(Author’s Note: This article is part of an ongoing series of reflections and case studies informing my forthcoming book, The Illiberal Turn: The Rise of the Executive State and the End of Political Negotiation. The “Illiberal Turn” refers to a global shift where democratic institutions—once defined by negotiation, transparency, and public consent—are increasingly bypassed by an insulated executive authority. This post examines how the failure of the “Pompeia Test” in our local streets is a symptom of this larger trend.)
“Because my family should not only be free from guilt, but even from the suspicion of it.” — Julius Caesar, on why he divorced his wife, Pompeia, on suspicion of adultery.
The story is well known. Publius Clodius, the lover of Caesar’s wife, Pompeia, was put on trial for profaning religious ceremonies. When Caesar was called as a witness and questioned about the alleged affair, he disclaimed any knowledge of it. When asked why, then, he had divorced Pompeia, the answer he reportedly gave, quoted as an epigram here, has become a core dictum for the standard of integrity to which holders of public office must be held.
I will re-phrase that standard for our current era: “Enforcers of law and justice should not only be free from partiality, but even from the suspicion of it.”
It appears, however, that our police leaders have failed Caesar’s dictum. I am referring specifically to their formal involvement with a partisan group that advocates for one side in a serious international issue: The Abraham Global Peace Initiative (AGPI). An online publication, The Maple, in its September 16, 2025 report, “Police Involvement With Pro-Israel Charity Raises Concerns,” documented the close ties between AGPI and several of Canada’s serving and retired police chiefs, and their organizations, such as, the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs (CAPC) and the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police (OACP).
Canadian police organizations that support the AGPI, along with the US-based International Association of Chiefs of Police. Source: https:://agpiworld.com/our-impact
The Mission of the AGPI
While the phrase “global peace initiative” sounds noble, the vast majority of AGPI’s work revolves around the defense of Israel and the promotion of Zionism.
Consistent with this mission is AGPI’s media advocacy, an example of which is a series of newspaper op-eds by the organization’s boss, Avi Ben-Lolo, with headings like:
- Carney’s recognition of a Palestinian state is a grave foreign policy error
- A Moral Failure at the very heart of the Liberal Party
- Carney Must Reverse Plan to Recognize a Palestinian State
- Recognition of a Palestinian State a Betrayal
- Everyone, it seems, is passionate and eager to stand up for dead Jews.
- Canada’s Betrayal Cloaked in Diplomacy
- Canada’s presence on the world stage has diminished. We have to bring it back.
The AGPI, to be clear, is not merely a “charity”; it is an advocacy engine for a specific geopolitical agenda. And this drives its many programs involving law enforcement.
The “ICE” Model: The MADD Mandate
Take, for example, AGPI’s striking calls for a “Homeland Canadian Jewish Community Security Task Force,” with a “MADD” mandate—monitor, activate, disrupt, and deploy—to confront what it terms “radical Islamist ideologies.” In practice, this translates to more surveillance, more undercover work, and the further stigmatization of Islamic and Arab communities.
This proposal is, in effect, a call for a Canadian version of the notorious U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). It asks law enforcement to “disrupt” individuals and ideologies deemed “radical Islamist” or “pro-Hamas”—terms frequently used to criminalize legitimate political dissent.
From Theory to Street Level: The March 25 Escalation
We are no longer speaking in hypotheticals. On March 25, 2026, reports surfaced that the Toronto Police Service (TPS) is moving to codify this aggressive posture. The TPS has announced the creation of a dedicated “anti-terrorism unit” specifically tasked with overseeing protests and demonstrations.
More alarming is the shift in tactical optics and capability: police are now being authorized to deploy officers armed with rifles at rallies. As reported by The Globe and Mail and CBC, this transition transforms the nature of public space. When “enforcers” arrive at a peaceful demonstration equipped for a battlefield, the “suspicion of partiality” is no longer a whisper; it is a visible, lead-heavy reality. By adopting the “MADD” philosophy of disruption and deployment, the police are essentially signaling that they no longer view the dissenting public as citizens exercising Charter rights, but as a domestic insurgency to be managed by an elite, militarized executive state.
