On May 19, 2026, I attended a C̓úx̌va, a Haíɫzaqv  (Heiltsuk) washing ceremony, held for Heiltsuk citizens Richard and Dawn Wilson. This traditional healing ceremony followed the settlement of a human rights complaint about discrimination they experienced while shopping at Canadian Tire.

Just before the matter settled, the BC Human Rights Tribunal granted BCCLA intervenor status with permission to make oral submissions during the hearing of the complaint, which ultimately didn’t take place because of the settlement. The focus of BCCLA’s intended submissions was on the involvement of Blackbird Security Inc., specifically about the unreasonable search of Richard’s backpack.

At the washing ceremony, I was heartened to witness representatives of Canadian Tire and Blackbird participate in earnest and atone for their wrongdoing, but BCCLA remains concerned about the quasi-policing powers granted to private security and the lack of accountability, especially as we are seeing a dramatic increase in reports of violent interactions involving security guards across the country. Some recent include:

• The 16-year-old First Nations girl who was forcibly restrained by Paladin Security guards at Guildford Town Centre;
• The violent detainment of a pro-Palestine student protester by campus security at Toronto Metropolitan University;
• The death of Trevor Dubois after an altercation with security guards at Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon;
• The Indigenous man who was repeatedly hit by an Impact Security guard using brass knuckles at Dollarama in downtown.

Similar to many instances of state violence, a recent APTN Investigates shows that Indigenous people are disproportionately experiencing violent encounters with private security guards.

Yet, private security guards — unlike the police — are not subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and consequently cannot be held accountable for violating Charter rights. The escalation in these violent incidents is unacceptable and demands a strong response from the governments responsible for regulating the security services industry.

Dawn and Richard’s Complaint

Richard and Dawn are father and daughter, and belong to the Heiltsuk First Nation. On January 17, 2020, Dawn and Richard were shopping at the Coquitlam Canadian Tire while Dawn was waiting for her vehicle to be serviced at the auto center. While they were waiting in the checkout line with a cart full of items, a Blackbird security guard singled out Richard and searched his backpack in view of other customers. When Dawn went to pick up her vehicle she was subjected to racist remarks by a Canadian Tire employee after reporting what happened to her dad.

After this incident, they filed a discrimination complaint against Canadian Tire and Blackbird with the BC Human Rights Tribunal under section 8 of BC’s Human Rights Code detailing their respective experiences of consumer racial profiling.

 

Consumer racial profiling is a recognized form of systemic discrimination and is defined as any type of differential treatment based on a perception of the consumer’s race or ethnicity.[1] It typically involves an Indigenous, Black or other racialized person being followed around, singled out for scrutiny, or closely monitored by an employee or security guard who suspects they may steal or do something else criminal.[2]

To educate the Tribunal on how this issue particularly impacts Indigenous peoples in Canada, Dawn and Richard’s lawyers commissioned an expert report. The report revealed that for Indigenous people, the most frequent and damaging encounters happen at grocery stores, banks, and retail shops – places that are increasingly patrolled by private security guards who exercise quasi-policing powers with little to no accountability with respect to individual rights.

This is the third human rights complaint brought by Heiltsuk citizens in recent years. Sharif Bhamji settled with TD Bank in 2025, and Maxwell Johnson and Heiltsuk Tribal Council settled with BMO in 2022 after he and his 12-year-old granddaughter were handcuffed in 2019 when trying to open a bank account. Together, they have joined forces with the Heiltsuk Nation to combat systemic racism through the #StrongAsCedar campaign. 

Security Guards or Private Police?

Security guards often detain or arrest individuals, use physical force in dealing with them, conduct searches, and use covert surveillance to gather personal information about people. These not only impact human rights but also implicate other fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, like the protections against arbitrary arrest or detention and unreasonable search and seizure. 

Blackbird in particular openly works as an arm of the police in “fighting back against retail theft.” For example, in 2021, it worked alongside the Vancouver Police Department in Project Arrow and boasted on its website:

Over a weekend of dedicated law enforcement efforts, Blackbird Security’s loss prevention experts participated in a program that saw 32 individuals arrested, 71 criminal charges recommended, and nearly $18,000 worth of stolen goods recovered [emphasis added].[3]

Despite this flagrant association, private security guards — unlike the police — are not subject to the Charter and consequently cannot be held accountable for violating Charter rights. A lack of training in crucial areas like consumer racial profiling compounds this issue.[4]  

In BC, private security services are governed by the Security Services Act and the Security Services Regulation, but neither explicitly say what powers security guards have in the execution of their duties. What’s more, the Regulation muddies the waters because it contains several ambiguous provisions. For example, under section 11 of the Regulation, security guards are generally not permitted to use a restraining device, but they may be authorized to use one under certain conditions. Section 14 lays out an optional Code of Conduct that includes a term requiring security workers comply with all federal, provincial, and municipal laws. These provisions are problematic because members of the public have no way of knowing whether any given security guard has the authority to exercise certain powers or is bound to follow the Code of Conduct.  

