OHRC Submission on Ontario’s Bill 119 Proposed legislative amendments to the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019

June 25, 2026 

 1. Introduction

The OHRC welcomes the opportunity to provide this submission in response to Bill 119, Protecting Ontario's Streets and Communities Act, 2026. Aspects of this Bill propose to amend the Community Safety and Policing Act (CPSA), by:

• Giving the Minister the power to issue directions to police service boards establishing priorities that the board must reflect in their strategic plan; and
• Authorizing officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or other prescribed persons who are peace officers under the law of a Canadian jurisdiction other than Ontario to exercise the prescribed powers of a police officer under Ontario legislation.

The OHRC urges the government to consider the human rights implications of these amendments given the ongoing presence of systemic racial discrimination in policing. The proposed amendments should include safeguards which ensure that Provincial directives do not displace local initiatives that prioritize efforts to dismantle systemic discrimination.

In addition, authorizing peace officers from other provinces the full authority to act as police officers in Ontario raises important questions for individuals protected by the Code. For example, to what extent have out of province peace officers been trained on the rights and responsibilities under the Human Rights Code? What systems will be implemented to ensure that out of province peace officers have been trained on leading practices regarding race-based data collection and use of force, used in Ontario? These concerns should be addressed in Bill 119 or its regulations, as they are critical to the process of rebuilding trust with racialized communities and maintaining public safety.

This submission sets out relevant background, specific human rights concerns with Bill 119’s proposed amendments to the CPSA, and recommendations to mitigate the human rights concerns.

2. The OHRC 

The OHRC is an independent human rights body established under the Code. Its functions include promoting and advancing respect for human rights in Ontario and recognising that it is in the public interest to identify and promote the elimination of systemic discriminatory practices in Ontario.

Addressing discrimination in policing has been a key priority of the OHRC’s work. The OHRC has collaborated with police services to create resources to help police services identify, monitor, and reduce discrimination.^[1] It has also made submissions to the government and independent reviewers about how to address systemic discrimination in policing.^[2] In the Framework for change to address systemic racism in policing (Framework), the OHRC recommended that Ontario adopt and implement all appropriate legislative and regulatory standards, guidelines, policies, and directives to address and end racial profiling and racial discrimination in policing.^[3]

In the Policy on Eliminating Racial Profiling in Law Enforcement (Racial Profiling Policy), the OHRC states that appropriate data collection by law enforcement is necessary to effectively monitor racial profiling, and to identify and remove systemic biases.^[4] The Racial Profiling Policy also recommends independent, arms-length and public monitoring of police services and police services boards regarding racial profiling through, for example, periodic audits.^[5]

3. Background

The Ministry of Solicitor General (the Ministry) is seeking input on proposed amendments to several acts, including the CPSA. The proposed amendments to the CPSA include changes that would give the Minister the power to:

• issue directions to police service boards establishing priorities that boards must reflect in their strategic plan;
• allow the Minister to require the Inspector General (IG) to investigate and report on whether appropriate arrangements have been made for the provision of adequate and effective policing;
• prohibit certain contracts between police service boards and current or former members of a police service board; and
• authorize officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or other prescribed persons who are peace officers under the law of a Canadian jurisdiction other than Ontario to exercise the powers of a police officer under Ontario legislation.^[6]

The OHRC welcomes amendments that may strengthen police oversight. This includes the proposed change that will prohibit contracts between police service boards and current or former board members and the Inspector General’s enhanced power to direct investigations into the adequate and effective provision of police services.

These changes must be considered within the practical reality of the challenges facing police services in Ontario. This includes ongoing concerns regarding systemic discrimination facing racialized communities, Indigenous communities, persons in crisis and religious groups.

In addition, Ontario’s Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009, already prescribes a process for appointing out of province police officers.^[7] According to the Act, an officer from another province can be appointed to serve in Ontario for not more than 3 years, and local commanders can impose conditions on the appointment as may be required.^[8] It is unclear why Bill 119 includes a separate process for the appointment of out of province  police officers in light of the requirements in the Interprovincial Policing Act.^[9] This issue should be addressed before the amendments are passed into law.

