Afghan detainee monitoring 'rigorous': PM
Opposition renews calls for halting transfers, public inquiry
Last Updated: Wednesday, April 7, 2010 1:44 PM ET
CBC News
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is defending Canada's "rigorous" monitoring of detainees transferred into Afghan custody, despite a top-level internal memo last summer warning his government that Canadians could face legal liability for complicity in torture by working with Afghan secret police.
In this July 2009 file photo, a man Afghan authorities suspect of insurgency-related activities is interrogated during a joint Canadian-Afghan army patrol in the Panjwaii district of Kandahar province. (Colin Perkel/Canadian Press)The memo, shared with CBC News and reported on Tuesday, expresses concern about legal "risks" over Canada's partnership with the Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS) "without prior insight into its methods" and warns the Afghan intelligence service's wide powers of arrest and detention give it "considerable scope for the use of improper methods."
The report prompted renewed calls from opposition parties for Harper to call a public inquiry into the Afghan detainee affair and suspend ongoing transfers of prisoners into NDS custody.
In an appearance Wednesday in southern Ontario, Harper did not directly address the contents of the memo, but said the Conservative government's 2007 agreement with Afghanistan has ensured prisoners handed over to Afghan authorities are monitored and any allegations of abuse are investigated.
"These reports continue to be things that have been said before, and our position is the same: Whenever there are specific allegations of abuse under the agreement, action is taken to investigate those," Harper told reporters at an event with Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty in Mississauga.
"There is a rigorous arrangement of monitoring and oversight in the new prisoner agreement, and it has continued to work effectively. As I say, if there are specific problems, they are investigated and appropriate action has been taken. That has been the case for over three years."
Tories misled Canadians: NDP critic
Citing the CBC News report on the document, the NDP said the "only solution" remaining for the government was to stop the transfer of detainees immediately.
"The Conservative government was informed that there would be legal consequences for sending prisoners to the NDS, yet they misled the Canadian people and continued to transfer," NDP foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar said Wednesday in a release.
Harper acknowledged that the 2007 agreement "doesn't mean that things are perfect in Afghanistan."
"No one claims that," he said. "But there are systems in place to monitor, and there is additional capacity [and] building exercises going on with the government of Afghanistan."
Government and military officials, past and present, have vehemently denied allegations by former top diplomat Richard Colvin that Canadian officials continued to transfer detainees into Afghan custody despite knowing about torture allegations.
In his testimony last November before the special parliamentary committee on the Afghanistan mission, Colvin alleged that all prisoners handed over by Canadian soldiers to Afghan authorities were likely subsequently abused and that government officials were well aware of the problem.Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/07/afghan-detainees-harper-documents.html#socialcomments#ixzz0kTIqZAKu
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
The Conservative government was warned of legal liability for complicity in torture.
The Conservative government was warned last summer that working with the Afghan secret police would lead to allegations that Canada condoned abuse and that Canadians may face legal liability for complicity in torture.
The information, contained in a candid top-level government memo shared with CBC News, shows that officials were worried that Canada's relationship with the Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS) was risky — and possibly illegal — even while the government was defending it.
The document warns the NDS is so secretive, even Canada and its allies are in the dark about most of what it does.
The NDS has wider powers of arrest and detention than most intelligence agencies, the memo says, and as a result, “there is considerable scope for the use of improper methods.” Engaging with the NDS “entails a degree of risk to Canadian interests,” it adds.
The document doesn't detail those risks specifically, but human rights lawyer Paul Champ said he has an idea of what they are.
Champ is the lawyer at the centre of several investigations into the alleged abuse of Afghan detainees. He said the NDS can't be trusted with detainees transferred into their custody by Canadian soldiers and the Conservative government is well aware of this.
“Make no mistake, the methods of the NDS are well known,” Champ told CBC News. “It's electric shocks, it's pulling out toenails, it's beating people with chains, it's hanging them for days. So when someone says abuse, that's a euphemism for torture.”
The memo's assessment of the NDS seems to make use of that euphemism. It cautions Canada ought to be concerned about its ongoing and longstanding relationship with the Afghan secret police.
“Canadian partnership in NDS projects without prior insight into its methods runs the risk of appearing to condone human rights abuses and acts which would be illegal under Canadian law,” the document states.
