussan, an organizer with the Justice for Mahjoub Network, adding, "The federal court has strangely ruled that in these cases the presumption of innocence does not apply."

Photos of the posters that were mounted at the jail were spread on Facebook by the Justice for Mahjoub Network, however they did not claim responsibility for putting them up.

"These posters were put up by allies who wanted the officers who jailed and tortured Mahjoub for 6 years to know that they were still being watched. It was also put up so that passers-by knew that Canada was jailing people without charge."

One of the posters that was pasted at the Toronto West Detention Centre was a large cut-out photo of Mahjoub and read: "Mahjoub Spent 6 Years behind these fences. He's spent 12 years in detention in Canada and he's NEVER been charged. Enough! Justice for Mahjoub Now!"
Other posters promoted a rally in support of Mahjoub that is being held on Tuesday June 26th in front of the CSIS building in downtown Toronto and marching to the federal courthouse.

"The rally marks the 12th anniversary of Mahjoub's arrest: a man who has been used to create a climate of fear in Canada against Muslims and immigrants. Marching with him is a show of solidarity against racism and Islamophobia and shows the lies that CSIS and Immigration Canada have created," explained Hussan. "This man's life has been destroyed for no reason."

Although the rally focuses primarily on the case of Mahjoub it will also be demanding the immediate release of the two other men currently being held under Security Certificates, as well as protesting the broader "anti-immigrant" policies of the Conservative government of Stephen Harper.

The rally will also demand justice, apology, reparations and citizenship for all five men who have been victimized by the Security Certificates regime and accountability for all officials responsible.

Tim Groves is a researcher and journalist based in Toronto. This article originally appeared on the Toronto Media Co-op.

Postering Action for Mahjoub

Oil, Gas and Banks Head South

Miles — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 10:56:15 +0000

Mining companies are only part of Canada's corporate presence in Latin America

LOS CABOS, MEXICO—The hard fought battle against the Keystone XL pipeline, which was slated to carry tar sands crude across Canada and the United States to port in Texas, kicked struggles against Canadian-owned oil and gas companies up to a new level. Resistance dominated headlines in Canada, while rural folk, Indigenous people, celebrities, and climate activists in the US took direct action to block Calgary-based TransCanada’s plans. In northern BC, Indigenous-led resistance to the proposed Enbridge pipeline, along with a host of other US-owned infrastructure projects, have become front and centre issues for environmentalists and activists across Canada.

The role of Canadian oil, gas and pipeline companies in other parts of the world is, however, less discussed. Many activists have focused on the behavior of the Canadian mining sector, a natural choice given the size of that sector compared to the oil and gas industries in Canada. “In Canada, a major difference between the oil and gas and mining sectors is that while many of Canada’s largest companies are oil and gas producers, some with integrated operations, they are not particularly prominent in the global arena just now,” reads a 2008 report by the Economic Commission on Latin America.

It’s been four years since that report was released, and it might be time to revisit the idea that the Canadian oil and gas sector hasn’t gained prominence on a global scale. Take the case of Latin America, where a host of oil and gas companies based in Calgary and Toronto have been increasing their holdings throughout the hemisphere, taking advantage of the same lax legal standards Canadian mining companies enjoy.

A study by Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP found that in 2010, Canadian oil and gas companies made over $35 billion in mergers and acquisitions in Central and Latin America, and the region is the second most attractive place (after the United States) for Canadian oil companies to invest outside of Canada. Colombia in particular has quickly become a favourite destination for this new surge of Canadian oil and gas investment.

At the same time as the Canadian Senate approved a free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia in June of 2010, a government-hosted bidding fair on oil and gas properties was taking place in Cartagena, Colombia. "I have some good news for our Canadian friends. The Senate has just approved a free trade agreement...so that opens the way for a lot of opportunities and our government is very happy about that,” said then-Colombian Energy and Mining Minister Hernan Martinez to corporate representatives bidding on oil and gas concessions in Cartagena that day.

Canadian oil companies were among the chief supporters of the agreement, which was roundly criticized because of the continued killings, kidnapping and displacement of Indigenous people, trade unionists, peasants, dissenters and the poor in Colombia. A free trade agreement with Peru was approved by the Canadian Senate a little later, on the heels of a massacre in the Amazon province of Bagua where an estimated 100 people were killed during protests in defense of their lands.

A preliminary list of Canadian oil companies active in Latin America

CALGARY
Gran Tierra Energy Incorporated: Colombia, Brazil, Argentina, Peru
Parex Resources Incorporated: Colombia, Trinidad and Tobago
Canacol Energy Limited: Colombia, Guyana, Brazil
Talisman Energy Incorporated: Colombia, Peru
Nexen Incorporated: Colombia
Petrominerales: Colombia, Peru
Quattro Exploration and Production: Guatemala
Quetzal Energy Limited: Colombia

VANCOUVER
Petro Vista Energy Corporation: Colombia, Brazil
TrueStar Petroleum Corporation: Guatemala

TORONTO
Pacific Rubiales Energy: Colombia, Peru, Guatemala

Pacific Rubiales and Talisman, two of the most important Canadian oil companies in Colombia, have already come under intense criticism linked to the high environmental and social cost of their operations.

A class action lawsuit brought against Talisman in 2002, which was later dismissed, alleged that the company was involved in funding war in southern Sudan. “Talisman Energy finances and directs the Government of Sudan’s ethnic cleansing campaign and must be stopped before all of our villages are destroyed and all of the people are killed,” said Taban Deng, a former government official, in 2002, from what is today Southern Sudan.

In some ways, it seems that little has changed in the 10 years since Talisman was active in Sudan. In December of last year, Amazon Watch released testimony from a priest who traveled into northern Peruvian Indigenous communities near Talisman’s operations. “The presence of Talisman is generating conflict between those who accept and those who don't accept the company, and a conflict like this here in the jungle runs the risk costing many lives,” said Father Diego Clavijo. “What they are doing here [in the Pastaza river basin] with some ex-leaders is also dividing people, and it is going to cause death and destruction,” he said. “We are on the verge of genocide, genocide between peoples, due to infighting over the presence of the company here.”

Talisman made inroads in conflict-ridden Colombia in 2010, when they bought 49 per cent of BP’s oil and gas projects in Colombia, including more than 2,000 kilometres of pipelines.

Pacific Rubiales, for its part, operates the largest oil project in Colombia. The company, which at one point had a military base with 600 soldiers stationed on its property, has been subject to ongoing strikes by the United Workers Union (USO). Numerous incursions by riot police to break up strikes have resulted in serious injuries among workers. Pacific Rubiales is working hard on public relations, having recently sponsored a prestigious golf tournament in Colombia, inaugurated with a celebrity swing by Bill Clinton.

Along with Nexen, another Calgary-based company, Pacific Rubiales has announced that it has discovered natural gas reserves within its Colombian concessions. A number of other Canadian companies have recently displayed renewed interest in the vast jungle regions of northern Guatemala, which is populated by communities primarily of Mayan descent. Increasing conflict in the region, exemplified by a horrific massacre of 27 peasants in San Benito, Peten, last year, has not been linked directly with oil and gas interests, instead being linked to the activity of drug cartels.

Tracing the fault lines of Canadian oil and gas companies in Latin America and the Caribbean also requires looking at Canada’s role in the banking sector throughout the region. RBC and Scotiabank are both major players, with banks and ATMs popping up throughout countries with heavy mining and oil and gas investment.

"Today, RBC has bought off every single aspect of the [Royal Bank of Trinidad and Tobago], and now financially dominates the landscape," said Macdonald Stainsby, an activist and writer who returned from the island nation earlier this year. “[RBC has] openly called for financing of new oil plays, in particular they’ve brought up tar sands,” he said. Stainsby, who runs the website oilsandstruth.org, increasingly devotes time to making links with communities organizing against tar sands in countries like Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela.

Building these links of solidarity and continuing to raise awareness about the impacts of oil and gas projects on local communities, while at the same time organizing against war and repression that so often accompany these projects, is work that must continue if we are to have any chance of collective survival on this planet.

Dawn Paley is a freelance journalist and co-founder of the Vancouver Media Co-op. A version of this article was published in the March/April print edition of Watershed Sentinel.

Oil Death Jeans Improved

Roma Refused

Tim McSorley — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 06:18:22 +0000

Changes to refugee law shut doors to persecuted minority

TORONTO—The Roma Community Centre's one-room office, located on the ground floor of the Crossways Plaza in Toronto, has been operating in this location since October 2011. Founded in 1997 after the arrival of over 3,000 Czech Roma refugees in Canada, the RCC is the only organization for Roma operating in Toronto. Originally based out of the office of Culturelink, an immigrant settlement organization, the new space now hosts a number of different programs including a weekly English as a Second Language class, a women's support group and immigration counselling.

