Archived Content Contenu Archivé
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARCHIVED - Archiving Content ARCHIVÉE - Contenu archivé Archived Content Contenu archivé Information identified as archived is provided for L’information dont il est indiqué qu’elle est archivée reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It est fournie à des fins de référence, de recherche is not subject to the Government of Canada Web ou de tenue de documents. Elle n’est pas Standards and has not been altered or updated assujettie aux normes Web du gouvernement du since it was archived. Please contact us to request Canada et elle n’a pas été modifiée ou mise à jour a format other than those available. depuis son archivage. Pour obtenir cette information dans un autre format, veuillez communiquer avec nous. This document is archival in nature and is intended Le présent document a une valeur archivistique et for those who wish to consult archival documents fait partie des documents d’archives rendus made available from the collection of Public Safety disponibles par Sécurité publique Canada à ceux Canada. qui souhaitent consulter ces documents issus de sa collection. Some of these documents are available in only one official language. Translation, to be provided Certains de ces documents ne sont disponibles by Public Safety Canada, is available upon que dans une langue officielle. Sécurité publique request. Canada fournira une traduction sur demande. em, o. Commission for Commission des RoubylccComanadra,171Agnatztpthoiece plaintes du public contre la r Genclarrnene royale du Canada a COMMISSION FOR PUBLIC COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE RCMP 111 Police Investigating Police FINAL PUBLIC REPORT A Chair-initiated complaint and public interest investigation into public concerns about the impartiality of RCMP members conducting criminal investigations into other RCMP members in cases involving serious injury death. a or HV 7641 August 11, 2009 • .A8 • P65 2009 • • • Final Public Report eReformatted graphically with nal information removed Canadâ ••erso P • HV • Tables of Contents 7GLH e , Ag e CHAIR'S FINAL REPORT AFTER COMMISSIONER'S NOTICE RCMP ACT I P65 e SCHEDULE 1 INTERIM REPORT i2009' • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii • 1. BACKGROUND 1 • 2. CURRENT LANDSCAPE 3 • 2(a) Media coverage 3 III 2(b) Political landscape 4 2(c) Academic 8 • • CURRENT HANDLING OF RCMP MEMBER INVESTIGATIONS - A REVIEW OF LEGISLATION AND POLICY 15 (1) Legislation 15 • I (a) RCMP Act - s. 37 Conduct 15 I (b) Commissioner's Standing Orders 16 1 (c) Provincial Police Acts 17 (2) Proposed draft model legislation 19 • (3) RCMP Policy 19 • 4. CASE FILE REVIEW - RCMP INVESTIGATIONS ASSESSED 27 • 4 (a) Methodology 27 • 4 (b) CPC Assessment of RCMP Cases 40 1(a) Line Management: any actual/perceived conflict of interest; • appropriateness of management structure and reporting relationships 41 1(b) Appropriate Level of Response: response appropriate and proportionate • to gravity of incident and whether qualified investigators have been assigned 49 1(c) Timeliness of Response: investigative team responded in timely manner 57 1(d) Conduct: conduct consistent with section 37 of the RCMP Act 62 • 2 Policy Compliance 65 • 4 (c) Overall assessment of cases based on terms of reference as per the Chair-initiated complaint 67 • 5. DIFFERENT REVIEW AND OVERSIGHT MODELS 71 1. The Dependent Model 75 • 1.1 Police Investigating Police 75 • 1.2 Police Investigating Another Police Force 78 • 2. The Interdependent Model 80 2.1 Civilian Observation 80 2.2 Hybrid Investigation 81 • 3. The Independent Model: Independent Investigation 86 • 6. STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES • What do others think is the right model? 91 • 7. CPC RECOMMENDED MODEL FOR RCMP MEMBER INVESTIGATIONS 95 • A. Legislative recommendations 97 • B. Structural recommendations 98 C. Policy and procedural recommendations 99 • • 8. COMPLETE LIST OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 103 • APPENDICES 111 • SCHEDULE 2 COMMISSIONER'S NOTICE 263 • COMMISSION FOR PUBLIC COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE RCMP CHAIR'S FINAL REPORT AFTER COMMISSIONER'S NOTICE RCMP Act Subsection 45.46(3) s 0 a s /411//sybe »eitot ,beeri/o, Les ceroits 04:942 "et: ec dbote« / froo tbeaeotfor.Crowe o'oceek,oteoie iliesafrbe con/ E 4QU e/20 0, /1 eroefrée ptéee, Préseo/eieeeeloeot OTTAWA (ONTARIO) KIA OP8 File No.: PC-2007-2673 Police Investigating Police O • • • • • • • • • • O a • O • • • , • •O • II Chairs Final Report After Commissioner's Notice • O • • • • CHAIR'S FINAL REPORT AFTER COMMISSIONER'S NOTICE O • The Complaint • The Chair of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the ROMP (CPC) launched • a Chair initiated complaint and public interest investigation on November 28, 2007, to III assess the conduct of those unidentified ROMP members who have undertaken criminal • investigations into the activities of other ROMP members in cases involving serious injury • or death, which took place anywhere in Canada between April 1, 2002 and March 31, • 2007. 