ARCHIVED - Military Police Complaints Commission

This page has been archived.

2009-10
Report on Plans and Priorities

Military Police Complaints Commission

The original version was signed by
The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay, P.C., M.P.
Minister of National Defence

Table of Contents

Chair’s Message

Section I - Overview

• 1.1 Summary Information
  • Raison d’être
  • Responsibilities
  • Strategic Outcome
  • Program Activity Architecture
• 1.2 Planning Summary

Section II - Analysis of Program Activity by Strategic Outcome

• 2.1 Strategic Outcome

Section III - Supplementary Information

• 3.1 Other items of Interest – Organization Chart
• 3.2 Other items of Interest – How to reach us

Chair’s Message

I am pleased to present the 2009-10 Report on Plans and Priorities of the Military Police Complaints Commission. This Report on Plans and Priorities sets out what the Commission intends to do over the next three years to provide greater public accountability by the military police and the chain of command in relation to military police activities. The Commission is solely responsible to provide these independent oversight services, services that help to ensure that the military police perform their policing duties in accordance with the highest standards for the benefit of the Canadian Forces and the communities they serve, and, ultimately, all Canadians.

The current year has been an extremely challenging year for the Commission; the years ahead are expected to be even more so. Issues continuously arise that must be effectively addressed in order to be able to provide effective oversight. The Commission must successfully manage multiple, concurrent, increasingly complicated and costly investigations involving the review of thousands of pages of evidence and the interviewing of many witnesses. There is an increasingly broad scope of complaints and significantly expanded workload. Further, there is much greater sensitivity in the post-911 environment regarding privacy, privilege and national security issues associated, more generally, with the protection and disclosure of information, and more particularly, as contained within the provisions of specific legislation (the Canada Evidence Act, the Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act) which requires balancing privacy rights and the public’s right of access to information.

Of particular note is that on March 12, 2008, I directed that the investigation into the complaints lodged by Amnesty International Canada and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association move to a public interest hearing (PIH) process. The Attorney General of Canada responded by requesting a judicial review in Federal Court of the Commission’s jurisdiction in this matter. The requirement to hold a public interest hearing and to respond to the judicial review application has resulted in additional and increased costs and workload. As a result, the Commission requested and received almost $5 million dollars over the three fiscal years ending 2010-11 for the one time expenses of the public interest hearing and the related Federal Court proceedings. The planned use of these funds is explained in this report.

The staff of the Commission is extremely hard working and they do a remarkable job resolving the complaints the Commission receives and finding innovative solutions to the challenges it faces. It is through their efforts that the Commission can provide effective oversight services on behalf of all Canadians.

We must continue to advance the quality of our oversight services to help ensure that the military police are able to maintain the highest standards of professional conduct and are able to conduct their investigations free of interference. This Report on Plans and Priorities details how the Commission will do so.

____________________
Peter A. Tinsley
Chair

Section I - Overview

1.1 Summary Information

Raison d’être

On behalf of all Canadians, the Military Police Complaints Commission (the Commission) exists to provide greater public accountability by the military police and the chain of command in relation to military police activities. The Commission derives its mandate from Part IV of Canada’s National Defence Act.

Responsibilities

A complaint may be lodged by any person about the conduct of a member of the military police. A member of the military police conducting or supervising an investigation is also able to complain about improper interference encountered in the conduct of an investigation. The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over complaints of interference.

The Commission oversees the military police complaints process, ensuring that it is accessible, transparent and fair to all concerned. The Commission, in its review of complaints identifies opportunities for improvement - be it in the behaviour of individual military police members or in the system of policies and procedures that govern the behaviour of all - and makes recommendations for change. These recommendations for change, when implemented, will support the military police in maintaining the highest standards of professional conduct and in assuring the integrity of military police investigations. The effective discharge of the oversight activity by the Commission will also provide assurance to members of the Canadian Forces, and ultimately to all Canadians, that they are being served by a military police service of the highest quality.