According to Gina Csanyi, Executive Director of the RCC, since acquiring the new office space there has been a dramatic rise in the number of people coming to the centre—around 20 per day—mostly Roma from Hungary. Csanyi said, “as things become progressively worse in Hungary more and more are fleeing.”

The Roma, more commonly known in the English-speaking world as Gypsies, are Europe’s largest minority with an estimated 8 to 12 million living in Europe, the majority in Central and Eastern Europe. Roma trace their roots back to northern India and are said to have left their home country and migrated west over 1,000 years ago. Throughout their long history in Europe they have been subjected to slavery, exiled, killed, used as scapegoats and have been historically marginalized in almost every country they have settled in. During the Second World War military officials sent the Roma living in Nazi-occupied countries en masse to concentration camps. Seven thousand Roma lived in the Czech Republic before the Second World War; less than 600 survived.

Today they suffer low employment rates, low education levels, lack of access to government services and health care, poverty, segregation and violent crimes perpetrated by neo-Nazis and skinheads. Forced school segregation programs and state removal of children affect Roma families in some jurisdictions.

Since 1997, thousands of Roma have been seeking asylum in Canada, the first wave coming from the Czech Republic, quickly followed by Roma from Hungary, and to a lesser degree Slovakia and Romania. Currently the largest group of Roma seeking asylum in Canada are from Hungary.

In recent years, changes to visa requirements and changes to immigration and refugee laws have created significant challenges to those wishing to immigrate here, leading to a massive decrease in the number of Roma accepted as refugees.

I met Robert and Monika, two volunteers, in the Roma Community Center on a Friday afternoon. They were helping organize the Hungarian Roma community.

According to Robert, a Hungarian Roma who came to Canada with his wife and child in 2010, one of the major problems in Hungary is that Roma are afraid to speak up about the persecution and discrimination they face because they have little support. Members of the police and government are intolerant of his people, he says. A far-right nationalist party that specifically targets Roma and Jews has grown into the third largest political party in the country and has spearheaded anti-Roma legislation. If Roma were to speak up, says Robert, they could lose their jobs and neo-Nazi groups would threaten them. The risk and insecurity prompted Robert and his family to flee the country. “I never want to go back,” he says. He and his family are waiting for their refugee court hearing to determine whether or not they can stay in Canada.

For many Hungarian Roma, applying for asylum in Canada is their last hope at finding a safe place to raise a family. Monika, another Hungarian Roma who came to Canada with her husband and 2 children said, “We had to sell everything to come here: our house, everything. We have no place to go if we return.”

According to Csanyi there are a number of obstacles the Hungarian Roma face when coming to Canada such as a lack of understanding of the rigorous process of the refugee system and what documents are expected for each refugee case such as police and medical records. It is often difficult for Roma to obtain these papers in their home countries because of police and state discrimination.

In Toronto, lawyers profiteering on the refugee claims of Hungarian Roma are also becoming an issue. “When I meet a client and see who their lawyer is I immediately know if they are going to have a successful claim or not,” says Csanyi. “These lawyers don’t even meet their clients. They cut and paste PIFF forms, have an almost 0 acceptance rate, stretch out the case for years and once legal aid runs out they drop the clients.” This severely affects the chance of a successful outcome in the hearing.

The recent history of Roma immigration to Canada has been a complex one, which Csanyi and others say has been aggravated by immigration legislation such as Bill C-11 and the newly proposed Bill C-31.

The latest Roma immigration wave began in 1997, as rates of neo-Nazi attacks and discrimination in their home countries increased. At first the Immigration and Refugee Board largely granted the Roma refugee status based on the evidence of systematic and long-term persecution in the Czech Republic and Hungary. The acceptance rate for Hungarian Roma before 1998 was around 78%.

As the number of Hungarian Roma refugees increased in 1998, the Immigration and Refugee Board organized an unprecedented examination of the overall conditions in Hungary that would be used in deciding other Hungarian Roma refugee cases. This is the only time such an investigation, known as a “lead case,” has been carried out in the history of the IRB.

The lead case involved two families and the tribunal decided that the conditions in Hungary did not amount to persecution and denied the claimants refugee status. The result was that acceptance rates for Hungarian Roma dropped from 70 per cent to 8 per cent from 1998 to 1999.

On March 27, 2006, the lead case was overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal on the basis that it was designed solely to limit the number of Hungarian Roma accepted as refugees in Canada. From 1998 to 2006, more than 10,000 Hungarian Roma refugees were rejected and deported back to Hungary.

Newly appointed Immigration Minister Jason Kenney publicly vocalized the idea that refugee claims made by European citizens were illegitimate. Starting in 2008, the term “bogus refugee” became synonymous with refugees coming from so-called “democratic” countries. This had a strong impact on the outcome of refugee claims made by Roma coming from Eastern Europe. In 2008 the acceptance rate for Czech Roma was 94 per cent. After these public statements the acceptance rate plummeted to 10 per cent in 2010.

Soon after, the government established new visa requirements for Czech residents (as well as Mexican residents), drastically limiting them from coming to Canada and applying for refugee status.

Kenney's targeting of Roma refugees sparked legal action in the Roma community. Rocco Galati, a Toronto-based immigrant lawyer, and the Czech Roma community launched a lawsuit against Kenney accusing him of blatantly undermining the Immigration and Refugee Board's independent tribunal process by spreading bias against the Roma. Court action is ongoing.

Despite these difficulties, last year there were 4,423 new refugee claims in Canada made by Roma from Hungary, with 5,975 cases still pending. While Hungary is currently the country with the highest refugee claims made in Canada, its acceptance rates are one of the lowest. The 2011 acceptance rate of refugee claims from Hungary was 18.3 per cent compared to the national average acceptance rates, which was 44.6 per cent. The average wait time for a hearing is 3 years, forcing many people to live in uncertainty long-term. Many point to immigration legislation and institutional bias against the Roma as the reason for these low acceptance rates.

The Balanced Refugee Reform Act (Bill C-11) passed in 2010 under a minority Conservative Government. At the time of adoption, some of the more contentious parts of the legislation were removed in order to satisfy opposition party demands, only to resurface in the Conservative Government's latest immigration bill, C-31.

Kenney has said he hopes to see Bill C-31, named Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act, passed by June 2012. Bill C-31 is an omnibus bill that incorporates aspects of several previously proposed pieces of legislation. The new laws would allow the detention of “irregular arrivals”—those who arrive by boat, for example—without a warrant or an appeal. It would also grant the Minister of Immigration sole authority to set a list of “safe countries,” which are deemed to be capable of protecting their citizens. This would limit the ability of residents of these countries to apply for refugee status and would revoke their option to appeal a rejection. They would also only be given 15 days to prepare and file their written statement which sets the basis of their claim, leaving little time to find legal counsel and translation.

Julianna Beaudoin, a PhD student at the University of Western Ontario, has been researching Roma and human rights issues since 2002, specifically focusing on the Canadian IRB and immigration policies. “Bill C-31 is yet another way the Canadian government is trying to reinforce the notion that there is a 'queue' for refugees, and groups like Roma who are taking active roles in trying to escape persecution and violence are 'jumping the queue,'” says Beaudoin. According to Beaudoin, Canada, as a signatory to the UN Convention on the Status of Refugees, has an obligation to provide Roma with a fair refugee hearing.

According to the government, assignment to the safe country list will only come after investigation, though there are questions as to whether other factors could be at play. Syed Hussan, an organizer with the immigrant and refugee rights organization No One is Illegal, argues that “safe country” legislation is linked to economic factors and trade agreements that Canada has signed or is negotiating. In particular, Canada is currently negotiating the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union. Hungary is a member and held the presidency last year.

Critics question Canada's willingness and ability to accept refugees from countries with which it has signed trade agreements, since such economic affiliations often tacitly show support for a country's political system as well. Placing these countries on the “safe country” list gives the Canadian government the power to turn away large numbers of refugees. “We call this bill the Refugee Exclusion Act,” says Hussan. “This bill gives [immigration officers] massive powers of detention [of] anyone who is not a citizen and demolishes all the key pillars of a permanent refugee system. If citizenship can be taken away at the whim of a government we are in deep trouble.”

Kristyna Balaban is a Toronto-based documentary filmmaker, photographer, and a member of the Toronto Media Co-op, which produced this piece.

