Is the City of Saint-Jérôme acting illegally by systematically dismantling homeless encampments on its territory? The question will be debated in Superior Court in Montreal this Friday morning. A legal decision that could have repercussions elsewhere in the province.
Homelessness is a hot issue in Saint-Jérôme. After receiving a damning report from the Laurentides Complaint Assistance and Support Center last fall, the largest municipality in the Laurentians found itself in court this Friday morning.
A legal organization defending the rights of homeless people argues that the City is violating the fundamental rights of the homeless because it does not offer adequate alternatives to evicted campers.
The city has only six emergency beds, for a population of around 40 to 50 homeless people living outside.
In addition, the operation of the only emergency shelter, the Hut, means that certain people cannot access it, for example if they have weakened capacities or have behavioral issues, indicate the legal documents consulted by The Press.
Despite everything, the City has adopted municipal regulations prohibiting any person from sleeping “on the streets, sidewalks, parks, playgrounds and in any other public place,” we can read.
In 2022, the municipality also prohibited the erection of camps for any purpose other than recreational. Since then, the camps for people experiencing homelessness have been regularly dismantled, denounce stakeholders and homeless people in the community cited in the appeal.
Imprisoned for unpaid fines
It is the Traveling Legal Clinic (CJI) which is leading the legal battle to invalidate these municipal regulations which, according to it, contravene the fundamental rights of people experiencing homelessness.
In addition to the dismantling and lack of resources, the CJI deplores that several homeless Jérôme residents were incarcerated after they were unable to pay fines received in contravention of municipal regulations.
These fines range from $150 for a first offense to several thousand dollars.
The CJI is the legal defense organization which defended the campers under the Ville-Marie highway in Montreal, in 2023. The latter were finally evicted in July to allow work by the Ministry of Transport, after several months of reprieve .
Municipal regulations in Saint-Jérôme “put life, liberty and security [des personnes sans-abri] in danger in a manner inconsistent with the principles of fundamental justice,” the CJI states in its legal action.
Neither the CJI nor the mayor of Saint-Jérôme, Marc Bourcier, wanted to comment on the case on Thursday given the ongoing legal proceedings.
The City criticized in the past
This is not the first time that the City of Saint-Jérôme has been criticized for its management of homelessness.
Homeless people are victims of systemic and organizational mistreatment, according to a report from the Complaint Assistance and Support Center (CAAP) of the Laurentides, as reported by local media at the end of September. . According to this report, there are dozens of homeless people on the city’s streets who do not fit into existing resources.
The report is based on interviews with people on the street, police officers, social workers and staff of the CISSS des Laurentides.
The file was submitted to the Public Protector, a journalist from the CIME network reported at the time.
In an interview given to the same journalist at the end of November, the mayor of Saint-Jérôme, Marc Bourcier, defended the city’s model for combating homelessness. “There are no camps in Saint-Jérôme, we do not want camps in the parks, for security reasons,” he assured in particular.
The example of Ontario?
In late January 2023, an Ontario judge ruled that it was unconstitutional to prevent a person from living outdoors if there was no accessible and available place indoors.
The decision prevented the Region of Waterloo from evicting around 50 people living on vacant land. Due to the lack of shelter places, the local regulation contravened the fundamental rights of the homeless, this judge ruled.
“It is a safe bet that in the event of a challenge, the Superior Court would reach a conclusion similar to that of Ontario [et, précédemment, de la Cour d’appel de Colombie-Britannique] », Professor Lucie Lamarche of the legal sciences department at the University of Quebec in Montreal (UQAM) told our columnist.