Defining and Criminalizing Dissent
Another crucial component of the MADD strategy is the campaign to have governments and police services adopt the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of antisemitism. While presented as a tool against hate, in practice, it is being used to codify a definition that equates criticism of the State of Israel with criminal antisemitism. There is, as we know, considerable debate and disagreement among scholars, experts and policymakers etc., both Jewish and non-Jewish, on this issue of defining antisemitism and of labelling criticism of the political State of Israel expression of antisemitism. Therefore, when police agencies take their “guidance” on policy from the AGPI, they are essentially adopting a framework that treats political dissent as a matter for the criminal justice system.
If versions of the MADD approach are used to enforce this definition, there is bound to be a serious negative impact on the public right to express dissent, a key right guaranteed by Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Elite Network and “Police Academy”
There is an important reason why this relationship between AGPI and our police leaders should worry us: it makes the police a part of an elite network. The “heft” of the AGPI is not accidental. Its leadership and advisors include “iconic” figures like Paul Godfrey (Chairman of Postmedia), former Conservative cabinet ministers like Peter MacKay and Stockwell Day, and even former Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair. This is a network of the socio-economic and political elite of Canada, providing an aura of “officialdom” to what is a deeply partisan project.
Toronto Police Chief Myron Demkiw at an event associated with the AGPI, illustrating the ties between Canadian law enforcement and partisan advocacy. Source: X post by @AzatAlsalim, July 16, 2024, https://t.co/KdY64wAj5L” / X
This photo speaks volumes about the institutional weight of the AGPI leadership behind TPS Chief of Police Myron Demkiw. I fear that an alliance like this effectively erodes the “Operational Independence” of our public police.
The AGPI-police alliance is buttressed further by the organization’s “Police Academy.” Through this “academy” the AGPI provides direct workshops and training to thousands of officers across Canada, including the Peel Regional Police and the Toronto Police Service. This isn’t just “sensitivity training”; it is the “Police Academy” as a vehicle for ideological indoctrination, where officers are taught to view Israel’s critics through the lens of national security threats.
The privileged and receptive relationship that these examples of AGPI’s links with Canada’s law enforcement agencies and political establishment reveal risks reinforcing the suspicion of partiality in policing that prevails in our divided and conflicted communities.
The Edmonton Context: “Junkets” and Influence
We see this “suspicion of partiality” playing out today in Edmonton. Despite intense public outcry from over twenty-six community organizations, Edmonton Police Chief Warren Driechel recently participated in a February 2026 delegation to Israel. His defense—that the trip was merely “educational”—misses the point of the Pompeia Test entirely.
At the heart of this confrontation lies the corruption of a once-vital legal doctrine: “Operational Independence.” Originally conceived to protect the police from partisan political interference, this doctrine is being repurposed as an executive shield. In Edmonton, as in Toronto, “independence” no longer means autonomy from the government; it has come to mean autonomy from the governed. When a Chief argues that no community group has the “right to direct where we can learn,” he is asserting that the police executive is a self-authorizing entity, accountable only to its own perception of “expertise.”
This relationship with AGPI is actually the latest incarnation of an old strategy. Years ago, a prominent member of Toronto’s Jewish community—a veteran politician—described to me how he had organized and led “junkets” for police leaders to Israel. These were often all-expenses-paid, guided trips.
The ostensible purpose was “education,” but the unspoken expectation was that these leaders would return as advocates, having developed a specific view of the threats facing Israel. A more insidious outcome was the acquisition of Israeli policing methods and surveillance tools. This has a direct impact on whom our police consider to be “the victims” and whom they label “the threat.”
Israel, “Foreign Political Interference,” and Implications for Canadian Policing
The reported relationship between the AGPI and Canada’s police organizations and leaders is concerning for another reason, too, namely, the hysteria that we encountered in Canada a few years ago about “foreign interference” in our political system.
Canada was in an uproar. The government instituted a judicial inquiry. Several individuals, mostly “New Canadians,” aspiring to make a career in politics lost their future prospects. Canada’s “intelligence” agencies, working with some media organizations, spread the story about the interference of countries like China and India in Canada’s political system. In fact, the so-called “intelligence” agencies of virtually the entire western world made this a huge story of the “democratic” west under threat from the “autocratic” “Orient”—China, Russia and India.