Toronto Roma vigil

Sonic Weapon Rushed Through for G20

stephlaw — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 10:48:09 +0000

Calling LRAD ‘communications device’ allowed cops to skirt rules

TORONTO—The police have tried to convince the public that its Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRAD), purchased for the G8 and G20 summits, were strictly communications devices—that they weren’t to be used as weapons. But internal police intelligence reports suggest otherwise.

Outside of public messaging, the police have in fact referred to the devices as weapons, according to documents obtained by The Dominion.

“Whether you call it a weapon or a communications device, it can be used in situations where it can cause people significant hearing loss, significant pain,” said Abby Deshman, a Program Director with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA).“They can be used as weapons; they have been used as weapons in the past.”

The CCLA believes that the government should have properly tested and regulated the LRAD before putting it into use—and this would have happened if the LRAD had been designated a weapon.

The CCLA is now calling on the government to institute stronger rules on their use based on testing conducted since the summits.

Manufactured by LRAD Corporation, the devices can play recorded MP3s or be spoken into through a microphone, and they also have a built-in alert function that emits high-pitched tones.

“This non-lethal weapon can produce permanent ear damage,” reads a May 31, 2010 intelligence brief created by the G20 Joint Intelligence Group (JIG). This group consisted of the Toronto Police, Ontario Provincial Police, RCMP and Peel Region police. JIG intelligence reports were sent to various security partners, government departments and, in some cases, international and corporate partners.

A week later, the JIG issued a correction, inline with the official police messaging, stating that the LRAD “is in fact a communications device.”

Toronto Police did not respond to a request for comment on the difference between the internal documents and the public messaging about the LRAD.

A 2010 briefing note created prior to the G20 by a media relations officer with the Toronto Police detailed the police’s official position. According to the note, the LRAD is a “tool to send emergency notifications, directions for evacuations, etc.” It added that the tool will “allow police to communicate to large crowds in various languages.”

This note described the LRAD very differently from a JIG report created shortly after the September 2009 Pittsburg G20 summit.

The older report described the devices as “sound cannons” to “engage unlawful protestors,” originally developed for military purposes and was “employed against Iraqi insurgents and Somali pirates.”

The Pittsburg G20 summit was the first place these devices were used by the police, rather than by the military. “Police used the device to emit a high-pitch sound that forced demonstrators to cover their ears and withdraw,” reads the report.

“There were no reports of demonstrators attending the hospital,” the report also noted.

Despite this claim, a bystander alleging permanent hearing damage due to the LRAD is suing the city of Pittsburgh, according to a press release from the American Civil Liberties Union dated September 21, 2011.
Karen Piper, the plaintiff in this suit, was subjected to the high pitch sound of a nearby LRAD for several minutes during the protest. She got no warning before the alert started, according to the release.

“Piper immediately suffered intense pain as mucus discharged from her ear. She became nauseous and dizzy and developed a severe headache,” read the press release. “Since then, Piper has suffered from tinnitus (ringing of the ears), barotrauma, left ear pain and fluid drainage, dizziness and nausea. She still suffers from permanent nerve damage.”

Concerned about how the LRAD would be used at Toronto’s G20 Summit, the CCLA took the matter to court. A ruling was made on June 23, 2010. No injunction on the use of LRADs was granted, but a judge did order greater restriction on their use.

“Part of the reason that the LRADs were bought or deployed in a hurry was that one-time funding was available from the federal government in order to police for the G20,” said Deshman.

Using federal funds, the Toronto Police acquired four LRADs in preparation for the G8 and G20 summits. Three were the portable “100X” model and one was a larger “300X” model, which can be mounted on a vehicle or boat. On top of that, the OPP also acquired three LRADs of their own.

Alphonse MacNeil, the RCMP officer in charge of all G20 policing, approved the purchase of these LRADs. However, when it was revealed by the Globe and Mail that the RCMP does not approve of the LRAD being used for crowd control or in urban settings, pressure was placed on MacNeil by the Ministry of Public Safety to justify his actions.

“Public Safety are on me about why I supported the purchase of the LRAD for TPS and OPP,” wrote MacNeil in an internal email.

In response, MacNeil received a briefing note on the LRAD, which said that the Toronto Police Service had developed a set of guidelines for appropriate use, and that the force had already used the tool to execute a warrant. It also pointed to the Pittsburg G20 and the Vancouver Olympics as examples of other events where the LRAD had been used.

The document explained that in addition to delivering audio recordings the “alert functions can be used if necessary.” It noted that the manufacturer recommends never using it for more than two-to-five seconds. It also explained that in order to use the LRAD, police commanders on the ground would need permission from an off-site Incident Commander.

CCLA’s Deshman said the police and other law enforcement officers have to be “extremely careful” about using new technologies like the LRAD.

“We can’t just take manufacturers’ assertions about when a device is appropriate and when it should be used, because they have an interest in selling the device,” Deshman said. “What we need is our government to strongly and independently test these things.”

While the LRAD was used by Toronto Police to amplify an eviction notice at Occupy Toronto in November 2011, it wasn’t used during the G20 protests, despite the chaos on the streets of Toronto.

The CCLA was still concerned and, after the summit, pressed to have the LRAD

regulated as a weapon. The province undertook a study on the matter and a report was issued in November 2011.
The report was based on a review of literature and field tests of the device. It established the disagreement on whether the LRAD is a weapon but did not take a definitive stance on the matter. It did, however, recommend changes that could be made in how the LRAD is regulated.

The report also noted that police operating the device may also be at risk of ear damage, recommending that operators of the 300X model stand at least two meteres behind the device.

“The report indicated that the existing limits on when LRAD can be used need to be updated,” said Deshman, “so we called on the government to implement that immediately. We haven’t yet received a response.”

In recent years, police forces in Canada have been acquiring another new device, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). These miniature robotic helicopters can fit in the trunk of a car and be flown by remote control to conduct aerial surveillance. They have been deployed to assist in homicide investigations, search and rescue and to view traffic accidents from above.

The RCMP, OPP and several local police forces across Canada have acquired these devices from Canadian companies that manufacture them: Waterloo-based Aeryon and Saskatoon-based DraganFly. In August 2011, the New York Times reported that an Aeryon’s Scout model UAV was donated to Libyan rebels by an anonymous donor.

A more advanced UAV, the Predator Drone, was used by a local sheriff in North Dakota. The aircraft is normally used to patrol the US-Canada border, but in this instance was used to assist the sheriff to spy on a family and their land.

A version of the Predator Drone armed with missiles is used by both the US Air Force and the CIA. These drones are reportedly used to carry out targeted assassinations in countries such as Yemen, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“We are increasingly seeing police interest in purchasing new technologies, technologies that often have been developed in context such as military use,” said Deshman. “I think this is a trend we will continue to see as technology develops.”

Deshman points to the Taser as an example of a device that was introduced without sufficient regulations or testing. There were 26 taser-related deaths in Canada between 2003 and 2008, including the high-profile death of Robert Dziekanski. National attention on Tasers, particularly after police Tasered and killed Dziekanski at the Vancouver International Airport in 2007, led to deeper scrutiny of the device and its regulation.

Deshman said Canada should learn from this lesson.

“It was probably the worst possible way for them to introduce a new technology,” said Deshman. “What we should be doing is having a lot of public discussion about new technologies, about the benefits and drawbacks.”

Tim Groves is a freelance journalist and investigative researcher based in Toronto.

LRAD - Sonic weapon

Scoring for Information

stephlaw — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 09:32:45 +0000

Police infiltration tactics viewed as a violation of women's bodies and rights

TORONTO—With the rise of modern technologies, most of us are at least peripherally aware that our lives are becoming increasingly monitored. We casually brush away the uncanny feelings conjured by Google ads culling search terms from our emails, and gently ignore the bubble cameras that watch the perimeters of offices, schools and public spaces in metropolitan areas. But state surveillance penetrates even more intimate aspects of life than your email inbox and your child’s schoolyard.

The use of sexual deception in intelligence gathering is neither new nor uncommon, said Gary T. Marx, professor emeritus from MIT, Harvard University and University of Colorado, and author of Protest and Prejudice and Undercover: Police Surveillance in America.

While agencies generally have rules against sexual deception in intelligence gathering, and will be careful not to document instances of it, supervisors will imply that agents should use sex in order to gain intelligence. The secretive nature of undercover operations presents a roadblock to any kind of future accountability, he said.

“What's the difference between having sex through threat or coercion and having sex through lies?”

Recent stories of police infiltration appearing in the news have drawn this scenario out of the realm of James Bond fantasies and into public discourse.

Eight women in the United Kingdom are currently pursuing a human rights lawsuit against the Metropolitan Police, after they discovered that five of their former romantic partners were undercover agents. These cops were assigned to spy on environmental activists starting in the mid-1980's. At least two of these police spies have fathered children with an activist while undercover, and one of them, Jim Boyling, even married the mother, according to Britain’s Guardian newspaper.