The Commission is a micro-agency. Operating out of Ottawa, the Commission currently has 19 full time employees (FTEs) and a program budget of $3.4 million. As a result of the public interest hearing and the Federal Court application, the Commission requested and received an additional $5.0 million ($1.2 million in FY 08/09; $2.6 million in FY 09/10; $1.2 million in FY 10/11) as well as an increase of 3 FTEs (increase of 3 FTEs in FY 09/10 reducing to 2 FTEs in 10/11).

The Commission reports to Parliament through the Minister of National Defence.

Strategic Outcome

In order to effectively pursue its mandate, the Commission aims to achieve the following strategic outcome: Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.

Program Activity Architecture

The relationship of the program activities, the priorities and the strategic outcome is illustrated in the diagram below.

1.2 Planning Summary

Financial Resources ($ millions)

The financial resources table below provides a summary of the total planned spending for the Military Police Complaints Commission for the next three fiscal years.

The total planned spending is allocated in the table below to better disclose how the monies are planned to be disbursed.

Human Resources (FTEs)

The human resources table below provides a summary of the total planned human resources for the Military Police Complaints Commission for the next three fiscal years.

The total planned FTEs are allocated in the table below to better disclose where the FTEs are planned to be utilized.

Strategic Outcome: Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.

* This include the ongoing program funding, including the carry-forward, as well as the additional funding received for expenses related to the Public Interest Hearing and Legal Proceedings regarding the transfer of detainees in Afghanistan

The priorities remain unchanged from the previous year. Providing the complaints resolution more effectively will result in timely investigations that confirm the correctness of the actions of the military police or provide recommendations, accepted and implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces, for improvement in policing activities. These confirmations and implemented recommendations will contribute to the maintenance and achievement of the highest standards of professional conduct by the military police.

Contribution of Priorities to Strategic Outcomes

Risk Analysis

Capacity and Timeliness

The Commission is addressing issues that are both unique and complex. The time required to conduct investigations and to complete the necessary research and analysis is growing. The complexity of the cases is resulting in thousands of pages of evidence and the need to identify, schedule and interview several witnesses across Canada and abroad. All of these factors contribute to both extending the duration of an investigation and length of the time required to write both interim and final reports. And the extra time involved increases the costs. The Commission will continue to review its critical path and its current use of technology in order to identify further cost and time savings.

Resources

The Commission is not resourced to conduct large public interest hearings. Prior to 2008-09, the Commission had one public interest hearing which cost approximately $100 thousand and was paid for out of the existing resource base. However, the estimated cost of the public interest hearing regarding the handling of Afghanistan detainees was beyond the existing resource level of the Commission. As a result, the Commission needed to seek additional funds over the three year period ending in 2010-11 to cover the one-time costs of both the public interest hearing as well as the resulting Federal Court challenges.

The Commission prepared a business case setting out the requirement for additional funding. The business case was approved but the receipt of the funds has been delayed because of the prorogation of Parliament. As the current year came to a close, the Commission was carefully monitoring its commitments and payments to ensure fund availability to continue with its ongoing operations while at the same time to carry on with the public interest investigations and hearing and to respond, as required, to the Federal Court applications.

It should be noted, however, that the Commission is not resourced to conduct a substantial public interest hearing and should the situation once again arise, it will once again require the Commission to seek additional funding and perhaps a permanent increase in its reference level.

Collaboration

The Commission will continue its practice of annual meetings with the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal and senior military police staff in order to discuss, address and resolve issues and even further strengthen the complaints resolution process. It will also continue its mutually beneficial working relationships with other government departments and agencies, professional associations and intra-government affiliations.

Recommendations for improvement in the Commission interim and final reports are not binding on the Canadian Forces and DND. The Commission will continue to foster quality working relationships in order to facilitate the conduct of the investigations and increase the likelihood that recommendations will be accepted and implemented.

Balancing Privacy Rights and the Public Interest

Appropriately balancing privacy rights of individuals versus the public interest’s right to know is a unique challenge influenced by the Privacy Act. Section 8 of the Federal Privacy Act allows the deputy head of an institution to disclose personal information where “the public interest in disclosure clearly outweighs any invasion of privacy that could result from the disclosure.”

The National Defence Act specifically requires the Commission Chairperson to release a report outlining his findings and recommendations following a public interest investigation and/or hearing. This is consistent with the rational put forward when the Commission was created in 1999 “to provide independent civilian oversight of the Canadian Forces military police” and “to provide for greater public accountability by the military police and the chain of command in relation to military police investigations.” Therefore, the Commission has a duty to ensure accountability and transparency in its processes and to serve the public’s right to know. Public trust and confidence are essential ingredients for effective policing.

The Commission believes that its legislative mandate allows, in certain situations, the use of personal information in its final reports. However, the Privacy Commissioner has set an extremely high threshold for disclosure i.e. “disclosures based on public health risk and overall safety of the Canadian public” and has not yet accepted this practice by the Commission. The Commission will continue to address these matters with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner in order to find a solution that will satisfy the goals and interests of both organizations.

Human Resource Planning

The success that the Commission has achieved is due in large part to its knowledgeable and stable workforce. But like all small agencies, it is difficult to retain employees when, for the most part, the size and flatness of the organization limit opportunities for advancement. The Commission will continue to stress effective human resource planning, anticipating potential staff turnover and developing staffing strategies to help ensure that knowledge is retained and vacancies are quickly filled.

Expenditure Profile

The financial resources of the Commission have increased for the three year period ending 2010-11. As mentioned earlier, the Commission sought and received additional funding to address the public interest hearing and the federal court appeal.

The Departmental Spending Trend chart below illustrates the Commission spending trend from 2006-07 to 2011-12. For the 2006-07 to 2008-09 periods, the total spending includes actual spending during the period from all parliamentary appropriations, including the carry-forward adjustments. For the periods from 2009-10 until 2011-12, the total spending corresponds to the planned spending. The increase in 2008-09 until 2010-11 is due to the increased funding received for conducting the public interest hearing and for responding to the Federal Court applications.

Departmental Spending Trend

2009-10 Allocation of Funding by Program Activities

The funding will be for complaints resolution program activity as well as for internal services.

Voted and Statutory Items

Voted and Statutory Items displayed in the Main Estimates ($ millions)

Section II - Analysis of Program Activity by Strategic Outcome

2.1 Strategic Outcome

Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.

The following section describes the complaints resolution program activity and the expected result of this activity. This section also explains how the Commission plans on meeting the expected results and presents the financial and non-financial resources that will be dedicated to the program activity. In addition, information will be presented on the internal services activity.

2.1.1 Program Activity – Complaints Resolution Program

The complaints resolution includes research, monitoring, planning, the conduct of investigations and the reporting of results.

Complaints About Police Conduct

Conduct Complaint Filed
Anyone, including civilians, may file a complaint about military police conduct.
Informal resolution is encouraged.

Provost Marshal Investigates Complaint
The Commission monitors process, and may, in the public interest, assume responsibility for investigation or call a public hearing.

Request For Review
If not satisfied with the results of the Provost Marshal’s investigation, a complainant can ask the Commission to review the complaint.

Commission Reviews Complaint
At a minimum, this process involves a review of documentation related to the Provost Marshal’s investigation. It can also include interviews with the complainant, the subject of the complaint, and witnesses, as well as review of relevant legislation, and police policies and procedures.

Commission Releases Interim Report
Depending on the nature of the complaint, this report is sent to one or more of a number of senior officials in the Canadian Forces and/or the Defence Department.

Notice of Action
The Notice of Action, the official response to the Interim Report, outlines what action, if any, has been or will be taken in response to the Commission’s recommendations.

Commission Releases Final Report
After considering the Notice of Action, the Commission issues a Final Report of finding and recommendations. Copies of the Final Report are provided to the complainant and the subject(s) of the complaint, among others.

