Why Canadian Police Must Transition from “Keeping the Peace” to "Enforcing the Law"

This article reflects my opinion on the current state of affairs as it relates to the protests occurring in Canada, which are impacting Canadian citizens.

In recent months, Canada’s law enforcement role has come under increasing scrutiny as peaceful protests have evolved into acts of intimidation, disruption, and violence. The challenges Canadian police face are not unique, but the reluctance to move from simply “keeping the peace” to enforcing the law has raised significant concerns—especially for marginalized communities.

With the upcoming Jewish high holidays and the anniversary of the October 7th attack by Hamas approaching, there is heightened fear and concern across many communities about the potential for increased threats and violence. Canadian police, now more than ever, must be prepared to protect these communities and take decisive action when protests cross the line into hate speech, intimidation, or violence.

It’s time for Canadian law enforcement to make a crucial shift, much like police forces in Germany and Scandinavia, which have successfully adapted their policing models to address the growing intensity and complexity of protests. However, this shift cannot be accomplished by law enforcement alone—political leaders must clearly signal their support for the police and ensure that the rule of law prevails. Governments must not only provide the necessary resources but also stand behind police officers as they enforce laws, ensuring public safety and security.

The Current State of Affairs: From Protests to Intimidation

Across Canada, what began as peaceful demonstrations has often morphed into acts of intimidation, hate speech, and illegal blockades, threatening public safety and creating a climate of fear in our cities. The most concerning protests have taken place in major urban centres like Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver—each facing unique challenges.

Toronto: Intimidation at Places of Worship

In Toronto, protests outside places of worship, particularly synagogues, have alarmed communities. As we approach the Jewish high holidays, these concerns have deepened, with fears that tensions may escalate. In the last year, demonstrations near the Holy Blossom Temple in the city's Forest Hill neighborhood involved antisemitic chants and symbols. What was framed as political expression quickly crossed the line into hate speech and intimidation. Families attending worship felt unsafe, and the Jewish community at large expressed concerns over their security.

These fears are further heightened by the upcoming anniversary of the October 7th attack by Hamas, which has increased anxiety within Jewish communities globally. Synagogues, schools, and community centres have become potential flashpoints for protests that could quickly escalate into violence if not managed properly.

While the right to protest is fundamental, protests that target religious institutions or marginalized groups must be met with a stronger law enforcement presence to prevent acts of intimidation. Police should not simply seek to “keep the peace” by de-escalating; they must enforce hate crime laws, as outlined under Canadian law. However, for this to happen effectively, political leaders must clearly signal that they support law enforcement’s role in addressing such threats and that the rule of law will be upheld in the face of intimidation and hate speech.

Examples from Germany and Scandinavia: Adapting Policing Models to Escalating Protests

Across Germany and Scandinavian countries, policing models have evolved in response to the increasing intensity and complexity of protests. These nations have recognized the need for law enforcement to take decisive action when protests cross legal boundaries, while also ensuring that fundamental rights are respected. Crucially, political leaders in these countries have stood firmly behind their police forces, ensuring that law enforcement has the backing to uphold the law.

Germany: Combatting Extremism and Enforcing Hate Crime Laws

Germany has developed one of the most proactive and structured approaches to handling protests, particularly those involving far-right extremism and hate speech. The rise of movements like PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the Occident) and other far-right groups led the German government to adopt a more assertive law enforcement model.

Germany passed stringent hate speech laws and gave police broader powers to intervene when protests crossed into hate speech or threatened public order. During far-right demonstrations in cities like Dresden and Berlin, German police have used force to disperse crowds and arrest individuals engaging in violence or hate-fueled rhetoric. In several high-profile cases, German courts have upheld the police's right to intervene in protests that incite violence, bolstering the authority of law enforcement to act decisively.

This model works because German political leaders have made it clear that there is no tolerance for hate speech or violence disguised as protest. Chancellor Angela Merkel and other senior leaders have spoken out against extremism, emphasizing the importance of preserving public order while protecting the rights of vulnerable communities.

In contrast, Canadian political leaders have often been hesitant to openly support such actions, creating uncertainty around police interventions in cases involving hate speech or religious intimidation.

Sweden: Addressing Far-Right Extremism and Hate Speech

Similar to Germany, Sweden has also seen a rise in far-right extremism and protests, particularly around immigration and multiculturalism. In response, the Swedish government has empowered its police forces to take swift action when demonstrations turn into hate speech or illegal activities.

