Skip to content

Tallying the G20’s legal costs

|Written By Michael McKiernan

More than six months after the last world leader jetted out of fortress Toronto, the impact of the G20 summit continues to reverberate across the city and the country, including the financial cost of the various legal proceedings and reviews that have resulted.

John Morden is billing $480 per hour for his review, while other members of his team are working on a sliding scale.

With a slew of reports, inquiries, reviews, class actions, criminal trials, and civil actions underway or still to come, the legal bills are threatening to add significantly to the famous billion-dollar security price tag.

Nathalie Des Rosiers, general counsel at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, continues to press for a single public inquiry into police actions that would consolidate at least some of the public probes. She insists it’s not too late to save money.

“When you have a multi-force policing effort, we ought to have had one public inquiry that has powers to compel testimony,” she says. “It’s sufficiently complex that a public inquiry would have been the cheaper and more comprehensive route. I think it would still be a cheaper route, but we’re still working with all the inquiries that are taking place.”

The CCLA is close to releasing its own report on G20 policing and public accountability after it held hearings in November. Des Rosiers says it’s also planning a book on the summit in addition to making submissions to most of the public inquiries underway.

One of the few proceedings yet to hear from the CCLA is the Toronto Police Services Board’s independent civilian review led by former associate chief justice John Morden.

Based at the offices of his firm, Heenan Blaikie LLP, Morden will make non-binding recommendations after tackling 35 questions posed by the review’s terms of reference about the board’s role in planning and leading the G20 security effort.

The review was only supposed to take 12 weeks when it was announced in July. But by the time of Morden’s selection, the deadline had become much more vague with no specific budget for the review.

Morden has been instructed to deliver monthly invoices while working at a rate of $480 per hour with other members of the small team remunerated on a sliding scale. Only the first month’s bill of $24,000 is publicly available so far, but the board is expected to approve additional costs at its next meeting in February.

Review counsel Ryan Teschner says there are four phases to the process: background research, document review, interviews, and report writing. After four months, he notes the team is just beginning the document review phase but he can’t say when it’ll be ready to hear from witnesses.

“We understand this review is being conducted with public money, so we are working hard to be as efficient and effective as possible and to make sure there is no overlap and no duplication of efforts,” Teschner says.

Former chief justice and Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP counsel Roy McMurtry has clearly cut the provincial government a deal for his review of the so-called secret law under the Public Works Protection Act.

He’s working at a bargain rate of $300 per hour. Joe Kim, spokesman for the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, won’t say how much the review has spent so far. “We want to provide one final tally once the report is submitted,” he says. That’s expected in April, he adds.

Ontario ombudsman André Marin conducted his own review of the act using his office’s regular budget. The Special Investigations Unit also kept its probe of six allegations of police brutality in-house.

The new Office of the Independent Police Review Director has hired additional investigators in order to meet the demands of its systemic review of G20 policing, but spokeswoman Allison Hawkins says it’s difficult to isolate the cost of that in its overall budget.

In addition to the police services board proceedings, the Toronto Police Service is also conducting its own internal review related to the G20, although spokeswoman Meaghan Gray says it’s all within the normal budget.

The service has, however, hired Borden Ladner Gervais LLP to represent it in various G20-related civil suits, but Gray notes an insurer covers the legal fees.

Seeking to put a significantly larger dent into public coffers than any of the multitude of G20 reviews and investigations are two class action lawsuits launched within weeks of one another in the summer.

But before the litigants take on the police, they may have to face off against one another. Murray Klippenstein, the lawyer on a $45-million class action against Toronto police and the RCMP, says it’s likely only one of the matters will proceed. The members of his class include about 800 people arrested and released without charge during the G20.

David Midanik is the lawyer for a $115-million class action that represents all of those arrested - estimated at about 1,170 people - during the G20 weekend. He says it’s important to include those who were charged.

“Most of the people who were charged were at the forefront of exercising democratic rights, so in terms of preserving civil liberties and democratic rights, it’s essential those people get representation,” Midanik says.

Klippenstein, meanwhile, says he’s considering expanding his class to include those who faced charges that were later withdrawn or stayed.

Initially, Midanik’s matter also included business owners who suffered property damage during the summit. That’s no longer the case due to a fear it made the class too broad for certification. Both lawyers are preparing applications for certification, but neither expects a court hearing for months.

Adam Goodman acted for several of those charged by acting at bail hearings on a pro bono basis. Although most of them had their charges dropped at the first appearance in court, one of his clients is facing a trial in April.

Goodman says he’s looking forward to hearing testimony from police when trials get underway in courtrooms across the city next month.

“There’s been mostly silence from the police officers, but at trial, they’ll be on the stand and under oath. There might be some who don’t like what happened but feel they have to be quiet right now.”

According to the most recent statistics released by the Ministry of the Attorney General, of the 320 people charged with criminal offences in the aftermath of the G20, just 86 are still before the courts.

Around 60 had charges diverted, pleaded guilty or were subjects of peace bonds. Just over half of those charged had their charges stayed or withdrawn, the bulk of those on the first day of mass court appearances.