BCCLA’s Proposed Argument in the Wilson Case

The search of Richard’s backpack raises important public law issues including the privatization of policing power and the impact that privatization and racial profiling may have on the rights of racialized customers under the Human Rights Code and the Charter.

Had the hearing proceeded, BCCLA planned to argue that there is a heightened need for human rights protections and remedies in the context of consumer racial profiling, particularly when it involves the use of private security personnel engaged in quasi-policing activity. This is because the use of quasi-policing powers by private security personnel affects an individual’s constitutionally-protected rights and civil liberties, including the right to be secure against unreasonable search under section 8 of the Charter. Such powers are open to abuse, particularly where private security personnel mirror police officers in power and appearance but are considered “non-governmental” actors to whom the Charter does not apply.

Absent robust protections and remedies afforded under the Human Rights Code there is no other legislative or administrative remedy that provides an effective check against the abuse of quasi-policing powers by private security, thus heightening the need for the Tribunal to consider systemic remedies that will advance meaningful and substantive protection of human rights.

Although these arguments will have to wait until another day, we hope that by sharing them others will feel inspired to join BCCLA in calling for better training and greater accountability within the private security sector, including tightening up security guard protocols and regulations to ensure security guards can’t unfairly take advantage of their status as private persons to deprive people of their Charter-protected rights and fundamental freedoms.

Heiltsuk Law in Practice

Through the implementation of the Expanding Our Vision report, the BC Human Rights Tribunal has made significant changes to its operations to make its complaint process more inviting and accessible to Indigenous peoples. One of those changes is to give space for the incorporation of Indigenous law.

In Dawn and Richard’s case, the Tribunal permitted them to incorporate Heiltsuk protocols for opening and closing the hearing.[5] In addition, the Heiltsuk Tribal Council joined them in support of their request for a collective remedy grounded in Heiltsuk law. Fortunately, the parties were able to resolve the matter through a settlement that satisfied the Wilsons’ wishes, including the traditional Heiltsuk washing ceremony and Canadian Tire and Blackbird’s commitments to systemic reform to ensure what happened is not repeated.

As a witness to the Washing Ceremony, I observed the immense generosity of a reciprocal system that works to restore the dignity of those harmed and, in turn, of those who caused the harm.

When I first entered the space where the ceremony was held, I could feel the heaviness of the unknown in the air, but that changed as the evening progressed. The care on display not only extended to the Wilsons; it wrapped around everyone present. As we shared a meal, the representatives from Canadian Tire and Blackbird offered unique and thoughtful apologies to the Wilsons that demonstrated a great deal of introspection and self-awareness. The parties were each blanketed according to Heiltsuk custom, and as they danced together, the room felt lighter.

Working within a Western-dominated legal profession, I am often puzzled by what I perceive to be an overemphasis on avoiding liability rather than taking accountability. An acknowledgement of harm, followed by an apology and a commitment to acting better, can go a long way. Yet it feels like much of our society has become resistant to accepting responsibility which is fundamental to addressing our problems leaving us stuck and unable to move forward.

How do we get unstuck?

The Washing Ceremony was a refreshing reminder that the process of law and governance can be done differently and with great success for all involved. We need more of this! There is so much we can learn from Indigenous peoples about how to live in right relationship with one another. I truly hope the power of putting aside our egos to come together in pursuit of collective healing catches on as other institutions continue to take the necessary steps for a more inclusive approach to conflict resolution and reconciliation.

In the meantime, here’s what you can do if you’ve experienced consumer racial profiling or a negative interaction with a security guard:

• Note the time, location, name of the security company, physical description of the security guard, and what happened.

Complaint mechanisms: 

• If you’ve had a questionable altercation with a security guard or if you’ve observed a security guard acting improperly, e.g., using unnecessary force or using unauthorized equipment, you can file a complaint under section 31(4) of the Security Services Act. Complaints must be submitted using the online form. 
• If you’ve experienced consumer racial profiling/discrimination, you can file a human rights complaint with the of the BC Human Rights Code. 
  • Indigenous peoples are encouraged to check out the Tribunal’s resource page for Indigenous complainants.

[1] Williams, Jerome  D., et al, 2001 Consumer racial profiling: Bigotry goes to market. The New Crisis 108: 22-24.

[2] Dr.  Lorne Foster and Dr. Lesley Jacobs. July 2025. Indigenous Consumer Racial Profiling in Canada: A Neglected Human Rights Issue. Expert Report. Prepared on behalf of Ng Ariss Fong, Lawyers, Wilson v Canadian Tire et al., (BC Human Rights Complaint CS-0003916) 2025-07-28-Signed-Expert-Report-Indigenous-Consumer-Racial-Profiling-w-abstract.pdf

[3] Nayomie Spence-Lees. “Boost and Bust: Fighting Back Against Retail Theft” (16 November 2024) Blackbird Security, online: Blackbird Security Proudly Provides Vancouver Retail Security and Loss Prevention | Blackbird Security Blog

[4]  Radek v. Henderson Development Canada and Securiguard Services (No. 3), 2005 BCHRT 302, paras 379 – 386

[5] Wilson and another v. Pagalis Sales Ltd. DBA: Canadian Tire Store 608 and others, 2025 BCHRT 241.