In Canada, allegations have arisen against a police officer who had sexual relations with women in the community he infiltrated during the lead-up to the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto, activists in southern Ontario told The Dominion.

Shailagh Keaney, an activist and independent journalist in Ontario who knew the G20 infiltrators, said that gendered biases were at play in the tactics used by infiltrators, as well as in the actions of uniformed police during the protests.

“Women's bodies are perceived as less violent but more violate-able," she said. "Men were generally beaten more brutally [during the G20] but women were routinely strip searched without even having their pockets checked.”

For marginalized women whose communities have historically been harmed by governmental powers, the thought of having been intimate with someone who represents state authority is profoundly violating, said Jen Meunier, who identifies as Algonquin and a womyn of mixed descents. “Sexual consent means being fully aware of the circumstances, being aware of everything that is necessary for your safety.”

Indigenous communities in Canada have understood surveillance and infiltration to be a concrete reality for many decades now, Meunier said.

Rachelle Sauve, a cook and community organizer in Peterborough, Ontario, who knew people who were affected by direct interactions with infiltrators, believes undercover agents strategically take advantage of characteristics that are traditionally stereotyped as being feminine, such as compassion, nurturing and emotional receptivity.

“That, in itself, is gendered violence,” she said. “This is coercion, this is manipulation, and this is rape—the criminalization of dissent is the only reason it is seen as acceptable.”

Like in any war, the women of subordinate groups—such as Muslims, Arabs, activists and Indigenous peoples—find the oppression they already face on the basis of gender exacerbated by their status as targets of state repression.

Sauve views the use of sex in intelligence gathering as part of the broader historical picture of gender violence, often used as a tool of control and domination.

“This contains a certain depth of psychological warfare that is particularly pernicious,” she said. “You can destroy an entire culture by raping its women.”

According to Professor Marx, the role of secrecy is the key structural enabler of sexual misconduct in undercover operations. In addition, cases of infiltration are rarely made public if they do not succeed in gaining grounds for arrests. Most of the people who have had interactions with infiltrators may never find out the individual's true identity.

The best devices for preventing sexual misconduct by police are transparency, pluralism of powers in the state and continual institutional review, Professor Marx said.

Human rights law may be an excellent emerging tool for seeking redress in cases like these, which have no clear precedent. Judiciary law also contains tools for pursuing accountability, such as suing perpetrators for mental harm.

For Meunier and Sauve, the solution for activist communities involves a stronger acknowledgement of the gendered aspects of state repression.

“We need to collectively address gender issues and heal our vulnerabilities all the time—not just when something bad happens."

Kelly Pflug-Back is a poet, writer, student and activist. You can find her newest stuff in upcoming issues of Goblin Fruit, Ideomancer Speculative Fiction and Iconoclast.

Questions? Comments? Drop us a line: info@mediacoop.ca.

Spooks using sex

Battle of the Budget

Tim McSorley — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:06:47 +0000

Police crack heads as Toronto city cuts reversed

TORONTO—Toronto residents are breathing slightly easier after a long-awaited City Council vote on large cuts to core city services took place earlier tonight. The cuts, proposed as part of the 2012 city budget, have been looming ever since Mayor Rob Ford manufactured a budget crisis upon taking office.

In a major blow to Mayor Rob Ford's austerity agenda, many of the most significant cuts were reversed, in large part thanks to a surprising move from the council's centre, led by Josh Colle. An omnibus motion, which used some financial sleight-of-hand to make increases to the budget in the sectors threatened by the proposed cuts, was passed by a vote of 23 to 21. Colle defended his position in an interview after the vote. “We made tough decisions...it's not reckless spending. We settled on a prudent budget that was fiscally responsible and addressed some of the concerns that people had brought up.”

Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday tried to play down the defeat, noting the narrow margin by which the votes on several of the most crucial cuts were defeated. “It's far from the end of the world,” he said.

Approximately two hundred people were in chambers for the vote; almost ten times that number remained outside, prevented from entering by a line of police officers mixed with City Hall security. Attempts to enter the building for the vote were met with violence, as a number of individuals were hit and pepper-sprayed. A small horse-mounted riot squad moved on the crowd. Several arrests were made, people were beaten and choked and an elderly man was thrown to the ground. At least one person was taken to St. Michael's hospital.

Aiden Hennings from Stop the Cuts described the scene:

“I was at the front, trying to get into City Hall. [The police] started grabbing people outside the barricades. I was grabbed by my hair and they tried to drag me through their lines, but other people took me back. About five minutes later I was pepper-sprayed from a foot away—the officer smiled while he did it, and my two little sisters were punched in the face by police as well.”

“I didn't expect it to be one of 'those kinds of rallies'” said Ryan of Occupy Toronto. “[The police] threw a lot of people around. They should have just let us in; they said they wouldn't because it was such a big group.” There was, however, room in council chambers for more people, with a large standing area behind the 250-seat gallery sparsely populated.

During the session, several observers shouted about the police repression outside, while others chanted “stop the cuts, save good jobs” in response to the results of a vote on the privatization of custodial services. They were forcibly ejected from council. “This is just a bunch of elites who claim to represent us, but they don't bother to consult us,” said one, to applause from many in the observation area. She later told the Media Coop: “Security and Toronto Police brought us down the elevator to the first floor. Elise [Thornburn, of Stop the Cuts] started to move toward the main exit, instead of the side exit that the police were taking us to. Police grabbed her, and she went limp. They dragged her down the hall to the door.”

Council Chair Frances Nunziata, who directed security to remove the protestors, had a low threshold for any perceived disruptions from the floor, threatening to clear chambers after a few boos were heard from the gallery.

As the motions wrapped up, City Hall's head of security announced that councillors would have to exit from the side and rear doors of the building, as the Toronto Police were “currently dealing” with the protest. An Occupy Toronto contingent was also present outside, setting up several tents in the middle of the square, which were later moved to the boundary of city and provincial land to “avoid a trespass bylaw.”

Hennings was upset about the police response to the rally: “We wanted to have our voices heard at city hall. We wanted them to hear that Toronto is against the cuts.”

Later, a small contingent of demonstrators marched to 52 Division, where several arrestees were being held. One of the men being held, Derek Soberal, appeared for a bail hearing at Old City Hall on January 18. The remainder of those arrested were released from the station.

Many activists are wondering whether tonight's events constitute a victory or a defeat. Although the feared cuts to libraries, social services and other core services were averted, the loss of jobs within city ranks and privatization measures still culled millions from the city budget.

The cancellation of some of the cuts is testament to months of mobilization by community groups, labour and many ad-hoc committees across the city who came together to save specific city services in their communities. Colle acknowledged the impact of these efforts, saying the budget had generated "more discussion amongst the public and councillors" than he'd ever seen before.

The fight against Ford's austerity agenda will likely continue, with a near-certain lockout of CUPE 416 coming in February, as the union refuses to accept their jobs being farmed out to private contractors.

—with files from Megan Kinch

Justin Saunders is an information technologist and journalist based in Toronto.

The article was originally published by the Toronto Media Co-op.

Jan 17 stop the cuts 1

Jan 17 stop the cuts 2

G20 Fallout Continues

dawn — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:54:08 +0000

Legal battles and jail time continue months after the showdown in Toronto

GUELPH, ON—Though the G20 summit in Toronto is long over, communities organizing against austerity continue to feel the sting of state repression. Of the over 1,100 people arrested in conjunction with protests against the G20 meetings in Toronto, 66 still face legal battles, house arrest and jail time.

On November 22, 11 of the 17 people facing a complex set of conspiracy charges had their charges dropped. As part of a plea bargain, the other six will serve more jail time.

Leah Henderson, Peter Hopperton, Erik Lankin, and Adam Lewis are in the course of serving their sentences of 10 months, five-and-a-half months, three months, and three-and-a-half months, respectively. These sentences are being served in addition to time spent in pre-trial detention—a period of as much as 70 days in the case of Lankin. Henderson is in Vanier prison in Milton, Ontario, while the other three are at Penetanguishene Central North Correctional Centre.

“Let people know that I’m not being wrecked by prison,” Lankin told The Dominion from jail. “It’s something to get through and I’m looking forward to continuing to organize when I get out.”

Also as part of the group plea deal, Mandy Hiscocks—who is being sentenced today—is expecting to serve 16 months and Alex Hundert is expecting to serve an additional 13.5 months.

“To those in jail or still on charges from the anti-G20 protests, to political prisoners and prisoners in struggle, we are still with you,” reads a statement put out by the 17 co-accused in late November.