In light of these challenges, the OHRC recommends:

1. Policing priorities established by the province should not displace local efforts to address systemic racial discrimination.
2. The process of establishing priorities must continue to be informed by local voices, in alignment with the Code.
3. Persons exercising the powers of a police officer in Ontario must be trained on the leading practices for addressing racial discrimination used in Ontario.

4. The OHRC’s Submissions 

1. Policing priorities established by the province should not displace local efforts to address systemic racial discrimination

Efforts to address systemic discrimination established by municipal police service boards should not be displaced by provincial priorities. The OHRC is concerned that the amendments proposed in Bill 119 do not address how priorities established by police service boards will be balanced with the priorities established by the province. As such, boards may have to decide whether to direct resources to priorities they established with community stakeholders, or the priorities established by the province. To address potential conflicts, Bill 119 should include provisions which protect the continuity of Code-related programs, policies, and initiatives.

This is an acute concern for efforts designed to address systemic racial discrimination. These initiatives require a sustained commitment to address the covert and deeply entrenched nature of the issue. The longstanding and at times intractable presence of systemic discrimination in policing has been carefully documented and acknowledged by courts in Ontario and the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). In R v Le, the SCC noted that recent reports that address systemic discrimination including the OHRC’s A Collective Impact: Interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, and Justice Michael H. Tulloch’s Report of the Independent Street Checks Review, reach conclusions that are similar to studies conducted 30 years ago^[10] on systemic bias in policing. In this regard, the SCC’s findings affirm the deeply entrenched nature of the issue.

In response, human rights work must be continually prioritized and cannot be upended if provincial directives shift the focus to other areas. A number of police services have included efforts to address systemic discrimination in their strategic plans that should be protected by Bill 119, or any forthcoming regulations. For example, Peel Police Service Board’s Strategic Plan for 2024-2027, identifies its Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, and multi-year Human Rights Project action plan as important goals to improve public trust.^[11] Hamilton Police Services Board’s Strategic plan for 2024-2026, identifies building “cultural competencies”, addressing unconscious bias, and providing anti-racism training as key priorities.^[12]

This important work can be protected by giving municipal police service boards the authority to continue to prioritize work that advances objectives of the Human Rights Code and Charter rights, including the right to equality.

This approach aligns with the primacy of the Code. Primacy is a legal principle which ensures that the Code’s protections, including the right to dignity and the duty to accommodate are prioritized when organizations are faced with competing demands.

2. The process of establishing priorities must continue to be informed by local voices, in alignment with the Code.

Under the CPSA, the current process for developing a strategic plan and establishing priorities requires public consultation. This includes consultations with individuals protected by the Code. The proposed amendments in Bill 119, provide no details regarding the process for establishing provincial priorities. This gap raises two concerns. First, it is unclear how the public, including individuals protected by the Code can meaningfully inform the development of provincial policing priorities. Second, if members of the public disagree with a provincial direction, they have no avenue to suggest revisions or urge local boards to focus on other priorities. This is because Bill 119 requires police service boards to reflect provincial priorities in their strategic plans. In this regard, the proposed amendments lack transparency and do not respond to local needs.

Under the current system, police service boards are responsible for preparing and adopting a strategic plan for the provision of policing according to section 39(1) of the CSPA.^[13] This section states that boards must ensure that strategic plans address the provision of adequate and effective policing in accordance with the needs of the area they serve, and address the “objectives, priorities and core functions of the police service”.^[14] The plans are also required to address interactions with members of racialized groups, members of First Nation, Inuit and Métis communities, and persons who appear to have a mental illness.^[15]

Police service boards are required to consult with communities when developing strategic plans. The CPSA requires police service boards to consult with various groups, including the band councils of any First Nations, and diverse communities in the board’s area of policing responsibility.^[16]

