Court Orders New Hearing for Ex-MP’s Discrimination Case Against Police

A significant ruling from the Ontario Court of Justice has reinstated a discrimination complaint from former Member of Parliament Matthew Green against the Hamilton Police Service. The court found that the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal (HRTO) improperly dismissed Green’s case, which stems from an incident involving alleged racial profiling nearly a decade ago.

In 2016, Green, who was then Hamilton’s first Black city councillor, reported that he was subjected to racial profiling by Constable Andrew Pfeifer. The incident occurred while Green was waiting for a bus on a rainy day, during which he was approached by police officers who questioned him about his presence in the area. Green described the encounter as psychologically distressing, stating, “I was made to justify my existence in my own community.” Following this, he filed complaints with both the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD) and the HRTO.

The OIPRD substantiated Green’s complaint, leading to a Police Services Act hearing that ultimately found Pfeifer not guilty of discreditable conduct. The HRTO subsequently dismissed Green’s application in 2024, claiming that the allegations had already been adequately addressed in the earlier police hearing. This dismissal was reiterated in January 2025, when adjudicator Joseph Tascona reviewed his decision.

Green’s pursuit of justice took a pivotal turn when, on November 7, 2023, a panel of three judges from the Ontario Court of Justice ruled that the HRTO had failed to adequately consider Green’s arguments. The judges criticized Tascona for not engaging meaningfully with the claims and for reaching “unreasonable” decisions. They emphasized that the HRTO and police hearings are fundamentally different processes, with the HRTO required to assess discrimination based on a balance of probabilities, while police hearings hinge on a higher standard of proof.

The court decision has now ordered that Green’s application be heard again by a different adjudicator, providing a renewed opportunity for his case to be considered fairly. Green expressed his frustration with the lengthy process, stating, “Justice delayed is justice denied. I had to go all the way to a judicial review to simply have the merits of my case heard in a fair and impartial setting.”

The judges also raised concerns about the potential biases inherent in police hearings, noting that the police chief at the time, Eric Girt, was involved in appointing the investigator and hearing officer, effectively allowing him to oversee the evaluation of his own department. In 2021, the position of police chief was assumed by Frank Bergen, who acknowledged the complexity of the situation and highlighted the impact on the community.

Green continues to advocate for systemic reforms within the Hamilton Police Service to address issues of racial profiling. He is not seeking personal damages but rather calls for an acknowledgment of the harm caused to the Black community and a commitment to cultural change within the police force. “This could all be ended if they simply took responsibility for what their own reports say,” he remarked, referencing ongoing statistics indicating disproportionate targeting of Black individuals by police.

The HRTO has not provided a timeline for when Green’s application will be reconsidered but has stated its commitment to processing cases as efficiently as possible. As this case unfolds, it highlights ongoing challenges faced by individuals seeking justice in encounters with law enforcement, particularly regarding issues of race and discrimination.