Toronto’s Troubling Protest Response – and What Ottawa Gets Right
- Rochelle Direnfeld
- Jun 7
- 7 min read
Updated: Jun 8
Record-Breaking Walk with Israel Disrupted by Protestors
Toronto’s Walk with Israel, held on May 25, 2025, saw a record-breaking 56,000 participants marching from Temple Sinai Congregation to the UJA’s Sherman Campus where the Renee & Irwin Nadal Walk Festival took place. Participants included many children, students, and allies from other communities.
As required, the march path was approved by the city, in part because it necessarily involved the temporary closing of parts of Wilson Avenue and Bathurst Street and the intersections en route. Police, not only from Toronto but other GTA services and the OPP, were present in large numbers, an unfortunate necessity in our current environment.
The event itself was entirely peaceful, marred only by a group of protestors, many of whom were intent on disrupting the march. Police liaison (PLT) officers attempted to establish a nearby location for their protest to take place safely. The protestors rebuffed these police efforts. Instead, they congregated on the road where the Walk with Israel was to take place.
At that point, protestors were likely engaged in an unlawful assembly, that is, conducting themselves as to cause others in the vicinity to reasonably fear that they would disturb the peace tumultuously, criminal intimidation (involving the blocking of roads), causing a disturbance, and mischief. Some were masked, a criminal offence during an unlawful assembly, and when worn with intent to commit an indictable offence.
One masked protestor was dressed as a militant, prominently displaying a hand grenade. The display of the hand grenade was obviously designed to intimidate participants in the walk, and even on the laxest law enforcement standards constituted multiple criminal offences, whether the hand grenade was an imitation explosive device or real. No arrests were made at that time and, to my knowledge, none have been made since—aside from one, noted below.
The police were able to move the protestors off the road, and ultimately to a location south of Sheppard Avenue, immediately east and west of Bathurst Street. They screamed anti-Israel rhetoric, and hurled insults, some antisemitic, at the walk’s participants as they proceeded north.
The walk's participants and protestors were separated by barricades and officers, although the protestors effectively compelled participants to walk through a gauntlet punctuated by hatred. One protestor was arrested for causing a disturbance and mischief in the vicinity of Bathurst and York Downs.
Chaos Outside Casa Loma: Hate-Fuelled Mob Targets Peace Event
Two days later, on May 27, the Abraham Global Peace Initiative hosted an event at Toronto’s historic Casa Loma. The keynote speaker was former Israeli UN Ambassador Gilad Erdan. The gathering was to “counter hate, intolerance and to promote human rights and peace in the Middle East”.
Outside Casa Loma, however, a mob that included radicalized demonstrators screamed antisemitic slurs and threatened violence against attendees and even those who happened to be passing by. They shouted, “baby-killers”, “Intifada” and “Nazi” to the men, women, and children trying to enter the event. Most protestors were masked. Police attempted to keep the mob at bay, but eventually, rhetoric turned to violence.
Two arrests were made. Kerry Gauer, 46, of Toronto, was charged with mischief, assault with a weapon, common assault and wearing a disguise with intent to commit an indictable offence. It is alleged that the accused assaulted two individuals attempting to attend the event, one a young person. The accused was wearing a face covering during both incidents.
Vincent Tourangeau, 50, of Toronto was also arrested and charged with assaulting a police officer. It is alleged that while being removed from the roadway, he pushed and struck a police officer.
Video of the scene is readily available on social media. It can only be described as a hate fest. This was anything but a peaceful protest. It, too, constituted an unlawful assembly. Many of the demonstrators were masked. A number engaged in intimidation of those attending the event, harassment, threatening and causing a disturbance.
None of these activities resulted in charges at the scene, other than the two arrests noted above. These and other events in Toronto continue to raise fundamental questions about the approach being taken by police to protests that transcend protected speech and involve criminal conduct.
Toronto’s Policing Strategy: A Systemic Failure
As a career-long participant in the criminal justice system, I have worked closely with police—indeed, have been deeply involved in training police and prosecutors on hate-motivated crimes. I acknowledge the value in employing de-escalation techniques in challenging situations. I fully support constitutionally protected freedom of speech and assembly.
Finally, I recognize the incredibly difficult job front-line officers have in policing aggressive protests. We all owe a debt of gratitude to the many officers who have shown dedication to protecting our community.
