The Occupy Toronto protest doesn’t stand a chance.
When Justice David Brown ruled on Monday, the City of Toronto could enforce bylaws requiring the dismantling of tents and the cessation of occupation overnight, it was all over.
Without the tents and overnight occupation, the protest is effectively moot – those two characteristics were the signs, the chants, marches and message; the life-blood of the movement.
That’s what protesters argued last Friday in Ontario’s Superior Court, where lawyer Susan Ursel said the tents were a physical manifestation of the protesters’ expression.
That much was obvious, but not enough to win an injunction to their eviction based on its unconstitutionality.
Ursel tried to convince Brown, who continually interrupted and hurried her along, that because the tents and camping were the message, impeding them infringed protesters’ rights under the Charter of Right and Freedoms.
Brown clearly disagreed and said protesters’ rights do not trump the public’s right to enjoy a public park.
“Although proclaiming a message of participatory democracy, the evidence, unfortunately, reveals that the protesters did not practice what they were preaching,” he wrote in his 54-page ruling.
“Specifically, they did not ask those who live and work around the park or those who use the park – or their civic representatives – what they would think if the Park was turned into a tent city.
“The protesters now say, in effect, that the Charter did not require them to ask; that the Charter sanctions their unilateral occupation of the Park …. With the greatest of respect to the applicants and the Protesters, they are mistaken.”
Although Ursel’s argument was backed-up by Jill Copeland, a lawyer representing the Canadian Civil Liberties Association who said “the Charter requires we tolerate some inconvenience to protect free speech,” Brown fell in line with what’s been happening to the movement around the world.
Its epicenter, Occupy Wall Street in New York, was raided last week and the eviction of protesters was then upheld in court. Occupy Portland and Oakland were also evicted, and Occupy Boston, Chicago and Seattle are on the cusp of eviction.
Closer to home, camps in London, Ont., and Saskatoon, were cleared and a court ruling last week forced Vancouver demonstrators to clear their encampment, which covered the lawn of the city’s downtown art gallery for more than a month.
It’s sad all these protesters’ rights (which they obviously have and had since the occupations took place for as long as they did) had a time limit, but it’s also understandable.
Those parks could not be overtaken for an indefinite period of time. It’s a situation of balance, and it seems those involved have got it right.
Toronto’s went on for five weeks, Vancouver’s for over a month, and Wall Street for over two months.
The cities are now simply saying continue if you wish, but not by overrunning parks to the extent no one else can use them – the truth, at least in Toronto where walking through the encampment Monday was like visiting a petting zoo that smelled of vinegar.
Charter rights are subject to “reasonable limits” and asking for the full function of the park to be returned after months of occupation seems reasonable.
Remember, rights exist only because of restrictions. So don’t be surprised if tents pop up elsewhere, perhaps another park not yet restricted by court order.