Ontario Court Orders New Hearing in Ex-MP’s Police Discrimination Case

A significant ruling from the Ontario Court of Justice has revived a long-standing discrimination complaint filed by former New Democrat Member of Parliament Matthew Green against the Hamilton Police. The court’s decision mandates that the complaint, initially dismissed by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO), be reconsidered by a different adjudicator.

Green’s ordeal began nearly a decade ago when he alleged racial profiling during an encounter with Constable Andrew Pfeifer in April 2016. At the time, Green, who was Hamilton’s first Black city councillor, was waiting for a bus under a bridge when police approached him. He described the encounter as confrontational, stating he felt “psychologically detained” while attempting to justify his presence in his own community.

After the police hearing in 2018, which cleared Pfeifer of wrongdoing, Green sought justice through the HRTO. However, in 2024, the HRTO dismissed his application, asserting that the allegations had been appropriately addressed during the police hearing. Green’s attempts to have the HRTO reconsider its decision were also denied earlier in 2025.

Judicial Review Highlights HRTO’s Oversight

A panel of three judges from the Ontario Court of Justice critically reviewed the HRTO’s handling of Green’s case. They unanimously concluded that the HRTO adjudicator, Joseph Tascona, failed to adequately engage with Green’s arguments, leading to “unreasonable” decisions. The court emphasized that the HRTO and police hearings are fundamentally different in nature. The HRTO is responsible for adjudicating discrimination claims on a balance of probabilities, while police hearings require a higher standard of proof, known as “clear and convincing evidence.”

The court found that the process skewed in favor of the police, as the former police chief, Eric Girt, appointed the investigator, prosecutor, and hearing officer. This arrangement raised concerns about impartiality, allowing the police service to potentially absolve itself of civil liability.

Call for Systemic Change

Green expressed frustration over the lengthy and complex process, stating, “Justice delayed is justice denied.” He emphasized the challenges faced by individuals attempting to seek justice against police actions. “I had to go all the way to a judicial review to simply have the merits of my case heard in a fair and impartial setting,” he added.

Despite the ruling, Green remains focused on systemic issues within the Hamilton Police Service. He is advocating for changes to address racial profiling and is not seeking personal damages. Instead, he hopes for an acknowledgment of the harm done to the Black community and a commitment to cultural change within the police force.

The HRTO has not provided a timeline for when Green’s application will be reconsidered but stated that it is dedicated to working as efficiently as possible. In light of ongoing concerns over police practices, particularly regarding the treatment of Black individuals, Green’s case underscores the pressing need for accountability and reform within law enforcement.