But the truth is that the Toronto Police Service’s strategy in dealing with protests is seriously flawed and has inadequately protected the Jewish community. This strategy has several features to it:
Charges are rarely laid in Toronto for unequivocal hate speech. Police appear unwilling to address even the most virulent hate speech. Here, we are not talking about debatable, offensive but permissible content, but hatred directly against Jews and Israelis.
Police will generally lay charges only when forced to do so because a breach of the peace is actually occurring. The intimidation of our community appears to be treated as an acceptable price to pay to avoid confrontation with lawbreakers.
Police in Toronto are not using existing criminal law enforcement measures such as intimidation and unlawful assembly charges to address the unlawful blocking of roads, and the harassment and intimidation of community members.
Extremists within the ranks of protestors have effectively been granted licence to act unlawfully without consequences in Toronto. Call for bullets to be given to Hamas’s leadership in support of its cause? Urge the killing of hostages if approached by rescuers? Self-identify as a member of Hamas? All met with silence and inaction. Take over major intersections? Barely a response. Violate municipal bylaws that exist to protect public safety? Expect little or no enforcement.
I support the police in the difficult work they do. I understand why some charges must be deferred for reasons of officer safety. But what is not understood by Toronto policing leadership is that de-escalation does not work if police do not establish lines that cannot be crossed without consequences. Extremists now know they can largely act with impunity in this city, and their conduct is escalating.
A Tale of Two Cities: Ottawa Enforces the Line
I am struck by the contrast between how unlawful protests are treated in Toronto and in Ottawa. The Ottawa Police Service appears to have made it clear that protests that block its roads will not be tolerated. Police are using the full range of available criminal law measures to protect its inhabitants, while respecting the right to peacefully and lawfully protest. A recent protest in Ottawa netted thirteen arrests when protestors refused to follow police direction.
Quietly, some Toronto officers have expressed frustration at a policy that resembles capitulation, rather than de-escalation. Meanwhile, the police, the city, the provincial government and the federal government point fingers at each other for the rampant antisemitism in this city. It is quite tiresome and counterproductive.
Leadership Needed — Now
The Toronto police and some politicians say they need stronger criminal laws, but they are not utilizing the ones that they have. Politicians note that they cannot interfere with day-to-day police discretion in enforcement. That is beside the point. They can create policies that do not interfere with discretionary policing but establish zero tolerance for hate activities and promote the use of municipal bylaws as an enforcement measure. They can require adherence to existing municipal bylaws that address, for example, the temporary occupation of the city’s infrastructure, roads and intersections.
The Toronto Police Service Board continues to have no policy on how to police public order events, such as protests and demonstrations, despite public consultations many months ago. The provincial government is fully empowered to create policing adequacy standards to address these issues, and to create policies that do not interfere with police discretion in individual cases.
The introduction of bubble legislation in Toronto was controversial. But the need for bubble legislation was amplified by enforcement inadequacies in protecting our community from hate crimes.
I assume good faith on the part of police leadership. I have worked with that leadership successfully in the past. But Toronto must reevaluate its inadequate approach to hate activities in this city.
About the Author
Rochelle Direnfeld is ALCCA's Senior Criminal Counsel. She was called to the Ontario bar in 1990 and has served in the Ontario Public Service for over 32 years as an assistant crown attorney, deputy crown attorney, crown counsel, and finally as a deputy director for Toronto Crown Attorneys in the Criminal Law Division of the Ministry of the Attorney General. Rochelle retired from public service at the end of 2023. During her career, Rochelle prosecuted a wide variety of Criminal Code cases in the Ontario Court of Justice, Superior Court of Justice, and the Ontario Court of Appeal.
Rochelle focused a large part of her career on youth criminal justice, developing policy as well as training and lecturing crowns, the defence bar, the judiciary, and the police. Since 2018, Rochelle has been committed to battling hate motivated offences and has sat on the Attorney General’s Hate Crime Working Group, providing legal advice to crown counsel and police on hate crimes. In the aftermath of October 7, Rochelle returned to work with the Hate Crime Working Group at Crown Law Office - Criminal until November 2024. Rochelle also serves as vice-chair of the Board of Directors of BOOST Child and Youth Advocacy Centre, a wrap-around agency serving children and youth who have been victims of abuse, as well as their families.