Social Profiling: A Form of Discrimination

In the News
Share
Print

Someone dealing with homelessness received more than 230 tickets in four years. Was this simply enforcing the law… or a form of discrimination based on their socioeconomic status, or “social condition” as it’s called in Quebec law?

A wood figurine painted red stands apart from a crowd of beige wood figurines.

If someone dealing with homelessness is often stopped by police, are they the victim of social profiling? Quebec’s Human Rights Tribunal addressed this question in a decision made on January 29, 2025. The Tribunal decided that the police didn’t socially profile the person dealing with homelessness in that case. However, the Tribunal took the opportunity to define social profiling and to explain the legal requirements for deciding whether it’s happened.

What is social profiling? 

According to Quebec’s Human Rights Tribunal, social profiling happens when a person in a position of authority, like a police officer, singles someone out mainly because of their socioeconomic status, also known as their “social condition” in Quebec law. Examples include experiencing homelessness or receiving social assistance (welfare). It’s unacceptable for a person in a position of authority to single someone out without a valid reason or concrete evidence, and to treat them differently and more harshly than they treat others.

Discrimination based on someone’s social condition is illegal

Social profiling can be considered a form of discrimination based on someone’s socioeconomic status. According to Quebec’s Charter of human rights and freedoms, no one can be treated differently because of their “social condition”. So, it can be illegal to refuse to give someone housing, a job, or a service because of their socioeconomic status, like the fact that they’re low-income. 

Courts have decided in past discrimination cases that social condition can include circumstances like experiencing homelessness, being a student, receiving social assistance (welfare), or having refugee status. But it’s important to know that each of these decisions was based on the specifics of that case.