Racial profiling is a major issue in our society. All the research conducted and reports published on the issue over the past twenty years are unanimous: racialized people are the subject of disproportionate arrests by the police. The Armony report is also clear that this disproportion is not due to greater criminalization of racialized people. Rather, it is the result of racial profiling: a phenomenon that leads police officers to select more often and treat certain individuals differently because of the color of their skin.
Posted at 1:00 p.m.
Mr. François Ducas said “enough” and decided to fight against his rights, which were violated by two police officers from the City of Repentigny. The Human Rights Tribunal, under the pen of Judge Doris Thibault, gave him his case. However, an analysis of the decision allows us to see that this victory is tinged with elements allowing us to doubt its real impact for the victims.
A black man driving a luxury car
In 2017, the police crossed the vehicle of Mr. Ducas and decided to turn around. Nothing in Mr. Ducas’ driving or in his behavior justifies this decision, apart from two elements: he is black and drives a luxury car.
This phenomenon is known as Driving While Black (DWB) and refers to the fact that black people driving cars considered to be luxurious are systematically stopped more often by the police. This stems from a stereotype associating luxury cars and black people with crime.
This is not a simple inconvenience. It should be emphasized that very often these drivers have to undergo repeated identity checks within a year without any offense being charged against them. However, the judge sees there an unconscious manifestation of racial profiling. The decision to turn around, however, was not. Following Mr. Ducas for a long distance either. Why then excuse the reprehensible behavior of policewomen in this way?
But there is more.
Mr. Ducas was arrested, searched, handcuffed and detained because he protested against an intervention which he considered to be racially motivated and therefore illegal. Does a citizen have an obligation to obey an illegal order from a police officer? The Supreme Court in the judgment Kosoian rendered in 2019 answers in the negative. The Human Rights Tribunal says yes. Moreover, the treatment to which Mr. Ducas was subjected was justified according to the Tribunal.
No compensation
With respect, I find this to be a misunderstanding of the manifestation of this important issue.
If the decision to intercept it was based on racial reasons, the jurisprudence teaches us that the whole intervention is contaminated. However, he was not compensated for this abusive and differential treatment.
In addition, the Commission was claiming $34,000 in compensation for Mr. Ducas. The Tribunal awarded him $8,000. No punitive damages towards the police officers at fault. No mandatory order towards the City of Repentigny. This is very little, especially considering that it is the City that will pay the bill.
Cities and law enforcement say they want to fight racial profiling. The courts too. However, when will there be substantive and dissuasive reparations to put an end to this scourge in our society?