In addition to this “main conspiracy group,” others are still facing G20-related charges and possible jail time, including George Horton, Ryan Rainville, Kelly Pflug-Back, Greg Rowley, Emomotimi Azorbo, Julian Ichim, Dan Kellar and Byron Sonne, among others.

Horton, from Peterborough, faces “a string of charges including three counts of mischief over [$5,000], assaulting a police officer, disguise with intent, possession of stolen property under [$5,000]” and possession of a dangerous weapon, a support call-out for Horton reads.

“Since the charging of six community organizers and eleven dropped charges, [Horton] and others being charged with ‘on-the-ground’ offenses such as mischief and assault, face an even heavier likelihood of being scapegoated by the court, in an effort to justify the billion dollar G20 budget and the ensuing violence of police,” reads Horton’s support statement. The Dominion was unable to reach Horton or his support team before this article went to print.

Ryan Rainville was charged with “on-the-ground” offences and plead to three counts of mischief over $5,000 in early December.

In his statement to the court, Rainville insisted on his rejection of the colonial, racist court system. “I have plead guilty to the destruction of state property, and while awaiting trial and sentencing I have spent more than three months in jail, nine months on house arrest, and two months living under strict bail conditions,” he told the court. “I have been beaten and condemned for my political beliefs, and I have served enough time in punishment for the damage that I have accepted responsibility for. It is time now for the state to set me free,” he said.

Rainville was sentenced to four months of house arrest at the Sagatay Toronto men’s shelter, on top of the time that he has already served. The Crown is currently appealing his sentence.

“I know at the core of my gut that I didn’t do anything wrong,” Rainville told The Dominion. “This is how the state is going to react,” he added. “We need to band together and stay solid, even in the face of it.”

Still ongoing is the trial of Kelly Pflug-Back, whose original charges included assaulting police with a weapon and conspiracy, though these charges have been dropped.

“There was nothing to suggest that I assaulted a police officer with a weapon,” Pflug-Back told The Dominion. “They just wanted to slap that on to my case as a way to really crack down on me and keep me on house arrest.” She continues to face charges of mischief, which she is still waiting to have resolved.

While serving more than a month in pre-trial detention, Pflug-Back was denied medical treatment for her chronic polyautoimmune disorders, which include thyroid disease and fibromyalgia. “They violated my right to access medical care. They violated my right to freedom of movement,” she told The Dominion.

Following her detention, Pflug-Back was put under stringent house arrest and was forced to be under the direct supervision of her parents while outside of the home. Once again, this made access to medical treatment nearly impossible. “They violated my right to not be subject to arbitrary detention,” said Pflug-Back. “I was basically under the same kind of conditions as someone accused of manslaughter.”

According to Pflug-Back, a plainclothes homicide detective made an appearance at each of her court dates. “The police were really taking [my case] personally. They had bought into this portrayal of me as being this rabid cop hater. It hurt their feelings, you know? You have to have a little compassion.”

Greg Rowley is also charged with “on the ground” offenses, but could not be reached by The Dominion before this article went to print.

Emomotimi Azorbo, who is described as an “apolitical person,” was confronted by police at the G20 as he was crossing the street. Azorbo, who is deaf, did not hear the police were shouting at him. He was then targeted by police for noncompliance. “There was a bit of resistance when police handcuffed him because he didn’t know what was happening,” Azorbo’s lawyer Howard Morton said in an article published in The Lawyers Weekly.

Azorbo was denied an unbiased, non-police sign language translator while in custody. Despite his treatment in detention, the charges of assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest are being pursued against him—charges that Morton resolves will “embarrass” the Ontario government.

On December 13, Sterling Stutz, who had her charges withdrawn as part of the “main conspiracy group”, stood in front of Old City Hall in Toronto at a support rally and media event for defendant Julian Ichim. “The police spent over a billion dollars on policing for the G20, they arrested over a thousand people, and what they got was a handful of charges,” Stutz told the crowd that had gathered for the rally. “These arrests were basically bought with that money.”

Stutz was among those attending court in support of Ichim, who is facing charges on three counts of disobeying a court order for having posted his personal account of interactions with an undercover police officer.

The officer operated under the alias “Khalid Mohammad” (the officer’s real name is Bindo Schowan) as a participant in social justice groups for more than a year in advance of the G20. Ichim posted his account of Schowan’s impacts of the community during the publication ban that forbade the publishing of identifying information relating to undercover officers.

In his blog, Ichim describes his story of befriending the undercover, referring to Schowan only by his pseudonym. Two days after publishing the blog post, Ontario Provincial Police officers arrived at Ichim’s house with an order that he withdraw his post. Ichim refused. “I wasn’t caught at a protest for causing trouble, but was sitting home quietly telling my story on the internet,” he told the crowd at the rally.

Dan Kellar is in a similar situation as Ichim. He faces charges after publishing a blog post on www.peaceculture.org. He is facing two counts of criminal defamation and one count of counsel to assault, also stemming from a blog post about G20-related incidents. The charge of counsel to assault relates to one particular line in the post that reads “spit in [the undercover’s] footsteps and scoff at his existence if you see him.”

Kellar is still awaiting the resolution of his charges.

Byron Sonne faces charges of possessing explosive substances. The security consultant denies having malicious intent. Sonne first appeared on the police radar for photographing the G20 security perimeter. The support team for Sonne declined a interview request with The Dominion, explaining that it's proving risky for them to speak publicly at this juncture in the trial.

According to numbers released by the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General in December, of the over 1,100 people arrested at the G20, 330 people appeared before the court. Of them, 201 had their charges dismissed or withdrawn. In all, 32 people have plead guilty, 39 people have seen resolution through diversion programs, and 34 are still awaiting resolution to their charges.

Shailagh Keaney is a writer and community organizer currently based in occupied Neutral territory in Southern Ontario.

Justice for our Communities March, G-20

A Safety of Our Own

hillarybain — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 09:38:51 +0000

Security and community in St. James Park

This article was published by the Toronto Media Co-op prior to the eviction of Occupy Toronto from St. James Park on November 23.

TORONTO—How does a non-hierarchical movement deal with the safety of its participants? “Occupy” encampments in many countries have been struggling with this question, and Toronto’s “Occupy” is no exception. Located in the downtown east side, St. James Park has been a refuge to many homeless people, and drinking and drug use have always been present. Dick Johnson, who has been helping de-escalate problems, told me that it was important to be sensitive to the needs of long-term park residents: “We have to remember that they were here first and a lot of the problems are with people who were here before us. The longest resident has been living here for 10 years.”

A team of marshals is trained and on call to de-escalate problems. “The issue is that we are dealing with the acts that go on in the park whether we are here or not,” one member of the Marshal Team said. “We have had to evict several people from the park in a non-violent way. There have been a few instances of extremely disruptive people who we were able to deal with in a non-violent and loving way and who were then able to be extremely productive members of this community. We need to publicize the idea about crisis prevention and de-escalation. What we are doing here is very different from the way society at large deals with conflict. There is a lot to learn for everyone.”

General Assemblies (GAs) in particular have been a site of significant disruption. In the most serious incident, a man showed his penis to the crowd during the meeting. But occupiers are taking steps to deal with these problems. A policy on drugs and alcohol (they are banned) has been passed through the GA.

“Marshals never quit,” said Johnson, one of the marshals. “There have been a lot of proactive solutions happening.”

“Security in the park should be all of our responsibility,” Johnson said. “We should not let either paranoia or apathy get to us—we also should not be vigilantes. Sometimes the best thing to do is to ask someone one else to help deal with the situation.”

There has also been an education in dealing with mental illnesses and police; people are realizing that it's not appropriate to call the police for mental illness or intoxication and that the paramedics and crisis intervention teams are better for situations that have become too out of hand for the park community to deal with.

Mental health and nursing professionals have started volunteering for the medic committee to help deal with these sorts of issues. There has been a general agreement only to involve the police in serious incidents of assault, and only when the survivor wants to go that route.

Taylor Flook is an experienced environmental activist who has been a key member of many committees at Occupy Toronto that deal with safety in the park. She says that at first people were reluctant to deal with problems out of a misplaced liberal social-ideology where people didn’t want to interfere with anyone else. “And we’re now…ending our third week—we are at a point when I mention that a sexual assault has happened again and that we liaised with the police and had them assist in the apprehension of the perpetrator, people clapped. It was very bizarre [to see such a change in attitudes]. So, we’re seeing that people are getting it. I hope that people are getting it fast enough to mitigate any further trauma upon an individual while people suss out their ideologies of how to deal with things.”