For example, during protests in Malm? organized by far-right groups, Swedish police acted decisively to disperse crowds and arrest individuals engaged in violent or illegal behavior. The Swedish government has been clear in its support of police interventions, particularly when protests cross the line into hate-driven rhetoric.

Swedish political leaders have reinforced that the protection of public safety and marginalized communities is a priority, providing law enforcement with the confidence and legal backing to act decisively. Canada can learn from this approach, where clear signals from political leaders have allowed law enforcement to effectively handle escalating protests.

Denmark: Balancing Protest Rights with Public Safety

Denmark’s approach to policing protests has also evolved in recent years, particularly in response to increased activism around climate change and other political issues. Danish police have adopted a model that emphasizes preventive dialogue with protestors, but they are also equipped to act when protests become violent or block critical infrastructure.

Danish police use dialogue officers who engage directly with protestors to de-escalate tensions, but they also have specialized units ready to intervene if protests escalate. During several climate-related protests in Copenhagen, Danish police dispersed crowds blocking roads and arrested those who refused to move.

Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has repeatedly backed these actions, emphasizing the importance of balancing the right to protest with the need to maintain public safety and order. The Danish government has been clear that while peaceful protest is respected, law and order must prevail. Canada, by comparison, has struggled with striking a similar balance, often erring on the side of de-escalation at the expense of enforcing the law when necessary.

Norway: Handling High-Risk Protests with Prevention and Early Intervention

Norway’s policing model focuses heavily on prevention and early intervention to avoid violent confrontations during protests. Norwegian police work closely with local communities and protest organizers to prevent escalation, but they are prepared to act swiftly if protests turn violent or violate the law.

For instance, during anti-immigration protests in Oslo, Norwegian police engaged with organizers ahead of the protests to ensure they remained peaceful. However, when clashes broke out, police quickly arrested those responsible for inciting violence and restored order. Norwegian law enforcement is also authorized to use force to clear illegal blockades and protect critical infrastructure when protests threaten public safety.

The Norwegian government, under Prime Minister Jonas Gahr St?re, has consistently backed law enforcement’s approach, affirming that the rule of law must be upheld. This political support has allowed Norwegian police to intervene early and decisively, reducing the likelihood of protests escalating into violence.

Why Canada Needs to Follow Suit

1. Protecting Marginalized Communities: The proactive policing models seen in Germany, Sweden, and Norwaydemonstrate that hate speech and religious intimidation can be met with swift law enforcement action. Canadian law enforcement should have the same mandate to arrest and prosecute individuals who engage in hate speech, especially around religious institutions during sensitive times, such as the Jewish high holidays or the anniversary of the October 7th attack by Hamas. Political leaders must signal their support for these efforts, making it clear that hate-driven violence will not be tolerated.
2. Preventing Escalation: Denmark’s balanced approach to engaging protestors while ensuring public safety shows the importance of swift intervention when protests cross the line into illegal blockades or violent demonstrations. Canadian police must learn from these examples and act quickly to prevent escalation. The government must stand firmly behind law enforcement, ensuring that officers are empowered to enforce the law decisively.
3. Maintaining Public Safety: Norway’s focus on prevention and early intervention provides a model for how Canadian law enforcement can reduce the risk of violence during protests. Canada must adopt similar measures, empowering police to act when protests pose threats to essential services or public infrastructure. Political leaders must publicly affirm their commitment to upholding the rule of law, providing law enforcement with the confidence to act when necessary.
4. Restoring Public Confidence: Countries like Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have redefined their approach to protests by balancing the right to protest with the need to maintain public safety. In Canada, public confidence in law enforcement is waning as police are seen to hesitate when faced with escalating protests. A more assertive stance, supported by clear signals from political leaders, is needed to restore trust.

Conclusion: It’s Time for a Shift in Canada

Canada has long prided itself on civil liberties and the right to peaceful protest. But when protests cross the line into intimidation, violence, or illegal blockades, the role of law enforcement must shift from “keeping the peace” to enforcing the law.

Countries like Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have successfully adapted their policing models to address the growing intensity of protests, empowering law enforcement to protect public safety without undermining civil liberties. Canadian police must follow suit, but this cannot be done by law enforcement alone—governments must provide clear support and policy direction to enable police to act effectively.

The time to act is now!