Court rules Ottawa police fingerprint retention policy unreasonable
Ontario's Divisional Court has overturned an Ottawa Police Service decision to deny a woman's request to have her fingerprint and photo records destroyed after charges against her were withdrawn.
Reported. A news outlet found this. voche.me names the outlet and links its report. Read the original report on ca.news.yahoo.com.
Ontario's Divisional Court has ruled that Ottawa Police Service's policy for denying requests to destroy fingerprint and photo records was unreasonable, the Ottawa Citizen reported on October 30.
The court overturned an OPS decision that denied a request to destroy biometric records after criminal charges against the person were withdrawn. According to the Ottawa Citizen, the court found that OPS had been automatically denying requests for certain categories of offences without looking at individual circumstances, and ordered the service to reconsider each such request on its own terms.
What the court decided
The Divisional Court did not order the fingerprint and photo records destroyed. Instead, it directed OPS to reassess the request in line with the court's reasoning.
The Ottawa Citizen reported that the court found people who have not been convicted retain privacy rights to their fingerprints and photographs. Police may keep biometric data, but only in exceptional circumstances tied to whether the data is genuinely needed, the ruling said.
The case arose after a woman was arrested in January 2024 and charged with a number of assault-related offences. The charges were withdrawn in August 2024 when she entered a peace bond. After the 12-month bond expired without incident, she asked OPS to destroy her fingerprint and photo records. OPS denied the request in September 2025 and rejected a follow-up request for reconsideration the following month.
Why the policy was found unreasonable
The Ottawa Citizen reported that the court took issue with OPS applying a blanket denial for requests involving certain categories of offences. The ruling said that approach was unreasonable because it did not allow for individual assessment of whether there was a legitimate reason to keep a specific person's biometric data.
The service is now required to review such requests individually, weighing the circumstances of each case.
What this means for Ottawa residents
Anyone in Ottawa who was arrested, had their charges withdrawn, and was then denied a request to have their fingerprint or photo records destroyed may be affected by this ruling. OPS must now individually assess those requests rather than apply an automatic refusal.
People in this situation can contact Ottawa Police Service at ottawapolice.ca to ask about the records request process following this court decision.
The ruling was issued on October 30, 2026. Follow the Ottawa election news for further developments.
Questions this story answers
What did the Divisional Court rule about Ottawa Police fingerprint records?
The court found that Ottawa Police Service's policy of automatically denying certain requests to destroy fingerprint and photo records was unreasonable. The Ottawa Citizen reported that the court said blanket denials for certain categories of offences, without looking at individual circumstances, were not legally justified. The court ordered OPS to reconsider such requests on a case-by-case basis.
Who brought this case to court?
The Ottawa Citizen reported that a woman named Heather Reichert brought the case after Ottawa Police denied her request to have her biometric records destroyed. She had been arrested in January 2024, but the charges against her were withdrawn in August 2024 when she entered into a peace bond.
What is a peace bond and how did it relate to this case?
A peace bond is a court order that sets conditions a person must follow, without a finding of guilt. In this case, Reichert agreed to conditions including no contact with her former spouse. The Ottawa Citizen reported the 12-month bond expired without incident, after which she asked police to destroy her biometric records.
Does the court ruling mean Ottawa Police must now destroy all fingerprint records from withdrawn cases?
The court did not order the destruction of records in this specific case. Instead, it ordered Ottawa Police to reconsider the decision using proper individual assessment. The court said police may retain biometric records in exceptional circumstances, but cannot apply a blanket denial policy.
What are the privacy rights of a person whose charges were withdrawn?
The Ottawa Citizen reported that the court stated people who have not been convicted retain their privacy rights to fingerprints and photographs. While police may have reason to retain the information, this is only justified in exceptional circumstances around whether the data is genuinely needed.
What is the Ottawa Police Service's fingerprint retention policy?
According to the Ottawa Citizen's report, OPS had a policy of automatically denying requests to destroy fingerprint and photo records for certain categories of offences, without considering the individual circumstances of each case. The Divisional Court found this policy unreasonable.
When was the Ottawa Police denial challenged in court?
The Ottawa Citizen reported that OPS denied Reichert's request in September 2025, and rejected a reconsideration request one month later. The Divisional Court's ruling overturning that denial was published on October 30, 2026.
What can Ottawa residents do if they want to request destruction of their biometric records?
People arrested in Ottawa whose charges were withdrawn can contact Ottawa Police Service to request destruction of fingerprint and photo records. Following this ruling, OPS is required to individually assess each request rather than apply a blanket denial. The Ottawa Police Service website at ottawapolice.ca has information on records requests.
Sources
The pages this story draws on. Open one to check a claim yourself.
Found an error? Tell the editors with the corrections form. A correction is noted on the story it changes. Read our standards.