There have been several incidents in which occupiers reluctantly felt they had to involve the official justice system. In the first week, a man was stealing from tents and sexually assaulting people by touching their feet—occupiers caught him, took him to the edge of the park, and turned him over to the police. This week, a team of marshals searched for another man who allegedly sexually assaulted someone and turned him over to police, as the victim wanted to file charges. There was also a citizen’s arrest made of a Sun TV reporter who was pursuing people so aggressively they were being hit with the TV cameras. While the Sun TV reporter was banned from the park, other reporters from the Sun newspaper respectfully camped out for several days without any incident.

Flook regrets that the camp still doesn’t have a firm process for restorative justice and as a result still has to deal with police regarding serious incidents: “…we don’t have elders or first nations people or anyone with a restorative justice process to actually play that out and show what healing is like, what atoning for your actions is like in a community.”

She says that marshals are a good first step (she’d rather they were called “mediators”). She told Toronto Media Co-op: “Marshals are just a bunch of people who were willing to volunteer; brave individuals who were trying to be the piece that is missing in our greater society. The police have, depending on your experience, failed at the ability to mediate conflict, they actually help escalate conflict…instead of that, what we’re trying to do is create community.”

Megan Kinch is an activist and journalist in Toronto.

Questions? Comments? Drop us a line: info@mediacoop.ca.

St James Park

Occupy Toronto survives Eviction Day

Tim McSorley — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 10:37:44 +0000

Occupiers, city, to present arguments in court today

TORONTO—November 15 was a whirlwind day for Occupy Toronto. Residents woke to the news that an eviction order had been issued for midnight that night. At the same time, word arrived that New York's Occupy Wall Street, the heart of the Occupy Movement, was being evicted from Zuccotti park. A morning march in solidarity with protesters in New York resulted in two arrests.

Bylaw officers soon entered the park, tagging tents and other structures with eviction notices. Camp organizers met with clergy from St. James Cathedral, which technically owns a portion of the land the camp is situated on, and a General Assembly convened to discuss potential responses. The camp buzzed with nervous energy as people prepared for an eviction and the possibility of police violence. A surge of support for Occupy Toronto became evident as the day wore on, with large numbers of people streaming into St. James, and prominent support coming from unions and even some celebrities, including renowned folk singer Gordon Lightfoot.

Sid Ryan, president of the Ontario Federation of Labour, released an "Open Letter to Rob Ford": "Please take this letter as formal notice that I will be personally joining the occupiers in St. James Park tonight, along with many other labour activists and community leaders, to link arms with the Occupy Movement. We are all part of the 99 per cent. [We] have a long and proud history of support for civil disobedience. It represents the finest instincts of citizens in a democracy to correct the actions of their governments...without it, there would have been no Civil Rights, women’s rights, environmental or other seminal movements that have changed the course of history."

The eviction order, signed by City Manager Joe Pennachetti, states that protesters are being evicted due to business complaints and the need to winterize the park. While media have highlighted several complaints from business owners, the Toronto Media Co-op has reported on several business owners in the area who are supportive of or benign to the Occupy site.

Julie, a City Liaison from Occupy Toronto, said that occupiers were more than willing to help with the process of winterizing the park. “Of course we care about the park, we live in it,” she told the Media Co-op. “I contacted five people at the Parks and Rec department. The only one I could get on the phone told me that he had been instructed not to speak with people from Occupy. I left very polite messages on Thursday the 10th and Monday the 14th with four other city workers indicating our willingness to cooperate with them, and received no reply.” Lana Goldberg, another protester living at the camp, says the city has not approached Occupy Toronto regarding winterizing the park. “We would obviously be willing to work with them on doing so,” she said.

Late in the day, the tide had shifted. As a result of negotiations through the church, police had promised not to follow through with a midnight raid, and a ruling on an injunction filed by several camp members against the eviction came down. Lawyers from Green and Chercover successfully argued for a stay against the eviction until a full hearing could be held to determine its legality. The injunction was granted at 5:30pm November 15, giving the camp a temporary reprieve. The legal teams are scheduled to debate the ruling in court today, Friday, November 18, with a final decision from the judge on Monday, November 23. The lawyers for the occupiers are expected to argue that Charter of Rights and Freedoms, namely freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, protect protestors from any action against the camp.

“I think this case is about whether city by-laws trump Charter rights, which is pretty incredible if you think about it,” said Dave Vasey, an occupier living at the camp who sits on a number of committees. Meanwhile, 11 city councilors have signed a letter calling on the mayor to stop the eviction.

Some activists were unhappy with attempts to call off a planned rally in solidarity with Occupy Toronto, and with the injunction itself. Bruce Darden said “I think it's irresponsible for anyone to ever demobilize people, to thwart community members' desires or will to action...The effect [it will have] is that people will continue to look to the institutions of the one per cent, that of the courts, to solve our problems instead of trying to act together and to deal with our issue in collective spaces like the park.” In spite of this development, a large crowd gathered in St. James for a General Assembly, which went late into the night.

Protestors have vowed to stay and continue to fight the eviction.

Justin Saunders is an information technologist and journalist based in Toronto. Megan Kinch is an activist and journalist in Toronto.

Eviction night in Toronto

Reconsidering Reconciliation

Martin Lukacs — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 10:56:16 +0000

Simpson's offers radical answers to long-standing questions

Dancing on Our Turtle’s Back: Stories of Nishnaabeg Re-Creation, Resurgence, and a New Emergence
Leanne Simpson
Arbeiter Ring: Winnipeg, 2011

In recent years, the topic of reconciliation between Indigenous nations and the Canadian state has been hotly discussed. But what exactly does the word “reconciliation” mean?

So far, our government's answers have been efforts to supposedly hasten land claims processes for unceded territories, and public apologies such as the one Prime Minister Harper offered to survivors of residential schools in 2008, notably referring to the period as a “sad chapter” in national history. But the devastating inequalities still faced by Indigenous people in Canada's legal system, child welfare bureaucracy and social and economic structure raise many questions as to whether such acts have ushered in a new, reconciled relationship. In an age when government policies are still actively harming Indigenous people, is it believable that federal bureaucrats honestly wish for a mutually beneficial reconciliation? Or is the entire concept little more than a tool for whitewashing Canada's dishonorable treatment of First Nations, both past and present?

In Dancing on Our Turtle's Back, activist and scholar Leanne Simpson answers these questions and many others, proposing a definition of reconciliation that is radically different from any offered by the colonial state. Reconciliation, Simpson writes, must be rooted in the political and cultural resurgence of Indigenous peoples: restoring traditions, revitalizing family ties that have been ravaged by residential schools and neo-colonial child welfare policies, practicing sustainable stewardship of the land and building a future where new generations of Indigenous children can assert their identity and self-determination and live free, healthy and joyful lives.

Far from being dry, Simpson's writing is a vital, vibrant and ultimately life-affirming fusion of personal experience and academic analysis, collective narratives of the past and visions for the future. Many sections are directly transcribed from talks with Elders, whereas others, such as the chapter "Breastfeeding and Treaties," are explorations of what children and infants can teach adults about how to have equitable political relations with other people and be respectful of the natural world.

Using examples from her own Nishnaabeg culture, Simpson explains the diverse ways in which resistance, love, mobilization and equality are and always have been inherent to Indigenous lifestyles and philosophies. Traditional Nishnaabeg society, she writes, was defined by principles of non-authoritarian governance and leadership, respect, mutuality and constant progressive change. Even the Nishnaabeg language contains this essence of fluidity, using verbs in a greater capacity than it does nouns. These principles and government structures are not concepts that are lost, she explains, so much as they are concepts that need to be supported and strengthened.

Often speaking from the reference point of parenthood, Simpson places passionate emphasis on how important healthy family dynamics and traditional child-rearing practices are to the future of Indigenous resistance and well-being. To build a cultural and political resurgence, relationships between parents and children must be a microcosm of the larger social structure: non-hierarchical, non-violent, non-coercive and non-condescending. In this way, parenting can be one of the most politically transformative acts: children raised today with positive models of how to relate to others without dominance and coercion will be naturally responsible leaders of tomorrow's resurgence.

Simpson's narrative style is as much a testament to non-hierarchical philosophies as the actual content she explores. In an expressive style reminiscent of some of the most emblematic writers of feminist and Indigenist thought—from bell hooks to Subcomandante Marcos—Simpson defies constructed divisions between the personal and the political, the past and the present, the spiritual and the empirical. Dancing On Our Turtle's Back opens the door to a world where a woman's role as a mother, aunt or daughter is no less revolutionary and political than her role as a front-line activist; where age-old creation stories are no less relevant or critical than yesterday's parliamentary decisions; and where the opinions and thoughts of children are taken no less seriously than those of learned adults. These are fighting words as much as they are loving words, standing as a direct challenge to the empty consumerism, individualism and disconnection from each other and the environment so widely accepted as normal states of being in neo-colonial culture.

