Delhi | 25°C (windy)

Alberta's Carding Conundrum: The Ban That Expired But Isn't Gone

  • Nishadil
  • September 19, 2025
  • 0 Comments
  • 3 minutes read
  • 2 Views
Alberta's Carding Conundrum: The Ban That Expired But Isn't Gone

A cloud of uncertainty briefly loomed over Alberta's policing landscape as the provincial ban on "carding" — the controversial practice of arbitrary street checks — officially expired on June 1. Yet, swift and firm, the province has declared that despite the lapsing of a key ministerial order, the contentious practice remains resolutely outlawed.

For many, the very word "carding" conjures images of unprovoked stops, particularly for marginalized communities.

It refers to random, intelligence-gathering street checks where individuals are questioned or have their identification recorded without any reasonable cause or suspicion of wrongdoing. This practice has long been criticized by civil liberties advocates and human rights organizations for disproportionately targeting racialized individuals and eroding trust between police and communities.

The now-expired ministerial order, implemented by Alberta's United Conservative Party (UCP) government in 2020, had explicitly deemed carding illegal.

This order built upon an interim policy introduced by the previous NDP government, aiming to formalize and strengthen the prohibition. However, the order was designed with a sunset clause, leading to its automatic expiration earlier this month.

Public Safety Minister Mike Ellis was quick to assuage fears, asserting that the expiration changes nothing about what police can and cannot do.

"The 2020 ministerial policy that defines carding as illegal remains in full force and effect," Ellis stated, emphasizing that the province's Police Act further prohibits arbitrary stops and that any collection of personal information by police must be justified by law or policy. "Carding is illegal in Alberta, period," he declared.

Despite these strong reassurances, the Opposition NDP and various civil liberties groups are not convinced.

They argue that the expiry of the specific order creates a dangerous ambiguity, potentially opening the door for the return of practices that have historically led to racial profiling and human rights abuses. "Without a clear, legislated ban, we’re relying on policy that can be changed or interpreted differently," explained a spokesperson for a prominent human rights organization.

The NDP has called for the UCP government to enshrine the ban in permanent legislation, rather than relying on ministerial policies.

Adding to the nuanced discussion, police services in Alberta's major cities maintain that their operations remain unaffected. Representatives from both Calgary and Edmonton police forces affirmed that their members continue to adhere to the existing UCP policy and the provincial Police Act.

They underscored that their focus is on legitimate investigative detentions, which are distinct from carding and require reasonable grounds for suspicion, ensuring their practices comply with legal and ethical standards.

It is crucial to distinguish between unlawful carding and lawful investigative detentions.

The latter occurs when police have specific and articulable reasons to believe an individual is involved in criminal activity, allowing for temporary detention and questioning. Carding, by contrast, lacks this necessary evidentiary threshold, making it a source of significant controversy and concern for civil liberties.

Alberta is not alone in grappling with this issue.

Other Canadian provinces have taken legislative steps to address carding. British Columbia introduced a regulation against the practice in 2019, while Ontario famously banned it in 2017 following extensive public outcry and reports highlighting its disproportionate impact on Black and Indigenous communities.

As Alberta navigates this legal and ethical terrain, the debate continues between the government's assertion of ongoing prohibition and the demand for robust, statutory protections.

The underlying sentiment remains: ensuring public safety must not come at the expense of fundamental human rights and the trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve.

.

Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on