The practice of racial profiling by police officers has become a contentious issue between law enforcement and advocacy group supporting rights of citizens. An increasing number of reported incidents in which law enforcement professionals have been accused of targeting minority groups have heightened the debate about racial profiling and the legitimacy surrounding it. The practice of racial profiling by law enforcement is an attempt to identify potential criminals before they could commit serious crimes. Law enforcement officers who have used racial profiling are confident that the process helps them to detain criminals and therefore reduce crime. However, the use of racial profiling has become a debated issue across North America. The media has captured the public’s attention by identifying how law enforcement officials make the assumption that minority groups and people from ethnic backgrounds are more likely to commit crimes. This paper will reflect that the use of racial profiling by law enforcement is both wrong and ineffective in many ways. First, racial profiling is wrong because it tends to target people of color under the assumption and stereotype that they create more crime, which clearly is unconstitutional under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Secondly, through the Toronto Star newspaper analysis it will be obvious that the use of racial profiling in solving crimes is not effective but is damaging and harmful towards individuals under the Human Rights Code. And thirdly, it will be argued through Kingston Police traffic data and Stonechild case that the use of racial profiling is morally wrong on the note that minority groups are subjected to unfair arbitration and detention under section 9 of the Charter.
‘Profiling’ and ‘racial profiling’ are used interchangeably, to reflect the illegitimacy and the Charter offending law enforcement through the practice of racial profiling. Profiling is used explicitly in terms of categorization of racial groups and in terms of social, religious, or cultural identities that serve as main components for race. Those components are similarly invoked to justify behavior that singles out to disproportionate surveillance, search and seizure, and arrest. Racial profiling has adopted a variety of definitions however in the book The Colour of Justice: Policing Race in Canada David Tanovich defined racial profiling as,
Racial profiling occurs when law enforcement or security officials, consciously or unconsciously, subject to individuals at any location to heightened scrutiny based solely or in part on race, ethnicity, Aboriginality, place of origin, ancestry, or religion or on stereotypes associated with any of these factors rather than on objectively reasonable grounds to suspect that the individual is implicated in criminal activity (Tanovich, 2006).

Racial profiling creates inequalities by denying people of color privacy, identity, security and the basic decisions of their daily life. In this way racial profiling could be portrayed through its unconstitutionality under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On these provisions under the Charter it violates individuals guaranteed rights under section 9 ‘arbitrary detention and imprisonment’ and infringes upon section 15(1) ‘equality under the law’ (Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982). The existence of racial profiling dates back to slavery and segregation of blacks and African Canadians. By the late nineteenth century Canada adopted the use of ‘racial profiling’ on the grounds of racial bias and discrimination in policing. Extensive media coverage and public attention has exposed and expanded profiling of other ethnic groups. After the attacks of 9/11, individuals of Muslim ethnicity began experiencing strict security screening at the border. This event has captured the media’s attention and increased the public’s understanding that race is not the only factor at play when it comes to racial profiling by officials. This begs the question, on what grounds do police officers exercise their discretion when it comes to profiling individuals? It is not easy to prove that police officers are racially biased when it comes to profiling individuals on unreasonable grounds. Police officers are highly trained individuals who possess a strong ability to exercise their discretion in a proper manner. Every police officer must exercise their full discretion under the Police Act: Code of Professional Conduct and Discipline Regulations. The Police Act is a set of regulations that every officer follows while on or off duty. This act contains rules and regulations that must be satisfied by every police officer in order to deliver fair and professional service to all the members of the community. In the Police Act under the ‘standards of conduct’ section it states that every police officers shall, “…respect the rights of all persons” and “…treat all persons or classes of persons equally, regardless of age, colour, creed, ethnic or national origin, family status, marital status, physical or intellectual disability, political belief, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or source of income” (Police Act, 2010). This is the statue that every officer must abide by in order to maintain the integrity of the law and the law enforcement. However, it has been debated whether a police officer’s use of ‘racial profiling’ is an effective tool for potential crime solving. It is hard to prove that police officers exercise racism while delivering their services to communities. However, throughout this paper it will become clear that police officers use ‘racial profiling’ an in improper way. It has become increasingly apparent to the public that the use of racial profiling is an unconstitutional and discriminatory practice that violates an individual’s rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Earlier I discussed the Police Code of Conduct that officers follow in order to maintain the integrity of the law. Now let us examine the anti-profile advocacy side of racial profiling and how they define the impacts and violations of constitutional rights. It is believed that racial profiling is a type of mindset that an individual possesses (Tanovich, 2006). In reality, racial profiling is a stereotype based on preconceived ideas that an individual has created about a specific character. Socially it has been accepted that ethnic groups or African Canadians are prone to