In light of these requirements, police services develop strategic plans and priorities, in consultation with the public, every four years.^[17] For example, the Toronto Police Services Board (TPSB) engaged in 3 phases of engagement regarding the development of their strategic plan which included consultation with community organizations, justice partners and more than 1200 members of the community.^[18] The findings from this engagement process is captured in the What we heard report, which found that Black communities expressed concerns about, systemic issues including racial profiling, and excessive use of force.^[19] Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, and Other Sexually and Gender-Diverse Communities of Toronto Sexual and Gender-Diverse (Queer) communities in Toronto discussed their deep mistrust of police, rooted in a history of targeted harm and systemic neglect.^[20] In light of these concerns, the TPSB is now tasked with addressing these systemic issues in consultation with communities.

Direct engagement with groups that have been negatively impacted by police practices is critical to building public trust. These issues must be addressed as prescribed by section 39 of the CPSA and the right to non-discriminatory services protected by the Code. This collaborative process provides a measure of transparency and responsiveness to issues voiced by local community groups that is absent from the amendments proposed by Bill 119.

3. Persons exercising the powers of a police officer in Ontario must be trained on the leading practices for addressing racial discrimination used in Ontario.

Section 101.2 of Bill 119 will give peace officers from other provinces and members of the RCMP the authority to act as police officers in Ontario. At this stage, Bill 119 does not explain how Ontario will ensure that out of province peace officers will be prepared to serve the public using leading practices to address systemic discrimination adopted in Ontario. 

Bill 119 proposes to grant policing authority to “peace officers”, which is a broadly defined group, that includes police officers and other actors. The term “peace officer” captures a wide range of public officials with varying levels of training and experience. In Alberta for example, a peace officer is broadly defined by section 7 of the Peace Officers Act.^[21] This section states that a peace officer is a person appointed for the purposes of preserving and maintaining the public peace.^[22] Unlike police officers, peace officers may only exercise powers authorized by the employer that appointed them. All peace officers do not receive the same training as a police officer.^[23] Further, under the Criminal Code, a peace officer includes sworn officers as well as correctional officers and supervisors; fishery guardians, customs officers and justices of the peace.^[24] Bill 119 does not specify the type of peace officer that can be granted the authority to act as an officer in Ontario, or account for the range of training and experience amongst this group.

Allowing peace officers from other provinces to serve in Ontario without clearly setting out training requirements, risks heightening pre-existing concerns about uneven officer training and service standards in Ontario. A study conducted by Judith Andersen, associate professor at the University of Toronto found that policing in Ontario suffers from a  “patchwork of de-escalation training across the province, with the instruction quality and amount dependent upon resources, which are lacking within many police services.”^[25]  Granting extra provincial officers the authority to act as officers in Ontario may exacerbate this concern if Bill 119, or future regulations do not address this issue. These uneven standards raise human rights concerns as Ontario has adopted some practices and legislation to address systemic discrimination that are not in force in all provinces.   This includes, Ontario’s Anti-Racism Act, which requires the collection and reporting of race- based data for use of force encounters. Pursuant to this requirement, officers must complete use of force reports that capture detailed information about the subject’s race, and mental health.  In addition, unlike other provinces, Ontario implemented a new use of force model, entitled the Ontario Public-Police International Training Aid in 2023, which emphasizes de-escalation.^[26] 

Conclusion

The OHRC’s recommendations are aligned with Ontario’s commitment to provide policing in a manner consistent with the objectives of the Code and the Charter. By protecting Code-related priorities established by municipal police service boards and ensuring officers in Ontario benefit from a consistent level of training on issues related to systemic discrimination, policing priorities and strategic plans will remain responsive to community needs. 

5. Summary of recommendations

1. Policing priorities established by the province should not displace local efforts to address systemic racial discrimination
2. The process of establishing priorities must continue to be informed by local voices, in alignment with the Code.
3. Persons exercising the powers of a police officer in Ontario must be trained on best practices for addressing racial discrimination used in Ontario.