The resurgence of Indigenous nations, Simpson asserts, is something that must move “beyond resistance and survival” to a flourishing state of joy, strength and self-sufficiency—a centuries-old process that is and will continue to be carried out with or without the acknowledgment of non-Indigenous social movement theory, the popular support of Canadians or the respect and permission of the settler government.

Kelly Pflug-Back is a writer, poet and activist in Toronto. Check her out at www.kellypflugback.wordpress.com.

Dancing on Our Turtle's Back cover

A Disappointing John

Martin Lukacs — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 10:31:51 +0000

Brown's "Paying For It" misses its potential

Paying For It: A Comic Strip Memoir about being a John
Chester Brown
Drawn & Quarterly: Montreal, 2011

This summer, Chester Brown’s new graphic novel Paying For It—a memoir about his encounters with a string of Toronto sex workers over the past decade—is being snatched up faster that ribbed jimmy-hats at a bodacious bawdy house.

Brown’s work gives us the voice of the john, a person often scorned and usually silenced. He is heard now; he is calling for understanding, for open mindedness, for the acceptance of a different sexual lifestyle, for the rights and protection of sex workers. I think we need to listen.

Having sworn off dating after a break up with long-term girlfriend Sook-Yin Lee of Much-Music fame, Brown decides one day to look for a sex worker. He doesn’t appear terribly suave as he stumbles nervously through the uncharted territory of brothels and call girl advertisements, but he never for a moment looks prudish or ashamed of himself either.

The sharp black and white artwork of the 227-page graphic novel is interestingly composed and the story is honest, intimate and to the point. But I have to say, it didn’t entirely meet my expectations.

I expected the memoir of an intellectual john speaking in defense of his lifestyle, to emphasize awareness and responsibility. I expected him to say, "See? People CAN pay for sex without abusing or exploiting anyone. So let’s stop being prudes about it!"

Instead, I read about Brown picking up women who sometimes appeared to be strung out on drugs, women who he hoped but wasn’t sure were 18 and women who seemed less than willing or distraught about what they were doing—and there wasn’t much compassion coming from him.

In one chapter, Brown finds himself having sex with a woman who hides her face during intercourse. He thinks to himself, "She’s ashamed, she doesn’t want me to be able to see her face while I’m screwing her," rather than reflecting on what forces brought this young woman to do this job she finds loathsome. He thinks "I feel bad for her, but not so bad that I’m giving her a tip," and later reflects, "I’ll have to give her a bad review on Terb (Toronto Escorts Review Board)."

In his introduction Brown prepares readers for an almost complete omission of women as characters. He explains that he left out the sex workers’ perspectives and never shows their cartoon faces for the sake of protecting their privacy. He claims to have genuine affection for the women—a sentiment that doesn’t come through in the scene described above.

One wonders why he couldn’t have used creative liberty to allow the sex workers a voice while still protecting their identities. This certainly would have lent much to his writing.

Canada may follow the lead of a number of countries in fully decriminalizing sex work. In the face of that, this memoir provokes a much needed discussion. No conversation on this topic can be productive without the voices of those involved in the industry.

While Chester Brown provides us only one side one of the account, he still manages to offer us insights and set an example of unabashed openness that I think is essential to any discussion of sex work and the law.

Melissa McCabe is an intern with The Dominion.

PayingforIt

Infographic: Threatening Ideologies

Moira Peters — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 05:36:25 +0000

tim-infog.11X17.new_.jpg

Tim Groves is an independent researcher and journalist in Toronto.

The Plastic Bag Debate

Tim McSorley — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 05:34:14 +0000

Lessons from Rwanda

KIGALI, RWANDA—One of the first things you will likely notice if you have the chance to visit Kigali, the capital of Rwanda, is the extraordinary cleanliness that spans the city. This pleasant reality can be explained by looking closely at how the Rwandese manage their environment.

Of particular importance is their stance on plastics: Rwanda is now entering its fourth year with a nation-wide law banning all plastic bags.

As Canada continues to debate the future role of plastic bags, it is worth looking at the Rwandan example, and understanding how such an initiative operates, and what benefits it can bring.

Toronto is the only Canadian city with a mandatory fee to the consumer of five cents per bag. However, in recent months Toronto mayor Rob Ford has repeatedly attacked the fee, and has explicitly stated that he wishes to get rid of it. Why you may ask? The answer: consumers are apparently annoyed.

A spokeswoman for the mayor, Adrienne Batra, told CBC news in December 2010 that “the mayor speaks with residents every day, and the thorny issue of the bag tax keeps coming up. People are sick and tired of being nickel-and-dimed to death.”

It seems that Mayor Ford may be ignoring the facts, as multiple reports have indicated that the tax has greatly reduced the purchase of plastic bags in Canada. For example, Metro grocery stores have reported a drop of 80 per cent since 2009.

This reduction in plastic bag use is important for the Canadian environment, says Franz Hartmann, Executive Director of the Toronto Environmental Alliance.

“Plastic bags require fossil fuels and many chemicals to be produced. This is having a negative impact on the environment, and using up precious materials. They are also a major source of liter in Toronto, and are having a bad impact on wildlife outside the city.”

Although the fee is playing a positive role, it is worth looking past initiatives that simply aim to reduce use and toward those that target outright elimination. The perfect case study is the fight against plastic bags in Rwanda, a fight that has led to their complete demise.

For anyone who has travelled in Africa the ubiquitous nature of plastic bags sprawled everywhere is an undeniable reality. The problem has not gone unnoticed though: several African countries have been working to ban plastic bags for years.

Located in Eastern Africa, Rwanda is largely known for its tragic genocide that exploded in April 1994. Since then it has tended to operate as a relatively unknown country outside certain political and economic circles. However, for such a small, developing nation it is home to a variety of unique, forward thinking policies.

In 2008, Rwanda declared a nation-wide ban on all plastic bags.

The initiative was a response to the two most common ailments caused by plastic: a well documented understanding of plastic's negative environmental impacts, but equally influential, the extensive physical presence of bags around the country.

Dr. Rose Mukankomje, the Director General of the Rwanda Environmental Authority (REMA), has been at the forefront of this policy, and continues to work on a daily basis to monitor its progress.

“In 2004, the Ministry of the Environment began to conduct studies on the use of plastic bags in Rwanda,” she explains. “At that time people had started to see plastic invading everywhere—black, yellow, red colored bags—causing even visual pollution.”

In addition to the visual pollution, research from the National University of Rwanda reported the widespread environmental consequences of plastic. “Plastic was not only all over the ground, but underneath as well. This hindered agricultural production in Rwanda, as plants cannot grow past the plastic. As well, our water sources were becoming highly polluted with plastic being found inside many dead fish,” Dr. Mukankomje recalls.

The first step was raising awareness about this information. This began in 2005 during the national day of cleaning, called Umuganda. As the communities around Rwanda began to clean up they were asked to collect all the plastic they could find.

“We came up with a huge, huge amount of plastic—in the land, around our compounds, everywhere—everyone was scared,” says Dr. Mukankomje.

This event signaled the turning point. It not only sensitized many Rwandans to the problem of plastic within the country, but it got politicians thinking about the issue as well—President Paul Kagame took part in this event. A nation-wide campaign began by flooding the media. Furthermore, local NGOs and businesses were commissioned to create alternatives—mainly cotton or banana leaf bags.

The advocacy was a success and in 2008 a bill was finally passed to ban plastic bags within Rwanda. While there was still much resistance from the affected private sector, the culmination of the campaign can largely be attributed to developing a general consensus among Rwandans. Dr. Mukankomje explains, “You need a policy to get rid of plastic bags, but it must be wanted to be successful.”

The benefits of Rwanda’s plastic bag ban were quickly evident: in 2008 UN Habitat named Kigali the cleanest city in all of Africa. Now three years since the bill was passed, Rwanda remains a plastic bag-free country, and has developed a reputation across the region for its extreme cleanliness. The passing of the bill coupled with Rwanda’s monthly day of cleaning has insured that it remains this way, and will continue for the foreseeable future.

As Toronto debates the future of plastic bags, the story of Rwanda, now more than ever, should be considered. Though different in many fundamental ways, Canada, like Rwanda, relies greatly on its natural resources. Thus, the future health of the land is of pivotal importance in both countries.

