Conduct Case MPCC‑2015‑044 Summary

In October 2015, the complainant filed a complaint with the Military Police Complaints Commission of Canada (MPCC) regarding the conduct of a Captain of a reserve unit in what the complainant understood to be a Military Police (MP) investigation.

The complainant had been pursuing different avenues to complain about the misconduct by military personnel at the unit, including violations of a provincial Liquor Control Act, as well as damage, trespass, and public urination on private property. In April 2015, he wrote about this issue to his Member of Parliament, who passed the letter to the Commanding Officer (CO) of the unit. In June 2015, the complainant was informed that a Captain had been appointed to conduct a fact finding investigation.

In his complaint, the complainant alleged that the Captain was in conflict of interest as he was investigating a complaint of misconduct against his unit that implicated himself and his CO. The complainant also claimed that the Captain had interfered in his complaint about misconduct by military personnel at the Armouries by refusing to investigate written evidence showing his complicity with his friend and his CO in covering up illegal activity.

The Deputy Commander, Canadian Forces Military Police Group (CF MP Gp), informed the complainant that, though formerly an MP, the Captain was now an infantry Reservist, and that pursuant to section 250.18 of the National Defence Act (NDA), the Captain was not subject to Part IV of the NDA, as he was not an officer appointed under regulations for the purpose of NDA section 156. As a result, the Deputy Commander directed that no PS investigation be commenced regarding the complaint.

The complainant requested a review of his complaint by the MPCC pursuant to section 250.31 of the NDA.

After its own review of the issue, the MPCC determined that the Deputy Commander CF MP Gp was corrrect that this complaint did not fall within the statutory definition of conduct complaints over which the MPCC has jurisdiction. Part IV of the NDA defines the scope of the complaints that can be reviewed by the MPCC. Pursuant to NDA subsection 250.18(1), complaints may be made “about the conduct of a member of the military police” in the performance of their policing duties or functions. As the Captain did not have this status at the time of the events giving rise to the complaint, the MPCC did not have jurisdiction to review his conduct.

Date modified: