The City of Richmond is mounting a legal challenge against an order from British Columbia's Information and Privacy Commissioner to remove high-definition surveillance cameras installed at a major intersection. The city contends its pilot program is lawful and essential for public safety, setting the stage for a court battle over privacy rights and municipal authority.
Legal Standoff Over Public Surveillance
In a statement released this week, Richmond officials confirmed they are appealing the order issued by Privacy Commissioner Michael Harvey. The commissioner's decision, released on January 14, 2026, mandates the city to cease recording, delete all existing footage, and physically remove cameras installed at the intersection of Minoru Boulevard and Granville Avenue. These cameras, which were installed in February 2025, are high-resolution and capture detailed information about individuals, license plates, and vehicle features. The footage has been shared with the RCMP to aid in identifying potential criminals.
Commissioner Harvey ruled that the city lacks the legal authority under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to collect personal information for law enforcement purposes. "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 stated in his report. He emphasized that video surveillance is "not neutral or objective, nor is it harmless, as its use impacts individual and collective privacy in the name of safety."
City's Defense and Councilor's Critique
Richmond maintains that its public safety camera program is legal and operates with sufficient oversight and safeguards to protect individual privacy. The city first received recommendations from the commissioner to stop using the cameras in November but declined to comply, prompting the formal order.
Richmond city Councillor Kash Heed, a former police officer, has been vocal in his criticism of the commissioner's decision, calling it "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. He explained that the currently installed cameras are part of a pilot project to test technology and are not actively monitored. "They're not monitored cameras. Nothing is being done with respect to the footage of these particular cameras," Heed said, noting that no criminal suspects have been identified through the program yet as it is still in a testing phase.
Next Steps and Broader Implications
While Richmond city council must still hold a formal vote to authorize the legal challenge, Heed indicated that council is likely to agree. During the court proceedings, the cameras will remain in place but will be kept inactive.
This case highlights the ongoing tension between public safety initiatives and personal privacy protections in Canadian municipalities. The commissioner acknowledged that surveillance can be justified in some situations but must be proportional. The outcome of Richmond's appeal could set a significant precedent for how other cities in B.C. and across Canada deploy similar surveillance technology, balancing crime prevention with the right to privacy.
