Chair Of Complaints
Commission Speaks Out
THE CRISIS IN RCMP ACCOUNTABILITY
The RCMP, as an institution, is under intense scrutiny from a number of quarters today. Should we be concerned? Can Canadians afford to let key institutions such as the RCMP continue to lurch from crisis to crisis?
A crisis has been defined as a situation that somehow challenges the public’s sense of appropriateness, tradition, values, safety, security or integrity of an institution.
It is largely based on perception of a problem, regardless of whether the problem is real or only apparent. In effect, a situation degenerates into a crisis when it is designated as such by the media, Parliament, or by powerful or credible interest groups.
A recent IPSOS-Reid poll gauging the trustworthiness of professions indicated that of the 30 jobs listed, the police were tied for sixth position with teachers. A very credible showing considering national politicians were tied for last with car salespersons and journalists were ranked 21st, just ahead of lawyers.
Public trust is essential in a democracy and this poll indicates that, by and large, citizens continue to have confidence in our police forces. They know that every day, young men and women risk physical injury, and in some cases die so that you and I can enjoy a level of personal safety that is unmatched anywhere in the world.
The sheer size of the RCMP – 26 000 members and an annual budget of $4 billion – gives it a presence and profile enjoyed by few police services. It is inevitable that such a police service will be the subject of public complaints as to how it discharges its duties.
Since 1988, the year the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP I lead was formed, there have been on average 2,000 complaints annually. The vast majority of these complaints can be and are adequately addressed under the current legislation.
Review bodies such as our Commission are creatures of statute. We are only as strong as Parliament makes us. We cannot pretend to have powers or the ability to impose obligations that have no basis in legislation. For example, the Commission cannot demand that the RCMP provide classified information when it lacks a legislative mandate to do so.
It has been said that the "only constant is change" and one area that has experienced unprecedented change over the last twenty years is public safety. Globalization, mass migration, technological advancements and the existence of failed or failing states have all contributed to a witch’s brew of sophisticated crime in the form of transnational organized crime, global terrorism, and the ever‑ubiquitous Internet with its hackers, fraud artists and hate distributors.
Within this context inadequacies of the legislative model for review of the RCMP quickly became apparent. The then Chair of the Commission in his 1989–1990 Annual Report to Parliament called for some 33 legislative amendments. Similar calls have echoed throughout the subsequent years, including my Annual Report of 2005–2006.
The Auditor General of Canada found that we lacked the review powers currently enjoyed by the Security Intelligence Review Committee and the Inspector-General for CSIS as well as other similar bodies and commissions.
Lack of a modern review mechanism has led to a seemingly endless series of public and private inquiries, including those conducted on Air India by former Ontario Premier Bob Rae and on Maher Arar by Justice Dennis O’Connor, as well as those presently being carried out by a number of federal parliamentary committees in Ottawa. Without modernization of the current review process, we can look forward to other such ad hoc responses.
The challenges of police accountability are not unique to the federal government. Provincial governments have faced them as well. Quebec, Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan and British Columbia have all taken steps to better address police accountability. Even though their regimes were enacted much later than the federal model, the provinces found it necessary to refresh those models to better address public expectations of transparency and accountability.
In my view, the current situation provides an opportunity for the media, legislators, as well as powerful and credible interest groups across Canada to take ownership of this crisis and collectively offer constructive ideas to restore the essential bond of trust between the RCMP and the Canadian public.
We all have a choice to be either part of the problem or part of the solution.
Paul. E Kennedy has been Chair of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP since October 2005.
You can view the draft model legislation here
And don't forget there is no "watch dog" for CSIS either.
Also, see Bad Cop News ..
No comments:
Post a Comment