Criminal Charges Dropped Against Pro-Palestinian Protesters in Montreal Scotiabank Sit-In
Crown prosecutors in Montreal dropped remaining criminal mischief charges against 14 pro-Palestinian demonstrators on October 26, 2026, ending a legal battle stemming from an April 2024 sit-in at a downtown Scotiabank branch, The Globe and Mail reported. Under the agreement, the defendants pleaded guilty to violating a municipal noise bylaw and paid $300 fines to conclude the proceedings.
The April 2024 Sit-In at Downtown Scotiabank
The legal case originated from a demonstration on an unverified date in April 2024, when 44 protesters occupied a Scotiabank branch in downtown Montreal. The activists targeted the financial institution to demand that it divest from Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapons manufacturer, amid the ongoing war in Gaza.
During court hearings held in April at the Montreal municipal court, a branch manager testified that the demonstrators caused no property damage and threatened no one. The manager stated he locked the doors and called the police immediately without asking the protesters to leave the premises.
Protesters maintained that their demonstration was peaceful. However, the initial police response resulted in 44 arrests and subsequent criminal charges.
Resolution of Criminal Charges and Plea Agreements
The path to resolving the 44 cases unfolded across different legal tracks over more than two years. Defence lawyer Barbara Bedont stated that most of the defendants had previously resolved their legal matters through community service.
For the remaining 14 defendants, the Crown agreed to drop the principal criminal mischief charges. In exchange, those 14 individuals entered guilty pleas for breaching a municipal noise bylaw, satisfying the court with $300 fines.
Protester Mara Farrokh explained that the defendants chose to accept the fines to bring a definitive end to the protracted court battle. She asserted that the group had originally mounted a strong challenge under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, contending that the police violated their constitutional protections during the arrests.
“We knew that getting justice out of this court system wouldn’t be possible,” Farrokh said in an interview. Defence lawyer Barbara Bedont maintained that her clients possessed a strong constitutional defense, cautioning that criminalizing peaceful demonstrations poses a direct threat to freedom of expression and the right to protest.
Scotiabank Subsidiary Sells Remaining Shares in Elbit Systems
The conclusion of the court proceedings arrived months after a major corporate shift regarding the target of the demonstration. Regulatory filings from February revealed that Scotiabank’s investment management subsidiary, 1832 Asset Management, had sold off its remaining shares in Elbit Systems.
Activists hailed the financial divestment as a definitive triumph for their campaign. Protester Harar Hall framed the outcome as a direct result of public pressure, stating that the group achieved its core objective of compelling a Canadian bank to alter its investment portfolio.
Despite the dropped criminal charges and the prior corporate divestment, participants expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of accountability from law enforcement and the judiciary. Protesters aired grievances regarding courtroom dynamics and police conduct during the initial 2024 intervention.
During April court hearings, video footage from security cameras was presented inside the municipal court. Farrokh alleged that the sequence showed officers in riot gear stepping on a demonstrator while surrounding the crowd. According to Farrokh, the presiding judge viewed the footage but declined to acknowledge what the defense characterized as excessive police force.
The allegations regarding police conduct have not been independently verified, and The Canadian Press did not view the specific footage described by the defense. In an official email response, Montreal police acknowledged the municipal court’s decision and noted that anyone alleging mistreatment during a police action may file a formal complaint with the force or an independent oversight body.
In response to their courtroom experiences, the protesters lodged a formal complaint against the presiding judge with Quebec’s judicial council. Farrokh stated that the complaint seeks a committee review of the judge’s behavior, alleging unacceptable conduct and bias throughout the proceedings.
The Crown declined to comment on the matter at the conclusion of the April hearings.