"Lastly, your article includes quotes from the Crown and Toronto police but excludes all comments from the accused or their counsel. Protestors described the charges as an attempt to “chill Palestine activists and their allies” and emphasized the political targeting behind the case. Their lawyer, Arash Ghiassi, spoke in detail about legal abuses. Yet none of this is reflected in your reporting."
April 1, 2025
To:
Andrea Baillie, Editor-in-Chief, The Canadian Press
Tim Cook, Managing Editor, The Canadian Press
Dear Ms. Baillie and Mr. Cook,
I am writing on behalf of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) to express deep concern regarding your article titled “Some charges dropped in Indigo protest because of reparations, guilty pleas: Crown”, published on March 28, 2025. This article was circulated widely through your wire service and has contributed to a troubling misrepresentation of the events and individuals involved.
Your report omits critical information and context that is essential for readers to understand the nature and significance of this case. In contrast, reporting by the Toronto Star on the same court proceedings provided a far more accurate and balanced account.
First, your article fails to mention serious allegations raised by defense counsel about the conduct of Toronto police. This includes the use of overnight armed raids, the deployment of over 70 officers, and “judge shopping” to obtain search warrants after an initial denial. These details are central to the civil liberties concerns raised by the accused and their legal teams. The Toronto Star reported that some accused described the raids as “incredibly terrifying” and condemned the scale of police action as grossly excessive. This omission constitutes a violation of the Canadian Association of Journalists (CAJ) ethics guidelines on accuracy and accountability. The Canadian Press distorted the narrative and concealed legitimate concerns about state repression and the criminalization of dissent.
Second, the protest at Indigo was not an act of random vandalism, but dissent in solidarity with Palestinians amid Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands and has been described by international legal experts as genocidal in nature. Your article never once mentions Gaza, Israel, or the motivation behind the protest.
Third, the protest specifically targeted Heather Reisman’s financial ties to the Israeli military through the HESEG Foundation, which provides scholarships to “lone soldiers” in the Israeli Defense Forces. Yet your article refers vaguely to “a foundation she started with her husband” and never names it. This exclusion minimizes public understanding of what the protest was about and protects powerful actors from scrutiny. Compare this with the reporting of the Toronto Star, where they correctly name the HESEG Foundation and clearly describes its military connection. CP’s failure to do the same violates basic standards of transparency and promotes factual error through exclusion of key details.
Lastly, your article includes quotes from the Crown and Toronto police but excludes all comments from the accused or their counsel. Protestors described the charges as an attempt to “chill Palestine activists and their allies” and emphasized the political targeting behind the case. Their lawyer, Arash Ghiassi, spoke in detail about legal abuses. Yet none of this is reflected in your reporting.
Again, this article perpetuates single viewpoint reporting and fails to uphold the CAJ principle of diversity, which calls on journalists to include voices “from all segments of the population.” Your overreliance on police framing, including unchallenged repetition of phrases like “targeted intimidation” and “criminal behaviour,” promotes a dangerous narrative that casts pro-Palestinian activism as inherently violent or hateful. This is also a form of anti-Palestinian racism as defined by the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association and The Canadian Guide to Understanding and Combatting Islamophobia where the presumption of antisemitism, which conflates criticism of Israel with hatred of Jews and undermines legitimate human rights advocacy can be considered a form of APR by defaming Palestinians and their allies as antisemites for criticizing Israel and its system of apartheid.
To conclude, the Canadian Press has the responsibility to present balanced, fair, and contextualized reporting. In this case, your coverage failed to meet that standard. I urge you to publish a follow-up story or clarification that includes the broader context of the protest, the motivations of the accused, and the serious concerns raised about the violent police response.
Sincerely,
Anthony Issa
Media Analyst
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East