committing more crime than whites. However, in a diverse society like Canada any type of discrimination based on race is prohibited and unconstitutional under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one part of the Canadian Constitution, which guarantees freedom and equality rights. ‘Equality Rights’ are guaranteed that every Canadian shall not be discriminated against based on bias according to race, colour, gender, and their religion. With this definition, let us examine the deeper issue of racial profiling when it comes to solving crimes. Racial profiling has been considered to be inaccurate and ineffective process. Racial profiling is ineffective as a law enforcement strategy and it should be considered offensive to individuals under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Racial profiling’s disadvantageous effects far outweigh the so-called benefits in areas where law enforcement interacts with society where it may damage the fundamental values of all Canadians. The perception in today’s society that although crime is flourishing and being managed, the use of racial profiling does not justify the ineffective and offensive way that law enforcement has been using their strategy. Victims who fall under racial profiling often have their liberties challenged and in some cases removed. These individuals are being unreasonably stopped, searched, detained, subjected to unwarranted force, and in severe cases they are being killed or perceived as a serious threat to society (Tanovich, 2006). Since the tragic event of 9/11 the harmful effects of racial profiling have been recognized more seriously by Canadians who are or are perceived to be of Muslim origin. National security check is a violation of section 8 of the Charter. Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure (Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982). Individuals of Muslim origin began to experience national security check at the borders and the airports, which often led to violations of privacy. Media coverage during the attack of 9/11 has potentially influenced citizens to think that individuals of Muslim origin could potentially be a threat to society. This reflects the very substance of a stereotype that individuals have created in their mind due to social facts around them. After the attack of 9/11 Canadian communities of Muslim and Arab origin began to experience a high rate of negative stereotype in accordance to national security check. The attack influenced the Canadian government to pass the Anti-terrorism Act, which was designed for law enforcement and national security agencies to stop those who promote the act of terrorism. Recently the Canadian government has passed a new piece of legislation Bill C-51 that would eventually cause Canadian deep concerns. Bill C-51 would jeopardize many of Canadians basic rights and liberties and it would also serve to undermine the health of our Canadian democracy (Roach, 2015). Let us turn to the moral issue of ‘racial profiling.’ In Canada alone there has been a controversial issue going on about ‘carding policy’ that is being used as a tool to solve crimes by law enforcement. The Toronto Police have engaged in the general gathering practice known as ‘carding’ for many years without any policy from the Toronto Police Board. They have continuously used ‘carding’ as a crime solving tool. Carding is known to be a police practice, which allows police officers to stop individuals on the streets without a legitimate reason and record their personal information in a database. For years this practice was known to be a systemic violation of an individual’s rights under section 9 of the Charter and especially of racialized minority youth. The unlawful detention based on racial profiling is outlined in section 9 of the Charter, which guarantees that everyone has a right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned. Carding policy has undermined the public’s trust and confidence in the police and damaged public’s safety. Carding policy is not well defined and should require that there be an honest belief on the part of the police officer in regards to the connection between the person contacted and the specific offence. However, under the present practice, police officers have often been falsely identifying individuals for investigation through the process of carding. The Toronto Police have previously tried to justify the practice of carding as a rational process of gathered information. Furthermore, it has never been clear if carding and the collection of irrelevant personal information is an effective way of addressing and solving criminal problems. In 2002, the Toronto Star ran a serious of articles addressing the issue of ‘racial profiling’ and whether it has been beneficial or unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the Toronto Police Board has never revealed statistics on the effectiveness of carding policy. However, in a series of articles in which the Toronto Star makes allegations based on the observations they have conducted it became clear that law enforcements engage in racial profiling. The Toronto Star series also identified the analysis of police crime data, which clearly showed that justice is different for minorities and whites. The newspaper released numerous articles addressing the issue of ‘racial profiling’ by law enforcement. According to the article, “Toronto’s police board banned the keeping of statistics linking race and crime in 1989…it was feared that such information would be used to reinforce racist stereotypes and label certain ethnic communities as criminal” (Toronto Star, 2002). However, the article revealed statistics that showed the inconvenient truth that the general assumption about racial profiling exists at every level of the Canadian criminal justice system. The Toronto Star took a look at a charge related to a simple drug possession case. The article compared two different arrest outcomes between the white and minority offenders. Statistics revealed that, “Whites were released on the scene 76.5 per cent of the time while blacks were released 61.8 per cent of the time” (Toronto Star, 2002). The different treatment was even more evident at the next level of police discretion and decision-making. The Star series found that, “black were held behind bars for a court appearance 15.5 per cent of the time. Whites were kept in jail awaiting a bail hearing in 7.3 per cent of cases” (Toronto Star, 2002).
