Should police who kill be named? Ontario court to consider if cops not charged should be kept anonymous

Should police officers who fatally shot a mentally ill man in crisis have their names shielded from the public?

That's the question facing Ontario's Superior Court of Justice as a hearing gets underway Tuesday in a lawsuit by the family of Ejaz Choudry, a father of four with schizophrenia shot and killed by police west of Toronto after his family called a non-emergency line for help.

Lawyers for the five Peel Regional Police officers involved in the death of the 62-year-old in June 2020 — including one who fired two bullets into Choudry's chest after his family called a non-emergency line when he was in crisis — say publishing their names could put them and their families at risk.

Lawyers for the family say there is no credible risk to the officers and that a publication ban would infringe on the public's right to know the identities of the officers entrusted with the powers that ended with Choudry's death and the media's ability to report openly on the case.

"The police are a public institution who enjoy the state's monopoly on the use of violence. Their ability to deploy those powers must be subjected to the highest level of scrutiny of any act committed in the name of the public," lawyers for the family say in court documents. "In that context, there can be no doubt that the public has a right to know and understand who these officers are, and the acts that they each committed that resulted in Mr. Choudry's death."

In responding documents, lawyers for the police say that the officers have faced threats to their safety. "Violent threats were made in the form of social media posts, wanted posters, and verbal threats at protests. They have been described as 'murderers' and 'suspects.' Anonymous groups have invited members to share the officers' names and addresses … There is no way to express the John Doe Officers' concerns without sounding dramatic: disclosing their identities makes them sitting ducks."

CBC News has intervenor status in the case and is in court opposing the proposed ban. Also intervening are the Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association against a ban, the Police Association of Ontario for a ban, and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, who ask the court to consider the impact of its decision in this case on future use of force cases.

The hearing comes amid an ongoing civil lawsuit filed against the Peel Regional Police Services Board, Chief Nishan Duraiappah and the officers, who have been cleared by Ontario's Special Investigations Unit of any wrongdoing in Choudry's death. The $22-million suit, first reported on by CBC News, argues police were "reckless" in their response to the mental health call by Choudry's family and breached his right to life under the Charter and violated his right to equality as a racialized person in crisis.

"They negligently allowed a straightforward mental health call to spiral out of control and become a high-risk tactical operation," the lawsuit says, adding the police "deployed deadly force without justification."

The allegations have not yet been tested in court.

It was 5:30 p.m. on that June day four years ago when Choudry's family called paramedics, worried because he hadn't been taking his medication.

Instead of getting medical attention, Choudry would die that day. 

According to the family's lawsuit, Choudry's daughter told the dispatcher he had a small pocket knife with him, but despite her reassurances that he wasn't dangerous, police arrived and demanded to see the knife.

According to the lawsuit, Choudry said he "would not leave his home because he was afraid that the officers would shoot him." English wasn't his first language, his family has said, and he later told a Punjabi-speaking officer that he did not intend to hurt himself.