2007 transfer agreement fixed problems: Tories
Government officials admit that Canada has used the fruits of NDS intelligence-gathering. Brig-Gen. Denis Thompson, former commander of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, told a parliamentary committee last week that his assessment of the NDS in fighting the insurgency “is that they were a very valuable partner, and I mean, we acted on the intelligence we received from the NDS.”
But the government says that after allegations of torture of Afghan detainees first came to light in April 2007, Canada acted quickly to fix its transfer agreement with the Afghans.
Under the 2007 agreement, the government gained access to the prisons of the NDS and had Canadian monitors follow up on the condition of detainees. This scrutiny is supposed to ensure that detainees are protected from being tortured.
“Over three years ago, we've dealt with this issue,” Defence Minister Peter MacKay said in late March. “We've had a new transfer arrangement in place now that allows for monitoring [and] mentoring.”
The information, contained in a candid top-level government memo shared with CBC News, shows that officials were worried that Canada's relationship with the Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS) was risky — and possibly illegal — even while the government was defending it.
The document warns the NDS is so secretive, even Canada and its allies are in the dark about most of what it does.
The NDS has wider powers of arrest and detention than most intelligence agencies, the memo says, and as a result, “there is considerable scope for the use of improper methods.” Engaging with the NDS “entails a degree of risk to Canadian interests,” it adds.
The document doesn't detail those risks specifically, but human rights lawyer Paul Champ said he has an idea of what they are.
Champ is the lawyer at the centre of several investigations into the alleged abuse of Afghan detainees. He said the NDS can't be trusted with detainees transferred into their custody by Canadian soldiers and the Conservative government is well aware of this.
“Make no mistake, the methods of the NDS are well known,” Champ told CBC News. “It's electric shocks, it's pulling out toenails, it's beating people with chains, it's hanging them for days. So when someone says abuse, that's a euphemism for torture.”
The memo's assessment of the NDS seems to make use of that euphemism. It cautions Canada ought to be concerned about its ongoing and longstanding relationship with the Afghan secret police.
“Canadian partnership in NDS projects without prior insight into its methods runs the risk of appearing to condone human rights abuses and acts which would be illegal under Canadian law,” the document states.
2007 transfer agreement fixed problems: Tories
Government officials admit that Canada has used the fruits of NDS intelligence-gathering. Brig-Gen. Denis Thompson, former commander of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, told a parliamentary committee last week that his assessment of the NDS in fighting the insurgency “is that they were a very valuable partner, and I mean, we acted on the intelligence we received from the NDS.”
But the government says that after allegations of torture of Afghan detainees first came to light in April 2007, Canada acted quickly to fix its transfer agreement with the Afghans.
Under the 2007 agreement, the government gained access to the prisons of the NDS and had Canadian monitors follow up on the condition of detainees. This scrutiny is supposed to ensure that detainees are protected from being tortured.
“Over three years ago, we've dealt with this issue,” Defence Minister Peter MacKay said in late March. “We've had a new transfer arrangement in place now that allows for monitoring [and] mentoring.”
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Canadian girls dream big Angus-Reid poll,.
Confidence is necessary to achieve your dreams, and when your dreams are big it is all the more important.
Good news for Canada, our young girls are brimming with confidence and have their eyes on some lofty goals.
According to a recent Angus-Reid poll, Canadian girls between the ages of eight and 12 are looking more and more to top-flight careers, such as being a CEO, doctor or school principal, and are shunning some of the more traditional (read 1950s-era) vocations like secretary and homemaker.
It would be easy to cast aspersions on the survey simply because it was commissioned by Mattel, the toymaker responsible for Barbie dolls, which in itself has been an ongoing source of controversy for the image it portrays to young girls.
But the numbers paint a good picture for our future.
Consider the differences between the girls of today and the girls of yesterday (women now over the age of 40). More than half of today’s girls want to own their own company, while only one in five of yesterday’s girls had the same desire.
When they were young girls, 54% of women now over 40 said they wanted to be a secretary when they grew up. That number has fallen to 32%. A quarter of yesterday’s girls had designs on being a stay-at-home mom, but that has fallen to 17% for today’s young ladies.
Perhaps the most telling statistic about the mindset of young Canadian girls is that only 4% think their gender will prevent them from attaining their goals.
That means a vast majority of girls feel empowered to accomplish their aspirations, no matter how high their desires; more than half of the girls between the ages of eight and 12 surveyed are optimistic that nothing will stand in the way of their dreams.