In 2003, the Kingston Police began researching the issue of racial profiling in Canada. For one year, police officers were required to fill out a form whenever they came into a contact of stopping individuals. In 2005, the analysis of police traffic data revealed the disproportionality of minorities charged in motor vehicle incidents compared to whites. The data revealed that Black residents were four times more likely to be pulled over by the police (Scott Wortley, 2005). Although the statistics are telling, it becomes difficult to know to what degree police officers exercise discretion in deciding whom to pull over and for what circumstances. The rate at which minority drivers are charged with motor offences has become a potential issue of racial profiling. According to the Toronto Star, police officers may be “…practice of targeting racial minorities on the assumption they commit more crimes” (Toronto Star, 2002). After reviewing the series of publications by the Toronto Star and Kinston Police traffic data it is perceptible that race plays a large role when it comes to legal enforcement. It is not fully clear whether police officers use their subjective mind when it comes to racial profiling. However, it is obvious that the color of one’s skin plays a role at both the legal and social and economic levels in society. Systemic racism and stereotyping occurs in day-to-day life at every legal level of the Canadian society. Let us now take a closer look at Aboriginal communities and how they experience systemic racism from the legal system. Starlight Tours is known to be a police practice where police officers pick up individuals and drive them outside of rural areas and drop them off regardless of freezing temperature (Griffiths, 2014). One example of police falsely targeting racialized minorities is the Stonechild case. Stonechild and his friend went out for drinks, where they became separated from each other. His friend Roy, “…last saw Stonechild battered and bleeding in the back seat of a Saskatoon Police Service vehicle (Gill, 2014). A couple days later, “Stonechild’s beaten corpse was found in a remote industrial area, without a winter coat and wearing only one shoe” (Gill, 2014). The case was never properly investigated and was closed after a couple of days of investigation. Although, the case was never convicted Stonechild case is an example of how police officers wrongfully targeting minority groups and in some instances could be blatant police brutality. It is important to understand that racism and racial profiling exist at every level of Canadian society and not just at the legal level. But it is also important to note that the use of racial profiling is not an appropriate way of solving crimes. When assessing the outcome of racial profiling one must weigh the balance between an individual’s rights and the effectiveness of policing. A balance between the two is not impossible. However, law enforcement must understand the limits required to effectively use racial profiling when it comes to solving crimes. The continuous use of race in law enforcement will only create a bigger disruption between the public and our legal institutions.

Bibliography

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11.
Gill, James. 2014. Permissibility of Colour and Racial Profiling. Western Journal of Legal Studies. Volume 5. Issue 3 State Encroachment on Personal Lives. Article 1. Pp. 1-19.
Griffiths, Curt. 2014. Canadian Criminal Justice: A Primer 5 edition. Ch. 5. Police Power and Decision Making. Pp. 92-120. Print.
Police Act. 2010. Code Of Professional Conduct And Discipline Regulations. Pp.1-10. Print.
Roach, Kent & Craig, Forcese. 2015. Bill C-51 Background #1: The New Advocating or Promoting Terrorism Offence. Pp. 1-27.
Tanovich, David. 2006. The Colour Of Justice. Policing Race in Canada. Irwin Law. Pp. 1-280. Print.
Toronto Star. 2002. “Singled Out.”
Wortley, Scot. 2005. Bias Free Policing: The Kingston Data Collection Project. Preliminary Results.