Navigation Links
Annual Report 2006
Message from the Chair
It is a pleasure to introduce the 2006 Annual Report of Canada's Military Police Complaints Commission. It has been an interesting year, both for this Commission and for civilian oversight of police in Canada. The Military Police Complaints Commission (“The Commission
” or MPCC) has seen a substantial increase in demand for its services and has undertaken significant steps for renewal of its organization and investigative procedures to meet those demands. The Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar - “Arar Inquiry
” - has generated national and international interest in oversight of all of Canada's police and security agencies. This new interest in the critical role of oversight agencies carries with it a challenge for excellence in performance.
By way of highlights of 2006, the number of complaints under review or investigation by the Military Police Complaints Commission was double the number from 2005. Of the investigations completed by the Commission during 2006, several will have significant, long-term impact on military police practices.
As an example, the Commission's investigations of interference complaints in 2006 have led the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal to revise the Military Police Policies and Technical Procedures to clarify the proper role and responsibilities of military police supervisors in respect of supervisory interventions. These investigations have also added clarity to the proper relations between the military police and the chain of command. In bringing a clearer definition to what does and does not constitute prohibited interference, it is hoped that both command staff and military police personnel will benefit in their relationships and the performance of their duties.
In 2006, the Commission undertook the first public hearing in its seven-year history which will be reported on early in 2007 - and launched three new public interest investigations into especially serious or broadly publicized complaints about military police conduct. One of these cases - involving a complaint by a former sniper with the Canadian Forces who was honoured by the U.S. military for his outstanding service in Afghanistan - was the subject of national media attention in 2006, including the cover of Maclean's magazine.
I am very pleased that, while faced with a significant increase in its workload, the Commission has been able to implement a number of internal changes. These changes have improved our capacity to deal with complaints as effectively and efficiently as possible, and allowed the Commission to officially reduce its annual budget requirement by almost twenty percent.
By putting a new service standard and an accompanying compliance mechanism in place, the Commission expects to be able to resolve complaints in substantially less time than in the past. This improvement in efficiency will not be at the expense of quality. Newly developed investigative procedures are designed to maintain the highest standards while maximizing the benefits of standardization.
The Commission has also implemented more efficient investigative reporting procedures. These methods will avoid unnecessary steps when there are no investigative findings that require a response from Canadian Forces authorities. Just as important, efforts have been made to simplify and better highlight the key issues in those reports which do require a response to substantive findings and recommendations.
The results of the most recent Public Service Employee Survey, showing a high level of job and workplace satisfaction among Commission staff, were most gratifying, as were the positive results of a Public Service Commission audit of the Commission's staffing practices. The work that has been done and the accomplishments that have been recorded over the past year speak volumes about the dedication and professionalism of the management and staff of the Commission.
Looking to the future, the “Arar Report
” recommended government consideration of an enhanced role for the Complaints Commission; one that would make it an integral piece in a new national fabric of federal oversight agencies. At the same time the report noted that Bill C-7 (an Act to Amend the National Defence Act), which received first reading on April 27, 2006, “would have a significant impact on the operation of the MPCC
”. The Commission agrees with Justice O'Connor's assessment of a significant impact and is concerned that the passage of Bill C-7 would leave the Commission unable to credibly carry out its current role or any new and enhanced one. To ensure that parliamentarians were fully informed concerning the potential impact of Bill C-7, the Commission filed a brief with the Standing Committee on National Defence which explained those concerns and suggested alternatives for the way ahead. That brief is now available on the Commission's Website - www.mpcc-cppm.gc.ca.
Managing the increased volume of work in 2006 was a major challenge for the Commission, particularly because it had only one sitting Member, the Chair. In addition to the Chair, legislation allows for as many as six part-time Members; historically, on average, three of these positions have been filled. I am hopeful that the Governor-in-Council will make additional appointments to the Commission in the year ahead.
In closing, I would also like to acknowledge the excellent cooperation of the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal, who shares our commitment to ensuring the Canadian Forces and all Canadians can take pride in a military police service of the highest professional calibre.
Peter A. Tinsley
Chair
December 2006