0 Specifically, the CPC sought to assess: R • Ô Standards Against Which Conduct is to be Assessed • 1. Whether the RCMP members involved in these investigations conducted the • investigations free of actual or perceived conflict of interest, whether they • responded appropriately and proportionately to the gravity of the incident, a whether they responded in a timely fashion and whether their conduct adhered • to the standards set out in section 37 of the RCMP Act. a • More specifically: 111 (a) Line management IIII a • Whether any actual or perceived conflict of interest. • • Appropriateness of management structure and reporting relationships. • (b) Appropriate level of response O • Whether RCMP investigative team response to the incident was appropriate a and proportionate to the gravity of the incident. • • Whether qualified investigators have been assigned. • (c) Timeliness of the response • • Whether members of the ROMP investigative team responded in a timely s fashion to the incident. a • (d) Conduct O • Whether the conduct of members of the RCMP investigative team during • the course of the investigation was consistent with section 37 of the RCMP Ô Act. a 2. Whether these same RCMP members complied with all appropriate policies, •Ô procedures, guidelines and statutory requirements for such investigations. ge s O • Police Investigating Police Ill The Commission's Public compliance, (3) timeliness, (4) line Interest Investigation and management and (5) level of response. Interim Report To secure a random sample for review, cases were first categorized by RCMP With the objective of identifying the region/division and by offence category most appropriate model for the RCMP's (assault, sexual assault and death). handling of criminal investigations into From this list, a random selection was its own members (involving serious injury, made to ensure that every RCMP sexual assault or death), the CPC: Region and every offence category was represented. • Undertook a detailed analysis of current media, political, and With the sample selected, the CPC then academic debate on the issue to began the work of assessing each case determine a baseline for discussion; against the RCMP-CPC jointly developed criteria for the E (British Columbia) Division • Sought public submissions on the Observer program, set out in the Chair- issue to help inform the debate; initiated complaint which includes: (1) conduct, (2) policy compliance, • Assessed the adequacy of current (3) timeliness, (4) line management and RCMP policy guiding member action (5) level of response. when investigating another member; In order to make a determination about • Reviewed a sample of 28 RCMP whether or not the RCMP handling of investigations where member each investigation was appropriate, actions were alleged to have the CPC included a more detailed resulted in serious injury, sexual definition of what could be considered assault or death between 2002 "appropriate" under each of the pre- and 2007 (the appropriateness of established Observer criteria. It is impor- each case was assessed against tant to note that the development of specific criteria which included: line these detailed baseline definitions was management; level of response; necessary given that nothing currently timeliness; conduct; and compliance exists in policy or in legislation to guide with policy); and the appropriate handling of a member investigation. There is no gold standard. • Researched alternate investigative So we created one. models and conducted interviews with domestic and international The detailed baseline definition for each bodies. criterion was developed based on: Case File Review: • An assessment (including interviews) with domestic and international The CPC assessed 28 randomly-selected criminal investigative bodies and cases in order to determine how best practices identified therein. appropriately each RCMP member investigation was handled against five key criteria: (1) conduct, (2) policy IV Chair's Final Report After Commissioner's Notice • Key concerns identified in the legitimately engender confidence in public submissions to the CPC which the transparency and integrity of the expressed what key stakeholders criminal investigation and its outcome?" (members of the public, international - the informed CPC answer is that it and domestic policing and oversight cannot. To address this, the CPC has bodies, NG0s, etc.) identified as recommended legislative, policy, pro- acceptable and unacceptable (e.g. cedural and structural proposals for need for transparency, timeliness, change. impartiality). While the specific findings and