It represents a major shift in the mindset of the fairer sex, and one that has been long awaited.
As 19th century American philosopher Henry David Thoreau said, “What a man thinks of himself, that it is which determines, or rather indicates his fate.”
The same holds true for women.
This survey says the Canadian women of tomorrow are in good stead to be leaders in our nation.
And judging by the current state of leadership in Canada, it can’t happen a moment too soon.
Good news for Canada, our young girls are brimming with confidence and have their eyes on some lofty goals.
According to a recent Angus-Reid poll, Canadian girls between the ages of eight and 12 are looking more and more to top-flight careers, such as being a CEO, doctor or school principal, and are shunning some of the more traditional (read 1950s-era) vocations like secretary and homemaker.
It would be easy to cast aspersions on the survey simply because it was commissioned by Mattel, the toymaker responsible for Barbie dolls, which in itself has been an ongoing source of controversy for the image it portrays to young girls.
But the numbers paint a good picture for our future.
Consider the differences between the girls of today and the girls of yesterday (women now over the age of 40). More than half of today’s girls want to own their own company, while only one in five of yesterday’s girls had the same desire.
When they were young girls, 54% of women now over 40 said they wanted to be a secretary when they grew up. That number has fallen to 32%. A quarter of yesterday’s girls had designs on being a stay-at-home mom, but that has fallen to 17% for today’s young ladies.
Perhaps the most telling statistic about the mindset of young Canadian girls is that only 4% think their gender will prevent them from attaining their goals.
That means a vast majority of girls feel empowered to accomplish their aspirations, no matter how high their desires; more than half of the girls between the ages of eight and 12 surveyed are optimistic that nothing will stand in the way of their dreams.
It represents a major shift in the mindset of the fairer sex, and one that has been long awaited.
As 19th century American philosopher Henry David Thoreau said, “What a man thinks of himself, that it is which determines, or rather indicates his fate.”
The same holds true for women.
This survey says the Canadian women of tomorrow are in good stead to be leaders in our nation.
And judging by the current state of leadership in Canada, it can’t happen a moment too soon.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Afghan security blocked access!.
Afghan security blocked Canadian detainee access
CBC News
Afghanistan's security service blocked Canadian efforts to get a human rights group's access to Afghan jails for three months in 2007, according to uncensored documents obtained by CBC News.
A version of the same document released by the federal government was heavily blacked out, but the uncensored version was leaked on Wednesday.
The Afghan human rights agency was appointed by Canada to be its eyes and ears in Afghan prisons at the time. The rights group was supposed to help ensure the safety of detainees who had been transferred from Canadian troops to the Afghans. The Afghan security service, the NDS, took those detainees from the Canadians.
The uncensored version of the document states there were "... five failed attempts to access Kandahar NDS facilities in 2007."
The document says the NDS response on detainee access was often, "You have your law, we have ours." It says Afghan human rights experts "discussed the access problem with [Afghan] President [Hamid] Karzai ... however, this did not help."
Cory Anderson, a former senior political adviser to Canada's provincial reconstruction team in Kandahar, echoed other concerns about the NDS during his testimony before a House of Commons committee on Afghanistan Wednesday
Anderson said there is "...endemic and systemic duplicity within the NDS, especially at the provincial level, that exists to this very day, and renders it virtually impossible to have an open and transparent relationship with their officials on the ground in Kandahar on this issue."
The diplomat noted that Canada is still handing over detainees to NDS, and he agreed the detainee issue was a potential "mission-killer" for Canada's efforts in Afghanistan.
'Doesn't change the partnership'
Anderson said Canada's original prisoner transfer agreement wasn't good, and the current prisoner transfer agreement isn't good enough, either.
"It doesn't change the partnership that we have with the people on the ground in Kandahar, who we are bound to work with, in the NDS," he said.
Anderson claimed the problem with the NDS is they are too secretive, and that they have no interest in working with Canadian officials to improve the lot of detainees. He said Canada should cut its detainee ties with the NDS.
Asked by committee member Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh if he considered the NDS to be a viable partner while he was in Afghanistan, Anderson replied: "No, they were not."
The uncensored documents and the diplomat's testimony came as the government continued its fight to keep MPs from getting full access to Afghanistan documents.
The opposition won a vote three months ago demanding uncensored versions of all documents.
However, on Wednesday, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson again said no.