Interference Complaints

Interference Complaint Filed
Members of the military police who conduct or supervise investigations may complain about interference in their investigations

Commission Investigates
The Commission has sole jurisdiction over the investigation of interference complaints.

Commission Releases Interim Report
The Interim Report includes a summary of the Commission’s Investigation, as well as its findings and recommendations. This report goes to the appropriate senior officials in the Canadian Forces and the Department of National Defence.

Notice Of Action
This official response to the Interim Report indicates the actions, if any, that have been or will be taken to implement the Commission’s recommendations.

Commission Releases Final Report
Taking into account the response in the Notice of Action, the Commission prepares a Final Report of its findings and recommendations in the case. Both the complainant and the subject of the complaint are among those who receive copies of the report.

Planning Highlights

In order to achieve the intended results, the Commission plans to undertake the following:

• Plan, conduct and report the results of its investigation – the Commission will continue to complete its investigations in accordance with the critical path developed specifically for each investigation. An exhaustive review of the critical path has just been completed and there are recommendations regarding process and timing. These recommendations will be implemented over the planning period to maintain the quality and timeliness of investigations and reports and to contribute to the refinement of the targets in the performance measurement framework.
• Operate effectively – The Commission intends to review its performance measurement framework and performance targets, based in part on the results of the critical path review, to more accurately reflect the changing scope, size and complexity of the investigations undertaken. It is recognized, however, that setting targets is difficult because investigations differ drastically one from the other.
• Cost control – The Commission will continue to look at the complaints resolution process to identify opportunities for cost savings. Outsourcing of investigative services and expanding its roster of investigators, if necessary, will allow the Commission to better match investigator skill sets with investigative requirements.
• Increase transparency of Commission operations – the Commission will continue its outreach program and focus on increasing the number of stakeholders who are informed about the complaints resolution process and the fairness that the Commission brings to it.
• Cooperation – The Commission, as has been mentioned previously, requires the cooperation of others to be successful. The success of the Commission depends on how well the Commission establishes and maintains a cooperative environment and enables its recommendations to be implemented.

2.1.2 Program Activity – Internal Services

In order to fully support the complaints resolution program, the Commission plans to undertake the following:

• Management Accountability Framework (MAF) - Respond, as appropriate, to the MAF recommendations of the assessment. The Commission will use these opportunities to better deliver its program, manage its resources and measure its performance.
• Planning & Reporting – The Commission will continue to develop its private and government partnerships for the delivery of human resource, access to information and privacy, records management and informatics and web services on a cost effective basis.
• Human Resources: The Commission will develop an action plan based on the Public Service Employee Survey.
• Evergreening program – The Commission evergreening program for information technology (IT) assets will continue to be managed and maintained to ensure that assets are acquired and retired on a planned basis to smooth its investment requirements from year to year.
• Risk Management and Management Reviews – The Commission will continue to maintain its risk management framework and will conduct internal reviews based on the high risk elements identified in the framework.
• Financial control – Respond, as appropriate to the two horizontal audits currently being conducted. The Commission will use these opportunities to strengthen its stewardship of its financial resources.

Section III - Supplementary Information

3.1 Other items of Interest – Organization Chart

ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATION

3.2 Other items of Interest – How to reach us

• Call our information line:
  • 613-947-5625 or toll-free at 1-800-632-0566 to speak to an intake officer
• Send us a fax:
  • 613-947-5713 or toll-free at 1-877-947-5713
• Send us a letter:
  • Military Police Complaints Commission
    270 Albert Street, 10^th floor
    Ottawa, ON K1P 5G8
    
  • Visit us at the above address for a private consultation – appointments are recommended
• E-mail us:
  • commission@mpcc-cppm.gc.ca
    Note: Please do not send confidential information via e-mail; we cannot guarantee the security of electronic communications at this time
• Visit our website:
  • www.mpcc-cppm.gc.ca
• Media inquiries:
  • 613-947-5668 or e-mail media mpcc-cppm.gc.ca