Email
PrintPM, justice minister contradict each other on Afghan documents, say Liberals
As of Friday, Cabinet has not yet passed an order giving Frank Iacobucci the legal authority to review government's documents.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson have contradicted each other over the extent of secret federal information a former Supreme Court judge will review in the controversy over detainee transfers by Canadian troops in Afghanistan, the opposition says.
But the terms of references passed by Cabinet and released by Mr. Nicholson over the weekend shows the work by retired judge Frank Iacobucci – appointed as a special adviser to Mr. Nicholson – extends beyond the scope Prime Minister Mr. Harper described last week in the Commons. His fee will be between $500 and $650 an hour.
But Prime Minister Harper has subsequently told the House Mr. Iacobucci's review will be limited to documents that have already been released, either at a Commons inquiry into the affair, Federal Court, or possibly a Military Police Complaints Commission inquiry into allegations the detainees may have been tortured after Canadians transferred them to Afghan police.
The confusion, and apparently contradictory positions taken by the justice minister and the Prime Minister, stemmed from the fact that the government had failed to formally appoint Mr. Iacobucci a full week after Mr. Nicholson announced on March 5 that the government had "engaged" the retired judge to review documents.
"They're very conflicting," Liberal MP Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Ont.) said. "The biggest conflict was on Wednesday when Harper referred to a thorough inquiry and on the very same day, Nicholson said there will be no inquiry."
The motion demanding documents relating to allegations of torture in Afghanistan that was tabled on Dec. 10 was sweeping. It calls for uncensored copies of "all documents" related to diplomat Richard Colvin's allegations of suspected torture and his subsequent suggestion of a cover-up within government, uncensored versions of all redacted documents the government produced at a Federal Court case on detainee transfers and all documents provided to Military Police Complaints Commission investigation and inquiry into the transfers, as well as every document related to a statement Chief of Defence Staff General Walter Natynzyk gave to the special Commons committee on Afghanistan.
When Mr. Nicholson announced Mr. Iacobucci would review the documents, he set it in the wide context of the opposition motion, referring to "information that is proposed to be withheld from release." Mr. Nicholson said his statement was specifically related to the December motion and that Mr. Iacobucci would report to him on whether the "proposed redactions" genuinely relate to information that would be "injurious to Canada's national security, national defence or international interests."
Mr. Nicholson added that Mr. Iacobucci's internal report would recommend whether the information or a summary should be disclosed and the form or limits of the disclosure. All of the elements from the opposition motion last December are covered in the terms Mr. Nicholson subsequently announced, with the addition of “relevant†documents from 2001 to 2005 under the previous Liberal government.
A prominent Ottawa lawyer who specializes on Supreme Court issues told the Hill Times a cabinet order would be required to authorize Mr. Iacobucci access to the secret information, as has been done in all similar inquiries, including Mr. Iacobucci’s internal inquiry into the indirect involvement of Canadian security officials in the detention and torture of Abdullah Almalki and two other Canadian citizens in Syria.
Mr. Nicholson's office last Friday, told The Hill Times that the government intended to release a second full description of Mr. Iacobucci's assignment, despite the description given by Mr. Nicholson on March 5. That move came after opposition MPs said they were concerned the government might have simply retained Mr. Iacobucci, who practises law with the prominent Toronto firm of Torys LLP, to conduct an internal review.
"Once the terms of reference are released, the specific details of Justice Iacobucci's appointment will be made available," Mr. Nicholson's press secretary, Pamela Stephens, told The Hill Times.
Prime Minister Harper told the House of Commons last week that Mr. Iacobucci’s review would be limited to documents the government has already released.
"We are asking Justice Iacobucci to look at all of the documents that have been previously reviewed by public servants in terms of access to information," he said last Wednesday in question period. "Justice Iacobucci will conduct a thorough inquiry on those documents and he will report according to his terms of reference."
There was no hint that day from Mr. Nicholson or Prime Minister Harper that a second version of Mr. Iacobucci’s duties would be forthcoming, and it appeared Mr. Nicholson’s position on the extent of documents to be reviewed had modified as well. “These are documents already reviewed by non-partisan public servants, but to add to the comfort level that possibly (Liberal MP Mark Holland) could have, Mr. Justice Iacobucci will have a look at this. He will work as expeditiously as possible, but it is a big job. We should let Justice Iacobucci do his work.
news@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
- 1
PM, justice minister contradict each other on Afghan documents, say Liberals
As of Friday, Cabinet has not yet passed an order giving Frank Iacobucci the legal authority to review government's documents.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson have contradicted each other over the extent of secret federal information a former Supreme Court judge will review in the controversy over detainee transfers by Canadian troops in Afghanistan, the opposition says.
