Call, Fax or Email Gérald Tremblay, Mayor of Montreal:

Demand that Mayor Tremblay immediately withdraw city of Montreal lawyer Pierre-Yves Boisvert’s mandate in the file in which the Montreal Police Brotherhood filed a motion to quash the public inquiry into Anas’ death

WE DEMAND A PUBLIC INQUIRY IN THE DEATH OF ANAS BENNIS!

As Montrealers, our message needs to come across clearly: there can be no substitute to the public inquiry -- it must be allowed to proceed as ordered by the coroner-in-chief and most recently by the Superior Court. The city's attempts to block it must cease immediately. Accordingly, we must demand that Pierre-Yves Boisvert's mandate in this case be revoked.

We are asking that you take 5 minutes to contact mayor Gérald Tremblay immediately (see sample letter below) to demand that he withdraw city of Montreal lawyer Pierre-Yves Boisvert’s mandate in the file in which the Montreal Police Brotherhood’s moved to quash the public inquiry into Anas’ death; this motion was rejected by Superior Court Justice Claude Champagne on September 2, 2010, thus allowing the coroner's inquiry to proceed.

Mayor Gérald Tremblay
Hôtel de Ville
275 Notre-Dame East
Montreal, Qc.
H2Y 1C6

maire@ville.montreal.qc.ca & geraldtremblay@ville.montreal.qc.ca
Telephone: 514-872-3101
Fax: 514-872-4059

Please email us to let us know you contacted the mayor, and 'cc' all your email correspondence with the mayor's office to justicepouranas@gmail.com

On the phone, be polite and patient, but also persistent. Make sure that you get your message across in a clear and effective way.

------------------------------------
[[[ SAMPLE LETTER ]]]

Mr. Gérald Tremblay
Mayor, City of Montreal

Re: Public Inquiry into the death of Mohamed Anas Bennis

Mayor Tremblay:

I am writing you so that you may clarify your position regarding the necessity of a public inquiry into the death of Mohamed Anas Bennis. I am also writing to support the Justice for Anas Coalition's demand for a public inquiry in this case. Specifically, I demand that you immediately withdraw the mandate held by city lawyer Pierre-Yves Boisvert to support the recently-rejected motion filed by the Montreal Police Brotherhood that sought to cancel the public inquiry into the death of Anas.

The Justice for Anas Coalition, led by the Bennis family and supported by dozens of organizations – including activist groups, community organizations and political parties – has been working to shed light on the circumstances surrounding the death of Mohamed Anas Bennis, a young Canadian of Moroccan background who was killed by Montreal police officer Yannick Bernier, accompanied by Jonathan Roy, on December 1st 2005, in Côte-des-Neiges.

As you know, a public inquiry was ordered in June 2008 by Quebec coroner-in-chief, Dr Louise Nolet. However, the inquiry was put on hold while the Quebec Superior Court heard a motion filed by the Montreal Police Brotherhood with the goal of quashing the inquiry. As you surely know, this motion was rejected by Superior Court Justice Claude Champagne on September 2, 2010, thereby paving the way for the coroner's inquiry to proceed.

During the Montreal City Council meeting in April (2010), in response to a question pertaining to the necessity of a public inquiry into the death of Anas Bennis, you answered as follows: "It was a tragic incident, and the family continues to suffer until all light is shed on this incident. And so, I wish, like you, and like all the members of the city council, that all light be shed as soon as possible."

Your wish that all light be shed on the circumstances surrounding the death of Anas Bennis is shared by thousands of Montrealers, dozens of community organizations, and more importantly, the Bennis family.

In light of your recent statement, it seems quite contradictory that the lawyer representing the city of Montreal, Pierre-Yves Boisvert, was actively supporting the motion filed by the Brotherhood, which aimed at blocking the only remaining avenue that could actually “shed light” on the death of Anas Bennis. That is, a public inquiry.

The Montreal Police Brotherhood does not represent the citizens of Montreal. Its actions are dubious. Moreover, on May 5th, 2010, a Quebec Court of Appeal decision concerning a public inquiry in the death of Michel Berniquez -- a case with much in common, where the Police Brotherhood had intervened to try and stop an inquiry from proceeding -- was unequivocal in mandating that a public inquiry proceed. The decision by judge Yves-Marie Morissette is very clear in condemning the action of the Brotherhood: “To suggest [...] that all light has already been shed on what we can learn of the tragic events [...], or to assert that a coroner’s public inquiry would discredit the judicial system and would cause prejudice to the police involved [...], seems to me not only exaggerated, but in the realm of verbal overstatement.”

In this context, the role played by Montreal city lawyer Pierre-Yves Boisvert is highly problematic. Meanwhile, the position of the city of Montreal as well as your own position on this matter seem incoherent.

When you were asked to clarify your position during the last Montreal city council meeting on May 20th (2010), you stated that you saw no contradiction between the right of the family to know the truth and the right of a person (presumably, officer Bernier) to "be protected". It is quite obvious that a public inquiry may be the only avenue that can lead to the truth about the causes and circumstances that led to Anas' death. If the truth threatens officer Bernier's right to "be protected", as you implied, one can wonder if the officer has something to hide. Police officers, just like citizens, as you well know, have to be held accountable for their actions by testifying in a transparent investigation; in this case, a public inquiry. This basic principle is recognized by Quebec law and has been reiterated in the recent Court of Appeal decision: "Police officers, like all citizens, have the duty to testify before a coroner when called to do so in an inquiry in situations when the circumstances of a death are unclear or violent."

Moreoever, you mentioned the public hearings of the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse (CDPDJ) on racial profiling as a possible venue for dealing with Anas' case. This assertion is absolutely unfounded, as the mandate of the CDPDJ is not to investigate police killings. By bringing up the CDPDJ hearings, though, you seem to acknowledge that Anas' death was a case of racial profiling. This is a consideration that many people have evoked, including very recently, in light of the fact that on June 2, 2010, the Police Ethics Committee found officer Roy guilty of five infractions of the Police Ethics Code in an incident of racial profiling and brutality in Côte-des-Neiges that occurred on March 31, 2008. The possible role of racial profiling could be clarified in the context of a public inquiry into the circumstances that led to the death of Anas.

As a Montrealer, I ask that you clearly state your position regarding the need for a public inquiry into the Montreal police shooting that resulted in the death of Anas Bennis. If you really wish that “all light be shed”, I demand that you immediately withdraw the mandate held by city lawyer Pierre-Yves Boisvert with respect to the now-rejected motion filed by the Montreal Police Brotherhood aiming at canceling the public inquiry into the death of Anas Bennis. An appeal of Justice Champagne's decision -- in the Brotherhood’s on-going attempts to delay the coroner’s inquiry further, if not quash it altogether -- is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated. It is time for the public inquiry to proceed as ordered over two years ago.

Sincerely,

(your name, address)

cc. Justice For Anas Coalition
justicepouranas@gmail.com