Court File and Parties
CITATION: Thibault v. Her Majesty The Queen, 2012 ONSC 801
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DV-871-11
DATE: 20120105
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
Hennessy J.
BETWEEN:
Jason Michael Thibault et. al
Applicant(s)
– and –
Her Majesty The Queen- Attorney General of Ontario,
Her Majesty the Queen- Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services.
The Ontario Civilian Police Commission,
Office of the Independent Police Review Director,
And Ontario Provincial Police
Defendant(s)
Jason Michael Thibault, Self-Represented
Judith Parker, for the Defendant(s)
HEARD: December 12, 2011
Endorsement
[1] The defendants brought this motion to quash the Application for Judicial Review or in the alternative for directions.
[2] The application as filed seeks judicial review ‘of the decisions’ made by the OPP, the Ontario Civilian Police Commission and the Office of the Independent Police Review Director. The applicant has made 61 complaints to these bodies and there is a decision in each case. The application therefore seeks review of 61 decisions, however they are he does not provide any specific grounds for review of any particular decision.
[3] During submissions, the applicant indicated that he would be prepared to narrow the application to 13 decisions. He conceded that what he really seeks is a full audit and review of the policing provided by the OPP to Little Current, Manitoulin Island. Mr. Thibault went further and stated that he wanted both civilian police oversight organizations to carry out the inquiry under s. 25 of the Police Services Act. He acknowledged that he had not made a specific request for such an inquiry and that therefore, none of the impugned decisions related to such request. In any event, it does not appear that s. 25 provides a right to a citizen to make such a request.
S. 25 (1) The Commission may, on its own motion or at the request of the Solicitor General, the Independent Police Review Director, a municipal council or a board, investigate, inquire into and report on,
(a) the conduct or the performance of duties of a police officer, a municipal chief of police, an auxiliary member of a police force, a special constable, a municipal law enforcement officer or a member of a board;
[4] The application is far too broad to identify what decisions the applicant seeks to have judicially reviewed. The application lacks any grounds specific to any decision on which to base his request for judicial review. The responding parties could not reasonably be expected to respond to this application. Nor would the court be able to ascertain the issues.
[5] In any event, I am satisfied that Mr. Thibault does not actually seek judicial review of the decisions made by the moving parties. He seeks a review of police services generally, as they are provided in his community. To the extent that the applicant is seeking the court to review the level and state of policing in his community, this is not a justiciable issue. Teja’s Animal Refuge c Quebec, (Attorney General), [2009] Q. J. No. 14684 at para 27 (C.A.).
[6] Mr. Thibault advised the court that he has initiated a civil action against the same parties dealing with the same issues.
[7] The application is quashed. Mr. Thibault is at liberty to bring a new application, properly specified on proper grounds subject to any arguments on unreasonable delay..
Hennessy, J.
Released: January 5, 2012
CITATION: Thibault v. Her Majesty The Queen, 2012 ONSC 801 DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DV-871-11
DATE: 20120105
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
Hennessy J.
BETWEEN:
Jason Michael Thibault et. al
Applicant(s)
– and –
Her Majesty The Queen- Attorney General of Ontario,
Her Majesty the Queen- Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services.
The Ontario Civilian Police Commission,
Office of the Independent Police Review Director,
And Ontario Provincial Police
Defendant(s)
Endorsement
Released: January 5, 2012