“Human civilization has worked just fine without plastic bags. It’s only been in the last 30 years that they’ve reared their ugly head,” says Hartmann. “Getting rid of them completely is the best solution. I don’t see what the issue is.”

Eliminating plastic bags will play a huge first step in curbing the prevalence of plastics in the Canadian environment. As Dr. Mukankomje frames it, “We must not see this as a challenge, but as an opportunity.”

Mayor Ford, take note.

Ryan Kohls is a freelance journalist out of Peterborough, Ontario.

Bag in tree

The Roads We Travelled

Moira Peters — Wed, 18 May 2011 05:39:02 +0000

Building the Toronto People's Assembly

TORONTO—Copenhagen, December 15, 2010. The day before what CNN referred to as “the most hotly anticipated action of the summit,“ nearly 1,000 activists huddled together in a Danish squat that became the focal point of grassroots mobilization against the United Nations annual Coalition of the Parties (COP) Climate Change Conference.

Lisa, an American activist and veteran of 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle, delivered a final pitch for the plan of action while maps were distributed, blocs were formed and participants felt the growing anticipation of being part of a plan to change the course of history.

“We will use the combined mass of our bodies to push through the police lines and then break through the fence,” she announced. “Once we are inside the UN grounds we will secure a safe space where delegates coming out from the conference can join us and together we will form a People’s Assembly.”

As much as has been said about the day of December 16—the “Reclaim Power” People’s Assembly in Copenhagen—the prior two weeks of frantic meetings, alliance building and constant striving to create an inclusive and horizontal process were critical in creating a new model for organizing that could be exported around the world. This action in Copenhagen was to inspire the Toronto People’s Assembly, a global gathering held in parallel to the 2010 G8/G20 summits.

Cochabamba, April 2010. Bolivia hosted the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. Toronto activists in Cochabamba observed a conference that, while engaging the grassroots participation of 30,000 activists from across the globe, was largely organized from the top down. The Toronto People’s Assembly drew much inspiration from Cochabamba, which also acted as a guide for the Assembly to be critical of its own process.

The main development to come out of Cochabamba was a collective understanding that the best way to answer the international call for justice is to build your struggle locally. One of the lessons drawn from Bolivia was the need to put in place impactful structures to build and maintain a movement that is substantial, consistent and long-term. The call from Cochabamba was to build a worldwide climate justice movement.

Toronto, May/June 2010. The weeks in May immediately following Cochabamba and in June prior to the G20 were a crucial and transformative period for the social and climate justice communities. Ongoing talks and discussions evaluated which elements could be drawn from Cochabamba.

“The People’s Assembly is an extension of the dialogue, organization, and mobilization that took place in Cochabamba. It’s an instrument through which local activists can create new spaces, and generate new possibilities,” said organizer Raul Burbano, who is also active with Toronto’s Latin America Solidarity Network.

As June 2010 and the G20 grew closer, a call was put out through the Toronto Community Mobilization Network for a day of resistance for climate and environmental justice during the G8/G20. Responding to this call, a circle of unaligned climate justice and environmental organizers started meeting weekly in a park on Church Street. Two plans for action emerged. One was a rally that would become known as the Toxic Tour. The other was the People’s Assembly on Climate Justice (PACJ).

The G20 hit Toronto like a storm, and the collective response was quick and widespread, with a resounding call to establish new relationships that was not only heard, but also understood.

In the aftermath of the G20, the organizing community would suddenly find itself in a new, highly charged environment. After the Toronto People’s Assembly on June 23, 2010, and through July and August, the intensity of organizing would remain high, with action camps across the country and groups in Toronto together emphasizing the immediate need for movement building. There would be no doubt that a second PACJ would take place.

Maxim Winther, a participant in the June 2010 Assembly, said, “I don’t really know what the G20’s like because it’s behind two layers of fence and it’s costing billions of dollars and I’m not seeing any of that. All I see is police roaming the streets.“

Police from across the country turned the downtown Toronto hub into what the Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin would later call “a time period where martial law set in the city of Toronto, leading to the most massive compromise of civil liberties in Canadian history.”

Despite this atmosphere, the Toronto PACJ was vibrant and successful, and another People’s Assembly was organized on December 4, 2010—the Worldwide Day of Climate Action. While the first PACJ focused on defining the meaning of climate justice, the second focused on the collective work of building a stronger movement for climate justice in Toronto. For both Assemblies, the starting point for participants to generate ideas was a “framing question”—a direct import from the Reclaim Power Assembly in Copenhagen.

The main innovation introduced in Toronto was a round of break-out groups, allowing more space for the Assembly’s horizontal process both to generate ideas and also to orient itself for action by harnessing the intimacy and energy of small group work. Beginning with the December 2010 Assembly, Toronto activists took the working-group model that emerged from Cochabamba and re-framed it as a series of permanent action-oriented bodies known as People’s Councils. People’s Councils included Movement Building, Outreach & Education, Group Coordination, Building Alternatives Spaces, Mass Action & Political Pressure, and Personal Development.

Both assemblies generated more than 200 participants and more than 40 endorsements from community groups in Toronto.

“It was very participatory and very open,” said Alaynah Smith. The new activist who travelled to Toronto from Michigan said the People’s Assembly was “unlike the G8/G20 where we can’t see stuff...and its really kind of almost a mystery. But this was open to the public; anybody could come and we all had a voice equally.”

The Assembly is an open collective dialogue which organizers have termed “radical horizontality.” Within the Assembly, radical horizontality is a two-pronged process which allows participants, through two rounds of break-outs and intermittent plenaries, to first generate ideas, and then to develop and synthesize them with the goal of establishing mandates for the People’s Councils. Radical horizontality extends to everyday life, seeking to establish shared responsibility and accountability in the entire community, making local resistance and organizing sustainable.

From its beginning, the Assembly focused on being a point of convergence inclusive to a wide range of organizations: women’s groups, anti-poverty, food security and environmental and migrant justice organizations, cyclists, co-operatives, collectives, and so on. To transform communities, the Assembly posited closing the gap between activism and everyday life.

Raul Zibechi, a Uruguayan socio-political theorist, explained how “in the new pattern of action...mobilization starts in the spaces of everyday life and survival, putting in [motion] an increasing number of social networks or, that is to say, societies in movement, self-articulated from within.” The People’s Councils were modeled on the hope of establishing this sort of organizing on a permanent basis, to make the leap from activism to organized communities.

The post-G20 realities of community organizing in Canada presented a challenge, and a new dynamic that calls for activists to develop, out of necessity, new methods of organizing. This requires ingenuity, responsibility, and a long-term willingness to sculpt a new grassroots paradigm.

Small beginnings and creative examples were observed in Canada during the months following the G20.

Action camps took place throughout the country during the summer of 2010, themed around climate justice, Indigenous solidarity, non-violent direct action and tar sands/pipeline resistance. Organizers built links between cities and strengthened regional networks. Simultaneous People’s Assemblies were organized in December 2010 across Canada; organizers in Montreal began to develop a climate justice co-op, and the climate justice community in Toronto established a permanent People’s Assembly. Climate justice organizers have used momentum from the G20 to create their own grassroots infrastructure, without waiting for existing infrastructure to get on board, or being dependent on external funding.

The People’s Assembly in Toronto rose on the tide of a paradigm shift towards popular assemblies as an alternative to the failure of international institutions and nation-states to address the urgent global threat presented by the climate crisis.

At the same time, a global climate justice movement has grown organically, shaped by horizontal structures, and differentiating itself from mainstream environmental voices through a deep anti-capitalist analysis.

The year 2010 presented the organizing community in Canada with two major opportunities to mobilize—one in Vancouver to oppose the Olympics and one in Toronto to resist the G20. Toronto organizers took this confluence of factors as an opportunity, and the People’s Assembly was one outcome.

By eschewing traditional hierarchies, the open and inclusive process of the Assembly is an invitation for communities and organizers to come together and build solidarity, share skills and coordinate efforts.

“The aim of the People’s Assembly in Toronto,” an organizer told The Dominion, “is for the climate justice community and its allies to utilize it as a vehicle or a space through which it can operate as a movement, a self-articulated space that will allow it to remain a movement.”

Kimia Ghomeshi, an organizer of the June Toronto People’s Assembly, told a Toronto Media Co-op reporter that the entire process was “highly participatory which we so rarely see in Canada...What will change things is the solutions being home-grown because then they’re relevant to the local context and people feel more ownership in creating that change rather than it being imposed on them.”

This article was produced by the Toronto Media Co-op for A People's Forecast: The Climate Justice Issue, our 2011 special issue. To read more articles as they are published, click here.For more news driven by readers and not advertisers, check out www.toronto.mediacoop.ca

People's Assembly Image