But the terms of references passed by Cabinet and released by Mr. Nicholson over the weekend shows the work by retired judge Frank Iacobucci – appointed as a special adviser to Mr. Nicholson – extends beyond the scope Prime Minister Mr. Harper described last week in the Commons. His fee will be between $500 and $650 an hour.
But Prime Minister Harper has subsequently told the House Mr. Iacobucci's review will be limited to documents that have already been released, either at a Commons inquiry into the affair, Federal Court, or possibly a Military Police Complaints Commission inquiry into allegations the detainees may have been tortured after Canadians transferred them to Afghan police.
The confusion, and apparently contradictory positions taken by the justice minister and the Prime Minister, stemmed from the fact that the government had failed to formally appoint Mr. Iacobucci a full week after Mr. Nicholson announced on March 5 that the government had "engaged" the retired judge to review documents.
"They're very conflicting," Liberal MP Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Ont.) said. "The biggest conflict was on Wednesday when Harper referred to a thorough inquiry and on the very same day, Nicholson said there will be no inquiry."
The motion demanding documents relating to allegations of torture in Afghanistan that was tabled on Dec. 10 was sweeping. It calls for uncensored copies of "all documents" related to diplomat Richard Colvin's allegations of suspected torture and his subsequent suggestion of a cover-up within government, uncensored versions of all redacted documents the government produced at a Federal Court case on detainee transfers and all documents provided to Military Police Complaints Commission investigation and inquiry into the transfers, as well as every document related to a statement Chief of Defence Staff General Walter Natynzyk gave to the special Commons committee on Afghanistan.
When Mr. Nicholson announced Mr. Iacobucci would review the documents, he set it in the wide context of the opposition motion, referring to "information that is proposed to be withheld from release." Mr. Nicholson said his statement was specifically related to the December motion and that Mr. Iacobucci would report to him on whether the "proposed redactions" genuinely relate to information that would be "injurious to Canada's national security, national defence or international interests."
Mr. Nicholson added that Mr. Iacobucci's internal report would recommend whether the information or a summary should be disclosed and the form or limits of the disclosure. All of the elements from the opposition motion last December are covered in the terms Mr. Nicholson subsequently announced, with the addition of “relevant†documents from 2001 to 2005 under the previous Liberal government.
A prominent Ottawa lawyer who specializes on Supreme Court issues told the Hill Times a cabinet order would be required to authorize Mr. Iacobucci access to the secret information, as has been done in all similar inquiries, including Mr. Iacobucci’s internal inquiry into the indirect involvement of Canadian security officials in the detention and torture of Abdullah Almalki and two other Canadian citizens in Syria.
Mr. Nicholson's office last Friday, told The Hill Times that the government intended to release a second full description of Mr. Iacobucci's assignment, despite the description given by Mr. Nicholson on March 5. That move came after opposition MPs said they were concerned the government might have simply retained Mr. Iacobucci, who practises law with the prominent Toronto firm of Torys LLP, to conduct an internal review.
"Once the terms of reference are released, the specific details of Justice Iacobucci's appointment will be made available," Mr. Nicholson's press secretary, Pamela Stephens, told The Hill Times.
Prime Minister Harper told the House of Commons last week that Mr. Iacobucci’s review would be limited to documents the government has already released.
"We are asking Justice Iacobucci to look at all of the documents that have been previously reviewed by public servants in terms of access to information," he said last Wednesday in question period. "Justice Iacobucci will conduct a thorough inquiry on those documents and he will report according to his terms of reference."
There was no hint that day from Mr. Nicholson or Prime Minister Harper that a second version of Mr. Iacobucci’s duties would be forthcoming, and it appeared Mr. Nicholson’s position on the extent of documents to be reviewed had modified as well. “These are documents already reviewed by non-partisan public servants, but to add to the comfort level that possibly (Liberal MP Mark Holland) could have, Mr. Justice Iacobucci will have a look at this. He will work as expeditiously as possible, but it is a big job. We should let Justice Iacobucci do his work.
news@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
