It is time for Parliament to exercise more power over the RCMP by ending specific laws and practices that give it the power to break the law and investigate its own officers while giving the commissioner more tools to efficiently deal with poorly performing officers and bolster the breadth and scope of the office that oversees complaints against the force.
The last year has seen a number of reports, interviews and incidents that have shed a less-than-flattering light on the RCMP, particularly because of the closed-ranks nature of the upper echelons of the national police force. Even in the face of questionable, damning findings and repeated requests for change, Parliament and the RCMP have nothing to show for it.
Tomorrow, Paul Kennedy, chairman of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP will wrap up his four-year tenure in office, but his actions over that time show more what hasn’t changed than what has. It was Kennedy who released a report over the summer calling for the RCMP to stop investigating its own officers, finding 68 per cent of investigations were marked with some hint of impropriety and calling for outside police forces and civilian agencies to intervene instead. The report was shrugged off by Commissioner William Elliott on the grounds of resources — too many officers serve in too many remote locations not accessible by outside agencies, he claimed.
Yet this is the same commissioner who wants Parliament to hand him more power to discipline officers faster, including their outright dismissal if the case warrants. But even in the face of another report by Kennedy, which found the four officers who responded to Robert Dziekanski’s outburst at Vancouver International Airport two years ago broke almost every rule in the book for dealing with the situation, Elliott chose instead to remain silent even as allegations of a cover-up of the four officers involved emerged. If Elliott wants these powers, he must be willing to use them, particularly in cases that generate such public outrage.
In every instance of impropriety, real or perceived, Kennedy has done his best to investigate and respond to complaints against the force, but his office lacks the power to reach further. In a recent interview, Kennedy spoke of his wish to review a law that allows the RCMP to violate the criminal code in the course of an investigation, with some restrictions. Yet despite having a top-secret security clearance, Kennedy’s office does not have the legislative power to get the information he needs. The RCMP does not have to hand over documents involving ongoing investigations and the only incidences of law-breaking that have to be reported — of which there were two in 2008 by civilian informants — are those that involve damage to or loss of property.
Parliament was scheduled to review the 2002 law after three years, but that hasn’t happened, much like the rest of Kennedy’s requests. His office and successor is in the position to best repair the tattered public image of the RCMP, but lacks the powers to do so. If our lawmakers are serious about issues of crime and justice, they would allot more power to the chairman of the Commissioner for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, along with the requisite funding. Policing the police requires more than an office and a title — there has to be legislative muscle behind it as well.
