Why were charges against the people who broke into the Giller awards ceremony 2 years ago dropped by the Attorney General?

Why were charges against the 3 persons who broke into the Giller awards ceremony 2 years ago dropped by the Attorney General?

We will not comment on the specific charges dropped except to say that there have been a number of instances where, in our view, the authorities failed to recognize the long-term implications of charges being dropped as emboldening continuing conduct.

We were also asked about the dropping of charges relating to the Indigo vandalism and about the dropping of charges more generally. We will not comment on the specific charges dropped in the Indigo case; some of the charges were not dropped; instead, defendants entered guilty pleas and findings of guilt were made.

Without commenting on specific cases and their dispositions, we have seen a number of systemic issues that should be addressed in various jurisdictions and at a national level. These include:

(a) a disconnect at times between police and prosecutors about the merits of hate-motivated charges, even when there have been no changed circumstances between the laying of charges and decisions to withdraw charges

(b) failure to recognize bias, prejudice or hate motivation in cases that target the vast majority of Jews that support the right of Israel to exist or Israelis, a protected class when targeted as a result of their national origin. But even in cases where the court declines to treat these cases such as vandalism as motivated by bias, prejudice or hate, it remains an aggravating circumstance on sentencing, as one superior court judge recently found that vandalism was motivated by political beliefs. The judge stated that such conduct undermines democratic values and can lead to the type of violent activity seen in the assault on the US capitol. We also see insufficient recognition of the fact that holding Canadian Jews responsible for events in the Middle East amounts to antisemitism.

(c) when otherwise minor criminal conduct is potentially hate-motivated, we see too many instances in which the complainants or the community are not consulted with before the prosecutorial decision is made, undermining confidence in the process even if the decision is the correct one.