The City of Richmond is appealing an order by B.C.’s privacy watchdog to remove high-definition surveillance cameras at an intersection that were shared with the RCMP.

Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.

• Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account.
• Get exclusive access to the Vancouver Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.
• Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.
• Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.
• Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.

Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.

• Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account.
• Get exclusive access to the Vancouver Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.
• Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.
• Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.
• Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

• Access articles from across Canada with one account.
• Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.
• Enjoy additional articles per month.
• Get email updates from your favourite authors.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

• Access articles from across Canada with one account
• Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments
• Enjoy additional articles per month
• Get email updates from your favourite authors

Sign In or Create an Account

or View more offers

The public safety camera program is lawful, the city argues, and it now seeks to have the legality of the pilot program determined by the courts, the city said in a statement.

But the information and privacy commissioner, Michael Harvey, writes in his decision that the city lacks authorization to collect personal information for law enforcement purposes.

The city states the cameras are only used for law enforcement purposes and that there is enough oversight and safeguards in place “to adequately protect the privacy of individuals.”

Harvey’s decision states the cameras, installed in February 2025, are high-resolution and collect information about individuals, licence plates and vehicle features to help the RCMP identify potential criminals.

The commissioner ordered the cameras at the intersection of Minoru Boulevard and Granville Avenue to be removed, recording be ceased and recorded footage be deleted, citing the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, which the commissioner argues didn’t grant the city legal authority to use them. Richmond has also been ordered to delete any recordings that it still has.

The city was first notified of the commissioner’s recommendations to stop the use of the cameras in November, but the city declined to comply, asking the commissioner to make an order, which he did, released Jan. 14.

“Beyond concerns relating to proper legal authority, there are concerns that surveillance is not as effective as often purported and can have other harms,” Harvey said in his report. “The deployment of video surveillance is not neutral or objective, nor is it harmless, as its use impacts individual and collective privacy in the name of safety.”

1. Advertisement 1

   Story continues below

   This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The commissioner acknowledged there are situations where surveillance can be justified, but it has to be proportional.

Richmond city Coun. Kash Heed calls the decision by Harvey flawed.

“I’ve got a big concern with him because I don’t think he quite understands the concept of public safety and rights of the individuals,” Heed told Postmedia News on Sunday.

While city council will still vote on whether to mount a legal challenge, Heed said it seems likely that council will agree. During the process of the court challenge, the cameras will remain in place but be “inactive,” he added.

“The cameras that are installed right now are just a pilot to test the technology, to make sure we have the right technology,” Heed said, explaining why no success has been recorded so far with police identifying criminal suspects through the program. “They’re not monitored cameras. Nothing is being done with respect to the footage of these particular cameras.”

The cameras in the pilot are far more technologically advanced than traffic cameras currently installed, Heed said, but don’t have facial recognition capabilities.

“There’s assumptions being made,” he added. “The cameras were never intended and will not be monitored in a real-time fashion. The footage will be captured. It will be stored for a period of time. Nobody will have access to that unless the RCMP were to get a court order, through a judicial process to review the footage at a specific time and day. That is the only access anyone has to that footage.”

The councillor said he has only received support from residents and other municipalities, adding that especially with the Lower Mainland’s gang and extortion cases, the program should be expanded across the province.

Surrey Coun. and mayoral candidate Linda Annis recently made waves with her own plan to expand camera surveillance in Surrey. Annis says she wants there to be a 24-7 camera monitoring team and for police to be a part of it to help find and arrest criminals quicker. The Surrey First candidate also wants to ask the province for more cameras throughout Surrey.

“I strongly believe that some municipalities will be involved in this process whether it will be from an intervener point of view or other process,” Heed said. “We’re not just trying to monitor people’s daily activities, it’s for a specific public safety reason.”

smoman@postmedia.com