Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair was sharply criticized by Ontario's ombudsman for failing to co-operate. (Canadian Press)

The Toronto Police Service says it was justified in refusing to co-operate with an Ontario Ombudsman investigation that was sharply critical of the force's actions during and after the G20 summit.

Ombudsman André Marin's report, released Tuesday, said police exceeded their authority by demanding identification and searching people far from the security zone around the June 26-27 G20 summit in downtown Toronto.

Marin also said he got "zero" co-operation from Toronto police. Chief Bill Blair did not co-operate with Marin's investigation, even though Blair had asked the McGuinty government to invoke a law that police used to exercise heightened search and arrest powers.

However, Toronto police spokesman Mark Pugash told CBC's Metro Morning Wednesday the department didn't participate in his review because the ombudsman has no jurisdiction over the force.

"We explained to Mr. Marin in a letter in August what our concerns were," he said. "And we explained that the Police Services Act covers the entire code of police behaviour and that there were a large number of human rights complaints and criminal investigations and legitimately constituted inquiries that were underway.

"And we had serious concerns that his would not assist the situation, but could compromise a lot of the activity that was going on."

Howard Morton, a criminal lawyer representing two people arrested in G20-related incidents, said Blair erred greatly in not participating in the review.

"And the chief … not only refused to be interviewed by the ombudsman staff, but he forbade them from attempting to interview any officers in terms of trying to determine what they were told about the act," said Morton, who was also the head of Ontario's police watchdog, the special investigations unit, from 1993-1995.

'We don't rush to judge'

He also said Blair should step down in the wake of the report.

"Regrettably, I think that's the only way to try and start anew with the type of policing we want to see in a democracy," said Morton.

Pugash, however, said the chief has the confidence of the public.

"There is no doubt that there are people who are very unhappy with what happened. But there are also six inquiries that are going on, three that are looking at Toronto police," he said.

"We do want to get to the truth. We don't rush to judge that. We wait till all the inquires are in, then we make our decisions."

He said police have co-operated fully with three of the six reviews currently underway:

• The OIPRD review.
• An internal review by Toronto police.
• The SIU investigation.

Marin's report harshly criticized the provincial government for quietly pushing through a regulation that designated parts of the area within the G20 security fence in Toronto a public work, thereby allowing police to exercise additional search and arrest powers in those areas.

But police interpreted that regulation to frequently ask those well outside the security perimeter to identify themselves and state their purpose for being there.

Anyone who failed to provide identification or explain why they were near the security zone could be searched and arrested. Penalties included up to two months in jail and a $500 fine.

Regulation 233/10, as it was called, was "probably illegal" and "likely unconstitutional," said the report.