We have perhaps forgotten that hysteria. In any case, the judicial inquiry initiated by the Canadian government of Justin Trudeau did not find any concrete evidence to support the allegations of interference by these countries, though it cautioned about the need for vigilance.
One story that escaped public attention completely was that of Israel’s efforts to influence the governance systems of western countries, and, indeed, their people’s view of the world and history. This has begun to draw attention in the wake of the current situation.
Israel and community-based Jewish organizations in countries like Canada supposedly dedicated to promoting good relations with and understanding of Israel have worked for a long time to garner support for that country and its interests.
This state of affairs should be a cause of grave concern for anyone who believes in an impartial, neutral, non-political approach to policing that upholds everyone’s Charter and human rights equally. In the “Illiberal Turn,” Operational Independence has been corrupted. It no longer means the police are free from political interference; it means the police are now an insulated executive force, free from public accountability. They are aligning themselves with the perspectives of a dominant elite, leaving the diverse public to wonder: if the enforcers have already chosen a side, who is left to protect the Charter rights of the rest?
Implications for Public Trust
Police services are required to uphold Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and observe strict neutrality. Unfortunately, a widespread view is emerging that police responses to those expressing opposition to Israel’s actions have been partial and disproportionate.
Whether it is the “MADD” approach proposed by AGPI, acceptance of a controversial definition of antisemitism or the persistent culture of international junkets, the message is the same: Canada’s police are aligning themselves with the perspectives of the dominant socio-economic and political elite. On the fundamental score of public trust, it cannot be said that Canada’s police leaders meet the test Caesar set for Pompeia.
A Conceptual illustration of Caesar’s ‘Pompeia Test’ vs. Modern Surveillance and the MADD Mandate
THE POMPEIA TEST: A Citizen’s Guide to Police Accountability
An Action Supplement to The Illiberal Turn by Alok Mukherjee
“Enforcers of law and justice should not only be free from partiality, but even from the suspicion of it.”
THE CRISIS: THE ILLIBERAL TURN
Our police leadership is increasingly bypassing public negotiation in favor of Executive Autonomy. By aligning with partisan advocacy groups, accepting private “junkets,” and deploying militarized units at peaceful protests, the “Operational Independence” of our police has been corrupted into an “Executive Shield.”
📋 THE CITIZEN’S ACCOUNTABILITY CHECKLIST
Use these points to question your local Police Services Board or Chief of Police.
1. End the “Junket” Culture
- The Question: “Will the Board implement a mandatory disclosure policy for all third-party funded international travel by police leadership?”
- The Goal: To ensure that “educational” trips to conflict zones do not result in the importation of biased policing methods or partisan ideologies.
2. Halt the “MADD” Mandate
- The Question: “Does the newly announced ‘Anti-Terrorism Unit’ utilize the Monitor, Activate, Disrupt, and Deploy philosophy proposed by partisan advocacy groups?”
- The Goal: To prevent the criminalization of legitimate political dissent and the stigmatization of vulnerable communities.
3. De-Militarize the Public Square
- The Question: “Under what specific, Charter-compliant criteria are officers authorized to deploy rifles at peaceful political assemblies?”
- The Goal: To reject the “Illiberal Turn” where the public is viewed as a domestic security threat rather than as citizens exercising their rights.
4. Protect Operational Neutrality
- The Question: “How does the Board ensure that the adoption of controversial definitions of ‘hate’ does not infringe upon the right to criticize the political actions of a foreign state?”
- The Goal: To restore the police as a neutral protector of all, not an instrument for a socio-economic elite.
🕊️ OUR DEMAND
We do not accept a policing model that is autonomous from the governed. We demand a return to transparency, neutrality, and the strict observance of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Download. Share. Attend your next Police Services Board meeting.
You can download this checklist at https://alokmukherjee.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/the-pompeia-test-a-citizens-guide-to-police-accountability.pdf or scan the QR Code.
Read the full series: ALOK MUKHERJEE – THE WAY I SEE IT, for more reflections on “The Illiberal Turn” and policing at Alok Mukherjee, The Way I See It
Alok Mukherjee, The Way I See It 
Leave a comment