A determined stance is being taken by a Toronto-area police division to preserve the anonymity of officers implicated in the shooting fatality of Ejaz Choudry, a father of four from Mississauga. They have contented the potential for “dangerous” repercussions that might impact both the officers and their loved ones if their identities are disclosed to the public.
A Notice of Motion was submitted to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in May, proposing a publication ban on any details that could expose the identities of the officers from the Peel Regional Police (PRP) connected to the man’s death. The legal effort is part of the civil proceedings in a lawsuit initiated by Choudry’s family. The motion argues that revealing the identities of the five officers implicated in the June 2020 death of the 62-year-old father would place them and their families in a perilous situation.
Should the motion be successful, a publication ban will be imposed, barring the sharing of any details that could potentially identify the accused officers. This includes, but is not limited to, names, physical descriptions, mannerisms, vocal characteristics, and images disseminated through television and radio, print, or electronic means, as per the motion.
In their sworn affidavits, the officers professed that they had been threatened by individuals who would disclose their places of residence. Other activities included the display of ‘wanted’ posters featuring their photographs and names, receiving verbal threats during rallies, and noticing banners on Highway 400 overpasses labeling PRP officers as “murderers.”
The officers argue the importance of their safety supersedes the public’s privilege to peruse court documents while a Canadian human rights organization contends this case threatens access to information, especially at a time when discussions about systemic racism and how those within the confines of the law treat the vulnerable should take precedence.
Shakir Rahim, a lawyer and head of the criminal justice program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, commented on the matter. Rahim acknowledged the intense scrutiny faced by local police services after several recent instances of serious injuries or deaths involving racialized citizens, arguing that the officers’ identities are of public interest. He underscored the necessity for the public to open a dialogue on these issues, not only as a form of accountability but also to probe whether these officers have been implicated in other instances as well.
Peel police abstained from commenting on their decision to file the motion, citing the active legal proceedings.
Choudry was tragically killed inside his apartment in Mississauga on June 20, 2020. His daughter contacted paramedics, seeking aid as she disclosed his refusal to take required medication due to a mental health crisis. According to the SIU’s report, responding Peel police officers made several unsuccessful efforts to safely remove Choudry from his home, before forcing their way in. They perceived him as armed with a knife and they ended up fatally shooting him. His death sparked public outrage, fueled protests, and renewed calls for a full inquiry.
In 2021, the SIU concluded their investigation, finding no legal grounds to press charges against the officer who fatally shot Choudry. His family then filed a $2 million civil lawsuit against Peel Regional Police, its chief, and five anonymous officers. They argue that a straightforward mental health call was negligently transformed into a high-risk tactical operation that ended in Choudry’s death.
In the ensuing civil proceedings, the police denied any wrongdoing and reiterated that they were confronting an armed man who posed a threat to them, and multiple attempts at non-lethal deterrence proved unsuccessful.
The officers argued that maintaining their anonymity was necessitated following actions by certain groups both online and offline. The alleged actions included the circulation of ‘WANTED’ posters, organizing community rallies, and threats of online disclosure of the officers’ personal details, including their residential addresses.
In their sworn affidavits to the court, the officers expressed fear for their personal safety as well as that of their families should they be publicly named. They articulated their perpetual fear and described the profound impact that the threats have had on them and their families. One officer, in significant distress, reported multiple visits to the ER to manage anxiety driven by the threats.
As per an affidavit by Christine Robinson, a detective from the Peel police Threat Assessment Unit, there have been “no identifiable threats or concerning communications directed toward the police” since the summer of 2021. Though she admits it would be impossible to predict the implications of public disclosure of the officers’ names, she emphasizes that violence often spawns from grievances and given the existent grievances following Mr. Choudry’s death, they could potentially be reignited.
However, Shakir Rahim of the Canadian Civil Liberties Associations underscores the importance of scrutinizing such situations critically and advocates for transparency in court proceedings, asserting its cardinal importance. He emphasizes that the court’s decision will invariably influence significant issues of systemic racism and the treatment of individuals in crisis. The case is scheduled for a subsequent hearing on April 9, 2024.
