Conduct Case MPCC‑2023‑047 Summary

In August 2023, a former Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS) Sergeant filed a complaint alleging that the CFNIS failed to investigate reported abuse of a subordinate. Instead, the CFNIS allegedly diverted the matter to a unit-level administrative investigation, purportedly to shield the individuals implicated in the complaint.

The Office of Professional Standards of the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal (CFPM) reviewed the complaint in the first instance and found that the allegations primarily concerned leadership and morale issues within the chain of command. These matters had already been addressed through a unit-level administrative investigation. Consequently, the Office of Professional Standards concluded that the allegations did not involve policing duties or functions and, therefore, did not constitute a valid conduct complaint.

In December 2024, the complainant referred the matter to the Military Police Complaints Commission (MPCC) for review. In accordance with the National Defence Act (NDA), the MPCC requested that the CFPM provide all information and materials relevant to the complaint. However, the CFPM declined to disclose any information.

During its review, the MPCC determined that the complaint comprised two distinct elements. First, the CFNIS had assessed the complainant’s allegations and determined that they were not criminal in nature, thereby directed a unit-level administrative investigation. Second, the complainant expressed dissatisfaction with the conduct of the unit-level administrative investigation.

Members of the military police have dual roles: they perform policing duties but also carry out general duties common to all Canadian Forces members. The MPCC jurisdiction is limited to conduct complaints involving members of the military police acting in their policing capacityFootnote 1. In this case, the MPCC found that the CFNIS’s determination regarding the criminal nature of allegations constituted a policing duty or function. However, the unit-level administrative investigation was deemed to be administrative in nature, as that may be conducted by both members of the military police and members of the Canadian Forces, who are not members of the military police. As such, it fell outside the scope of the MPCC’s jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the MPCC review was restricted to examining the CFNIS’s decision not to initiate a criminal or service offence investigation, which is a core policing duty or function.

After review, the MPCC found that the CFNIS had examined all relevant documentation, identified and interviewed key witnesses, briefed senior leadership, sought legal advice, and kept the complainant informed throughout the process. The MPCC concluded that the CFNIS had acted reasonably in discharging their duty.

In response to the MPCC’s interim report, the CFPM refused to issue a Notice of Action setting out action that has been or will be taken with respect to the complaint, citing that there is no right of review under the NDA. In its Final Report, the MPCC reiterated that its review was strictly confined to the CFNIS’s decision not to initiate a criminal or service offence investigation, which is a core policing duty, and did not address the unit-level administrative investigation.

Date modified: