Rosie Awori – Local Journalism Initiative
Analysis: Years of reports have documented disparities and called for reform. The latest dismissals put the response to warnings, the role of supervisors and the consequences for misconduct under renewed scrutiny.
In 2019, three researchers put a number to a concern Montreal’s Black communities had been raising for years.
Their analysis of SPVM street-check records found that Black people were about 4.2 times as likely as white people to be stopped. The researchers, Victor Armony, Mariam Hassaoui and Massimiliano Mulone, also found that neighbourhood crime rates did not explain the variation in Black people’s likelihood of being stopped.
The findings gave the debate a measurable foundation. They did not establish that every recorded encounter involved racial profiling. They did establish disparities that required an institutional response.
The police service accepted the report’s findings. Then-chief Sylvain Caron acknowledged systemic or organizational biases and announced measures that included developing a street-check policy.
Seven years later, Montreal is again examining the relationship between individual conduct and institutional responsibility.
On Nov. 2, police Chief Fady Dagher announced the administrative dismissal of seven officers following allegations of discriminatory and racist conduct and other misconduct.
Five worked at Station 39 in Montréal-Nord, where a 16-member patrol team was disbanded in June following allegations that officers cut locks of hair from racialized residents and kept them as “trophies.” Two others worked at Station 21 downtown. Public reporting has not established that each dismissed officer participated in every alleged act.
The alleged conduct gives the discussion of trust a disturbing specificity. It concerns whether people encountering police can expect to be treated with dignity, and whether officers who abuse their authority face consequences.
For communities that have spent years calling for accountability, the dismissals represent a significant development. But they also raise questions about how misconduct is reported, what supervisors do with that information and whether responsibility extends beyond the officers directly involved.
According to the SPVM’s published chronology, management learned of allegations involving the Station 39 team through internal reports in March and immediately opened an investigation. On June 12, the service suspended two officers, reassigned three to administrative duties and dispersed the remaining team members. Further suspensions followed.
That sequence does not, by itself, establish that management responded improperly. It does provide a basis for examining when supervisors became aware of concerns, what protective measures followed and whether earlier opportunities to intervene were missed.
It also shows why officers’ willingness to report colleagues matters. In this case, information came from within the service. Lasting accountability will depend partly on whether officers can continue to speak up and have confidence that their reports will receive a serious response.
Montreal has considerable experience identifying the broader problem. The public consultation that led to the city’s 2020 report on systemic racism grew out of a citizen initiative in 2018. Residents and community organizations helped force the issue onto the municipal agenda.
The resulting report concluded that racial and social profiling existed within the SPVM and called for changes to its organizational culture. Its recommendations included stronger screening of police recruits for racial prejudice and leadership equipped to address profiling.
That history provides a useful way to assess this week’s developments. Removing officers establishes a consequence. Examining how their alleged conduct emerged, persisted and reached investigators addresses the institution’s responsibility.
The circumstances of the dismissals remain contested. Dagher said the service consulted city lawyers before withdrawing the officers’ accreditation and security clearance through an administrative process. The Montreal Police Brotherhood says the approach raises fundamental legal questions and will challenge it.
Quebec’s prosecution service, the DPCP, has confirmed receiving an investigation file concerning allegations involving Station 39. Criminal charges had not been announced as of Nov. 4. The dismissals are employment decisions, separate from any determination of criminal responsibility.
Community organizations have welcomed the action while making clear that their support comes with expectations. At Union United Church on Nov. 4, representatives backed Dagher’s efforts while calling for greater transparency, accountability and investment in community programs.
Sharon Nelson, president of the Jamaica Association of Montreal, described the dismissals as a significant instance of community concerns being heard and acted upon. Shauna Joyce, executive director of Tyndale St-Georges Community Centre, cautioned that lasting change could not rest on one person.
Their response places the focus on whether accountability can become a consistent institutional practice.
Fo Niemi, executive director of the Centre for Research-Action on Race Relations, raised the role of local leadership directly.
“How come these things were not being addressed by the superiors at the local district station?” he is quoted as asking.
That question deserves an answer supported by the investigations. Dismissals alone do not explain whether supervision worked, where it failed or what should change.
Roger Petit-Frère, CEO of Centre Jean-Paul Lemay, called for a major, long-term commitment to housing, education, employment and social development in Montréal-Nord. His appeal gives substance to an argument communities have made for years: public safety also depends on the services and opportunities available to residents.
Removing officers cannot supply those resources. Governments will have to answer that part of the demand.
For the SPVM, the immediate tests include the union challenge, the continuing investigations and decisions about prosecution. Public scrutiny must also follow the chain of command and the treatment of people who report misconduct.
Does a warning prompt action before another resident is harmed? Can an officer report a colleague without fearing professional isolation? Can a complainant understand where a case stands?
Montreal has spent years documenting the distance between its stated commitments and residents’ experiences.
The seven dismissals show that serious allegations can lead to the loss of police employment. Whether they mark lasting progress will depend on what the institution learns about how the alleged conduct became possible, and what it does with those findings.