"The practice of this House, and in other jurisdictions, has always been to acknowledge that some information ought not to be disclosed for considerations of public policy or national security," Nicholson said in the House of Commons.
There could be a constitutional showdown after MPs return from their Easter break. The Speaker of the House of Commons is set to rule on whether Parliament is entitled to see the uncensored documentsRead more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/04/01/afghanistan-nds-detainees-.html#socialcomments#ixzz0k0LYEeSo
CBC News
Afghanistan's security service blocked Canadian efforts to get a human rights group's access to Afghan jails for three months in 2007, according to uncensored documents obtained by CBC News.
A version of the same document released by the federal government was heavily blacked out, but the uncensored version was leaked on Wednesday.
The Afghan human rights agency was appointed by Canada to be its eyes and ears in Afghan prisons at the time. The rights group was supposed to help ensure the safety of detainees who had been transferred from Canadian troops to the Afghans. The Afghan security service, the NDS, took those detainees from the Canadians.
The uncensored version of the document states there were "... five failed attempts to access Kandahar NDS facilities in 2007."
The document says the NDS response on detainee access was often, "You have your law, we have ours." It says Afghan human rights experts "discussed the access problem with [Afghan] President [Hamid] Karzai ... however, this did not help."
Cory Anderson, a former senior political adviser to Canada's provincial reconstruction team in Kandahar, echoed other concerns about the NDS during his testimony before a House of Commons committee on Afghanistan Wednesday
Anderson said there is "...endemic and systemic duplicity within the NDS, especially at the provincial level, that exists to this very day, and renders it virtually impossible to have an open and transparent relationship with their officials on the ground in Kandahar on this issue."
The diplomat noted that Canada is still handing over detainees to NDS, and he agreed the detainee issue was a potential "mission-killer" for Canada's efforts in Afghanistan.
'Doesn't change the partnership'
Anderson said Canada's original prisoner transfer agreement wasn't good, and the current prisoner transfer agreement isn't good enough, either.
"It doesn't change the partnership that we have with the people on the ground in Kandahar, who we are bound to work with, in the NDS," he said.
Anderson claimed the problem with the NDS is they are too secretive, and that they have no interest in working with Canadian officials to improve the lot of detainees. He said Canada should cut its detainee ties with the NDS.
Asked by committee member Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh if he considered the NDS to be a viable partner while he was in Afghanistan, Anderson replied: "No, they were not."
The uncensored documents and the diplomat's testimony came as the government continued its fight to keep MPs from getting full access to Afghanistan documents.
The opposition won a vote three months ago demanding uncensored versions of all documents.
However, on Wednesday, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson again said no.
"The practice of this House, and in other jurisdictions, has always been to acknowledge that some information ought not to be disclosed for considerations of public policy or national security," Nicholson said in the House of Commons.
There could be a constitutional showdown after MPs return from their Easter break. The Speaker of the House of Commons is set to rule on whether Parliament is entitled to see the uncensored documentsRead more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/04/01/afghanistan-nds-detainees-.html#socialcomments#ixzz0k0LYEeSo
Friday, April 2, 2010
proud to be Canadian!!!
So, What do we Canadians Have to be Proud of?
1. Smarties (not in the USA )
2. Crispy Crunch, Coffee Crisp (not in the USA )
3. The size of our footballs fields, one less down and bigger balls.
4. Baseball is Canadian - 1st game June 4, 1838 - Ingersoll, ON
5. Lacrosse is Canadian
6. Hockey is Canadian
7. Basketball is Canadian
8. Apple pie is Canadian
9. Mr. Dress-up beats Mr. Rogers
10. Tim Hortons beats Dunkin' Donuts
11. In the war of 1812, started by America , Canadians pushed the Americans back past their White House. Then we burned it, and most of Washington . We got bored because they ran away. Then, we came home and partied. Go figure.
12. Canada has the largest French population that never surrendered to Germany .
13. We have the largest English population that never Ever surrendered or withdrew during any war to anyone, anywhere. EVER! (We got clobbered in the odd battle but prevailed in ALL the wars)
14. Our civil war was fought in a bar and lasted a little over an hour.
15. The only person who was arrested in our civil war was an American mercenary, he slept in and missed the whole thing. He showed up just in time to get caught.
16. A Canadian invented Standard Time.
17. The Hudsons Bay Company once owned over 10% of the earth's surface and is still around as the world's oldest company.
