the part of the code that should have been explored is as follows:

Limitation
(2) A peace officer shall not arrest a person without warrant for

(a) an indictable offence mentioned in section 553,

(b) an offence for which the person may be prosecuted by indictment or for which he is punishable on summary conviction, or

(c) an offence punishable on summary conviction,

in any case where

(d) he believes on reasonable grounds that the public interest, having regard to all the circumstances including the need to

(i) establish the identity of the person,

(ii) secure or preserve evidence of or relating to the offence, or

(iii) prevent the continuation or repetition of the offence or the commission of another offence,

may be satisfied without so arresting the person, and

(e) he has no reasonable grounds to believe that, if he does not so arrest the person, the person will fail to attend court in order to be dealt with according to law.

=====

what that says in english is that an officer should not arrest somebody under a hybrid offence unless they think the person is a threat to re-offend or poses a flight risk, neither of which were true in this case.

the officer had two options available to him:

1) seek an arrest warrant,
2) give me a summons.

arresting me and holding me was neither appropriate nor legal, by statutory clarity; we should not be talking about "reasonable cause" here at all.