In several cases, the withdrawal of charges led to a switch of focus to civil suits from criminal matters.

Clayton Ruby, for example, is preparing a civil suit on behalf of Charles Veitch, a British satirist charged under the act for failing to identify himself within five metres of the security fence. Ruby also defended him on the charges that were later withdrawn.

Another client, Natalie Gray, has sued Toronto police after they allegedly hit her with rubber bullets. She was charged with obstructing a police officer, but those charges were later withdrawn.

Ruby is also representing Dorian Barton, who claims officers assaulted him during the G20 weekend. The SIU closed an investigation into his case late last year after concluding there wasn’t enough evidence to lay charges, but new photos of the alleged assault have since emerged.

“The SIU is a fake agency,” Ruby says. “It’s a fraud and a sham. They’re not interested in investigating effectively.”

In Ruby’s view, the raft of G20 investigations is ineffective because each is too narrowly focused. “There’s no sign that enough pressure is going to be exerted to bring about a royal commission, and I can’t imagine anything less will do. So we’re left with the civil law system, which unfortunately only results in damages and publicity.”

Des Rosiers says she’s not surprised at the G20’s staying power in the public consciousness and expects it to remain a big file for the CCLA well into the future.

“What we have seen from people on the ground and from what our monitors saw presents a significant violation of civil rights that weekend. Our view is that the story has to be told, and accountability, no matter how long and how difficult it will be, needs to be brought to bear because what happened was unacceptable.

It takes some time for processes of accountability to unfold, so I think the story will be told for quite some time yet.”

For more on this story, see "Lawyers gearing up for G20" and "G20 legal fallout: summits cost too much."

  • Mark
    The bashing of police or protesters solves nothing at this juncture. And this is a legal blog, but few if any have commented directly on those actions. Instead I see little more than pandering to the far extremes of either side - trashing police, or blindly covering for them.

    To that end, as far as I am concerned, the Police face an overwhelming burden, particularly with regard to the class action suits where they will have significantly less regulatory and political influence.
  • So many testimonials

    There are so many testimonials of police violence and abuse at the G20 and in many places across the country that the question is not firing some bad cops but rather about cleaning up the many bad police forces across the country.
  • Reg111
    Excellent Article.

    I recomend signing the CCLA petition.
  • CCC
    This is the most abusive waste of govt money in ONt. the SIU OIPRD and Ombuds. All orgs that have little to no teeth, and the Union rules the cops and the city. I came, i saw and left for a less corrupt force. I am from the US and civil rights govern the cops and they are sued as are the cities for what has happened in the G20. The fed govt in the US encourage such suits for such abuses. TO is now known, for having a bad. dishones,abusive police dept as are several other Ont. cities. Cheifs cannot even fire bad cops but at soime point Blair should at least admit he has some bad beans in his dept. What ripoff the govt lawyers are creating. Do the math 4 months at 450 and hour to 300 for a team of lawyer. FIRE THE BAD COPS!
  • Guest
    While I don't know what Grade Mr. McCue teaches, I can assure him, and the Toronto Board that if a police officer shows up in my daughter's classroom, I'll be in the principal's office the next day asking why my consent wasn't obtained first.

    While I'd welcome discourse, I will not allow police to have that discourse with my child, without my presence. I used to think Toronto police were the best, and I no longer trust them.

    Chief Blair ought to be ashamed at letting things get this far, and he has a responsibility to all the good officers to clean his force up and/or resign!
  • reply

    Do you think a cop will poison your daughters mind with public safety messages? In a grade school classroom no less? Give your head a shake.
    Every citizen has a responsibility to question government control, whether it is a police force or otherwise, but why bring your children into that marketplace? What will you teach them, to be suspect of authority? To distrust government? Tsk.
  • nerbus
    The days of seeing an officer as a community partner and protector are over. They are thugs hiding among corrupt "good cops". How good is any cop that ignores their obligations, mandates and our highest laws?
  • nerbus
    The point being made is that we used to view police as trusted community members, friends and protectors. They were once viewed as people whom our children can approach if ever in need. Those days are long gone.

    Without accountability, integrity or distinction from the criminals in uniform, they must all be viewed with equal suspicion. No Ontario police officer is welcomed in my child's classroom, especially without my knowledge or consent or a warrant. Extreme? Not these days.
  • accountability? Discussed with teachers.

    It would seem to me that inviting the police INTO the classroom would create some much needed discourse. The prof's I remember from way back would love to "get into it" with a healthy dose of "can you explain why...". Are you protecting the "kids", making a political statement, or trying to foist your views on young minds that are already being bombarded by the media? It appears to me that you are shutting out the debate, which in my view is the true abuse of power.
  • Accountability

    Thomas McCue
    As a result of the abuse of power, as a result of disgusting Police behaviour, the Police are no longer welcome in my classrooom. How can I explain to my students that the Police represent a benevelent force after they have seen the Youtube videos and read the news? I can't.
    A disgusted teacher,
    Thomas McCue

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Lawyers have expressed concerns that of 38 justices of the peace the province appointed this summer, only 12 have law degrees. Do you think this is an issue?