18. The average dog sled team can kill and devour a full grown human in under 3 minutes. (That's more information than I need!)
19. We know what to do with the parts of a buffalo.
20. We don't marry our kin-folk.
21. We invented ski-doos, jet-skis, Velcro, zippers, insulin, penicillin and the telephone. Also short wave radios which save countless lives each year.
22. We have ALL frozen our tongues to something metal and lived to tell about it.
23. A Canadian invented Superman.
24. We have coloured money.
25. Our beer advertisements kick ass (Incidently...so does our beer) BUT MOST IMPORTANT!
The handles on our beer cases are big enough to fit your hands in with mitts on.
OOOoohhhhh..... Canada !! Oh yeah...And our elections only take one day!
Error! Filename not specified.
Pass this on if you're proud to be Canadian!!!
1. Smarties (not in the USA )
2. Crispy Crunch, Coffee Crisp (not in the USA )
3. The size of our footballs fields, one less down and bigger balls.
4. Baseball is Canadian - 1st game June 4, 1838 - Ingersoll, ON
5. Lacrosse is Canadian
6. Hockey is Canadian
7. Basketball is Canadian
8. Apple pie is Canadian
9. Mr. Dress-up beats Mr. Rogers
10. Tim Hortons beats Dunkin' Donuts
11. In the war of 1812, started by America , Canadians pushed the Americans back past their White House. Then we burned it, and most of Washington . We got bored because they ran away. Then, we came home and partied. Go figure.
12. Canada has the largest French population that never surrendered to Germany .
13. We have the largest English population that never Ever surrendered or withdrew during any war to anyone, anywhere. EVER! (We got clobbered in the odd battle but prevailed in ALL the wars)
14. Our civil war was fought in a bar and lasted a little over an hour.
15. The only person who was arrested in our civil war was an American mercenary, he slept in and missed the whole thing. He showed up just in time to get caught.
16. A Canadian invented Standard Time.
17. The Hudsons Bay Company once owned over 10% of the earth's surface and is still around as the world's oldest company.
18. The average dog sled team can kill and devour a full grown human in under 3 minutes. (That's more information than I need!)
19. We know what to do with the parts of a buffalo.
20. We don't marry our kin-folk.
21. We invented ski-doos, jet-skis, Velcro, zippers, insulin, penicillin and the telephone. Also short wave radios which save countless lives each year.
22. We have ALL frozen our tongues to something metal and lived to tell about it.
23. A Canadian invented Superman.
24. We have coloured money.
25. Our beer advertisements kick ass (Incidently...so does our beer) BUT MOST IMPORTANT!
The handles on our beer cases are big enough to fit your hands in with mitts on.
OOOoohhhhh..... Canada !! Oh yeah...And our elections only take one day!
Error! Filename not specified.
Pass this on if you're proud to be Canadian!!!
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Harper loses fourth director in four years!.
OTTAWA – Once again, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is looking for a chief of communications.
After a little more than eight months in the job, John Williamson has decided to try his hand at elected politics, vying to get the Conservative nomination in the New Brunswick seat being vacated by retiring Veterans Affairs minister Greg Thompson.
Williamson said Wednesday that he would be out of his job within “weeks,” staying only long enough to ensure a transition – with a successor who is yet to be named. The speculation at the moment is that a new director will be found within the ranks of the current PMO communications staff.
Williamson, 39, is the fourth person to hold the job in a little more than four years and his quick departure is viewed as another symptom of Harper’s ongoing difficulty with communications and the media.
It’s a problem that actually predates Harper’s time as prime minister – in opposition, there was a similar, revolving door of communications directors, coming in and out of the job at the same rate of about one a year.
In his book, Harper’s Team, former chief of staff Tom Flanagan chronicled early problems finding someone to handle communications for Harper. Flanagan wrote that Harper “wants self-effacing media people around him.”
Under Harper, PMO communications is more like a bunker as well, largely organized around protecting the government from the media and rigid control of the so-called “message” all across Ottawa.
Williamson, a former head of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation, kept a low profile while in the PMO – some said too low, since it wasn’t clear at times what he did. Williamson left the public-spokesperson functions to PMO aides Dimitri Soudas or Andrew MacDougall, while people such as William Stairs (a former communications director) and Dan Robertson do behind-the-scenes strategy.
On Wednesday, Williamson said he was busy in meetings and not able to conduct an interview, but pointed instead to the comments he gave to the St. John Telegraph-Journal, where he announced his intentions to leave the PMO and run for office.
“I want to ensure that the riding has strong representation in Ottawa,” Williamson told the Telegraph-Journal.
“I know how the federal government operates and I think I can get things done here. I think I could give the citizens of New Brunswick Southwest the strong voice it deserves in our nation’s capital. Greg Thompson has big shoes to fill, but I do think my experience would lend itself to this challenge.”
After a little more than eight months in the job, John Williamson has decided to try his hand at elected politics, vying to get the Conservative nomination in the New Brunswick seat being vacated by retiring Veterans Affairs minister Greg Thompson.
Williamson said Wednesday that he would be out of his job within “weeks,” staying only long enough to ensure a transition – with a successor who is yet to be named. The speculation at the moment is that a new director will be found within the ranks of the current PMO communications staff.
Williamson, 39, is the fourth person to hold the job in a little more than four years and his quick departure is viewed as another symptom of Harper’s ongoing difficulty with communications and the media.
It’s a problem that actually predates Harper’s time as prime minister – in opposition, there was a similar, revolving door of communications directors, coming in and out of the job at the same rate of about one a year.
In his book, Harper’s Team, former chief of staff Tom Flanagan chronicled early problems finding someone to handle communications for Harper. Flanagan wrote that Harper “wants self-effacing media people around him.”
Under Harper, PMO communications is more like a bunker as well, largely organized around protecting the government from the media and rigid control of the so-called “message” all across Ottawa.
Williamson, a former head of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation, kept a low profile while in the PMO – some said too low, since it wasn’t clear at times what he did. Williamson left the public-spokesperson functions to PMO aides Dimitri Soudas or Andrew MacDougall, while people such as William Stairs (a former communications director) and Dan Robertson do behind-the-scenes strategy.
On Wednesday, Williamson said he was busy in meetings and not able to conduct an interview, but pointed instead to the comments he gave to the St. John Telegraph-Journal, where he announced his intentions to leave the PMO and run for office.
“I want to ensure that the riding has strong representation in Ottawa,” Williamson told the Telegraph-Journal.
“I know how the federal government operates and I think I can get things done here. I think I could give the citizens of New Brunswick Southwest the strong voice it deserves in our nation’s capital. Greg Thompson has big shoes to fill, but I do think my experience would lend itself to this challenge.”
Monday, March 29, 2010
Detainee Docs control the story
DetaineeDocWatch: That's one way to control the story, at least in the short term.
By Kady O'Malley
So, according to this week's Hill Times, it seems that last Thursday's surprise move by the government to table more than 2,500 pages of heavily censored detainee-related documents had what one should assume -- for the moment, at least, until proven otherwise -- was an unintended result of temporarily preventing lawyers for the parties involved in the ongoing Military Police Complaints Commission investigation from commenting on the contents:
The sudden release of the documents, which MPs later learned had been tabled but not yet released at an inquiry being conducted by the Military Police Complaints Commission, resulted in an unusual circumstance for lawyers who were taking part in the commission inquiry into detainee treatment. Although the government released the documents publicly in the Commons, thus making them available to the Parliamentary press gallery and the public, the lawyers at the inquiry could not discuss them."All or nearly all are documents that have been produced to the MPCC over the past two months," Paul Champ, a lawyer for Amnesty International, told The Hill Times. "We have been unable to speak about them because we are bound by a legal undertaking of confidentiality until they are formally introduced as exhibits at the MPCC hearing. We plan to write to the MPCC and ask if we can disclose them."Inside Politics readers will recall that much the same Catch 22-like conundrum arose following what then-MPCC chair Peter Tinsley referred to as the "selective public circulation" of what are now known as the Colvin files, which, he noted, somehow wound up in the hands of "at least one media outlet" before it had been officially released as evidence.
