By Pamela Stephens
Imagine walking down the street and being followed by a police car. The officer requests to see your identification and tells you to “go back where you came from.”
Imagine being harassed every day at your place of work as you try to earn a living, being ridiculed and told you are “worthless.”
This is what life is like for panhandlers in Ontario — and the Safe Streets Act states that way of life is illegal.
But, is it really a crime to be poor? The Ticket Defence Program, a collective of volunteers, law students, social workers and anti-poverty activists says no.
Modelled after a similar program in Toronto, it challenges tickets issued for panhandling, illegal camping, and soliciting under the Act, and so far, has won 19 of 20 cases.
John Hollingsworth, a 34-year-old research analyst for the Canadian Association of University Teachers, is one of 20 volunteers in Ottawa who have rallied to fight tickets issued to the poor under the legislation, which he calls “constitutionally flawed.”
“Clearly, the province has created a new category of crime with this Act and this is not a provincial prerogative,” he says. “They have no right to create crimes and this is what they’ve done . . . and it’s very clear how this legislation is being implemented on the streets.”
The legislation, which came into force in 2000, allows people who are found to be “aggressively” panhandling, soliciting, “squeegeeing,” disposing of “used condoms or needles in the street,” and even sleeping on the street to be fined or even jailed for up to six months, for subsequent offences.
In October, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice rejected a Canadian Civil Liberties Association challenge that the Act is unnecessary because the Criminal Code already protects against panhandlers and it infringes on freedom of expression.
Now, the Ticket Defence Program, founded by Direct Action Casework Ottawa and Legal Support Ottawa, is part of a coalition that is challenging that decision in the Ontario Court of Appeal , arguing that it criminalizes poverty.
Canada’s Vagrancy Law was repealed in 1972 for unfairly targeting the poor, leading some anti-poverty activists to argue that the Safe Streets Act is similarly flawed.
If people have been fined under the Act, by the National Capital Commission, City of Ottawa bylaw officers or OC Transpo, the Ticket Defence Program will collect their tickets and challenge them in court, says Hollingsworth.
People can drop off their tickets at 216 Murray St., 507 Bank St. and Operation Go Home in the Rideau Centre. The person fills out a form authorizing the program to act on their behalf. and the ticket is mailed. When the program receives notice of the trial, it sends a volunteer to represent the accused in court.
“The key thing is that we increase awareness among the people on the streets about where they can go if they have tickets,” says Hollingsworth. “It’s also very important that they get them into the centres within 15 days of being fined, otherwise, it complicates the case and we risk losing it.”
With 80 court dates pending and even more waiting to be filed, Kevin Simpson, a youth worker and volunteer for the group, says they are working hard as “agents in court, doing outreach, doing political work at the city level, holding meetings (for the public), processing tickets, doing educational work, (and) responding to information requests.”
The program is currently plugging up the courts with ticket challenges, many of which are being adjourned until the Court of Appeal hands down its decision later this month as to whether the Safe Streets Act itself should be amended, upheld or simply thrown out, says Hollingsworth.
Many of the cases that do make it to court are dismissed for technical reasons, such as the ticketing officer not being present in court, he adds.
One particular officer, Const. Mark Horton of the Ottawa Police, is “notorious” among the homeless and panhandlers in the city and is well-known for his “personal mission” to uphold the Safe Streets Act, says Hollingsworth.
In a newspaper interview in September, Horton publicly proclaimed his “love” for the Act, and said he has written position papers on it. And although he now works in the traffic section, he can still quote the legislation word for word.
“Conceivably, if he really wants to put his money where his mouth is . . . he’d be spending a lot of time in court,” joked Hollingsworth.
Horton was responsible for 92 per cent of all tickets issued in Centretown under the Act during his time on the beat.
Thomas Charlebois, 53, a homeless man currently staying at The Salvation Army, says he has been hassled by the police for all kinds of things, once for discussing his religion in public.
“Four cops came because there were these people who wanted me fined for talking about God on the street,” he says angrily. “They told me ‘go back where you came from’ . . . I have rights! No one can tell me that my freedom of speech and belief doesn’t count just because I’m living (on the street)! I am an equal in society and he can’t tell me where I can and cannot walk!”
He says many police officers use the Safe Streets Act as an excuse to “show off their muscles and try to intimidate people. But I know I’m not doing anything wrong by simply trying to live and strive for a bit of normalcy in my life . . . if anything, the police aren’t really serving or protecting us: they’re wasting more of the taxpayers’ money than it’s all worth!”
Charlebois was not ticketed for preaching in the street, but he says he has seen the signs for the Ticket Defence Program posted at “Club 454,” a nickname he has given the social service agency on Murray Street, in the Byward Market.
While the program does have administrative problems, Hollingsworth says he wants more people in the community get involved because “the poor need our support,” adding the group might look into stable funding in the future. Hollingsworth says the group doesn’t have an official office yet.
“Regardless of what people think about panhandlers, they do have the right to legal representation and if you believe in a fair process, then we encourage you to get involved and spread the word,” he says.
Although not optimistic about the outcome of the appeal, Hollingsworth says he is determined not to give up.
“We’ll keep fighting, either by making it a costly exercise to enforce or by launching our own constitutional challenge should this appeal fail,” he says. “We’ll keep at it until it’s overturned or annulled.”