Following an urgent request from Amnesty International Canada and the BC Civil Liberties Association, he agreed to waive the voluntary undertaking of confidentiality, noting that "a selective release of documents and information has already occurred through means outside the Commission's control" -- without, he pointed out, "proper context and safeguards" -- which "threatens the reputational interests of at least one witness, Mr. Colvin," who had been exposed to "the surely unwelcome glare of unwanted publicity." Given that this latest batch of documents has been tabled in the House of Commons, it's hard to imagine that interim MPCC chair Glenn Stannard, would come out with a radically different ruling than his predecessor on what will likely be a very similar waiver request, immediately, but for the next few days, at least, the gag is likely to remain in effect on Champ and other lawyers involved in the MPCC hearings, which means that they may not be able to share their insight on any as yet unnoticed aspects of the new material until the House rises for the Easter break. Oh, and speaking of running down the clock, it's probably also worth noting that the opposition parties appear to be growing increasingly impatient with the curiously leisurely approach the government seems to be taking with regard to its response to those questions of privileged that were raised on March 18th. We got a taste of that during the impromptu debate that broke out last week, but that same Hill Times article has more on the subject, including Liberal MP Derek Lee's pointed musings that the House has to deal with the matter "within the next several days or week or two," as does the Toronto Star, which reported over the weekend that the opposition may "put supplementary pressure" on the government to comply with the order. Suffice it to say that the speaker may want to remind the ministers involved -- Rob Nicholson, Peter MacKay and Lawrence Cannon -- that when he agreed to put off his deliberations until he'd heard their submissions on the issue, he didn't mean that he'd wait around forever.
Finally, a reminder: You can find links to the full set of newly released detainee-related documents here, or read them from the comfort of your browser here. Let us know if you find
anything that piques your interest!
By Kady O'Malley
So, according to this week's Hill Times, it seems that last Thursday's surprise move by the government to table more than 2,500 pages of heavily censored detainee-related documents had what one should assume -- for the moment, at least, until proven otherwise -- was an unintended result of temporarily preventing lawyers for the parties involved in the ongoing Military Police Complaints Commission investigation from commenting on the contents:
The sudden release of the documents, which MPs later learned had been tabled but not yet released at an inquiry being conducted by the Military Police Complaints Commission, resulted in an unusual circumstance for lawyers who were taking part in the commission inquiry into detainee treatment. Although the government released the documents publicly in the Commons, thus making them available to the Parliamentary press gallery and the public, the lawyers at the inquiry could not discuss them."All or nearly all are documents that have been produced to the MPCC over the past two months," Paul Champ, a lawyer for Amnesty International, told The Hill Times. "We have been unable to speak about them because we are bound by a legal undertaking of confidentiality until they are formally introduced as exhibits at the MPCC hearing. We plan to write to the MPCC and ask if we can disclose them."Inside Politics readers will recall that much the same Catch 22-like conundrum arose following what then-MPCC chair Peter Tinsley referred to as the "selective public circulation" of what are now known as the Colvin files, which, he noted, somehow wound up in the hands of "at least one media outlet" before it had been officially released as evidence.
Following an urgent request from Amnesty International Canada and the BC Civil Liberties Association, he agreed to waive the voluntary undertaking of confidentiality, noting that "a selective release of documents and information has already occurred through means outside the Commission's control" -- without, he pointed out, "proper context and safeguards" -- which "threatens the reputational interests of at least one witness, Mr. Colvin," who had been exposed to "the surely unwelcome glare of unwanted publicity." Given that this latest batch of documents has been tabled in the House of Commons, it's hard to imagine that interim MPCC chair Glenn Stannard, would come out with a radically different ruling than his predecessor on what will likely be a very similar waiver request, immediately, but for the next few days, at least, the gag is likely to remain in effect on Champ and other lawyers involved in the MPCC hearings, which means that they may not be able to share their insight on any as yet unnoticed aspects of the new material until the House rises for the Easter break. Oh, and speaking of running down the clock, it's probably also worth noting that the opposition parties appear to be growing increasingly impatient with the curiously leisurely approach the government seems to be taking with regard to its response to those questions of privileged that were raised on March 18th. We got a taste of that during the impromptu debate that broke out last week, but that same Hill Times article has more on the subject, including Liberal MP Derek Lee's pointed musings that the House has to deal with the matter "within the next several days or week or two," as does the Toronto Star, which reported over the weekend that the opposition may "put supplementary pressure" on the government to comply with the order. Suffice it to say that the speaker may want to remind the ministers involved -- Rob Nicholson, Peter MacKay and Lawrence Cannon -- that when he agreed to put off his deliberations until he'd heard their submissions on the issue, he didn't mean that he'd wait around forever.
Finally, a reminder: You can find links to the full set of newly released detainee-related documents here, or read them from the comfort of your browser here. Let us know if you find
anything that piques your interest!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)