Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF

[lenaitch]

Disciplinary/criminal jurisdiction over members of a sending/visiting force and the authority of a force's police are usually covered in Status of Force Agreements (SOFA) and may be covered in a Visiting Forces Act.

The original NATO SOFA has become the most widely replicated example of a SOFA. For example, this article outlines some of the rights of a sending force's police.

I recall this being discussed at length some time ago. I see limitations of Canadian civilian police operating out of country unless they were sworn under the NDA. Even if there is latitude to investigate an out-of-country allegation, if there is evidence to support a charge, then what? Because the exercise is to move the process into the civilian system, what does the Criminal Code say about jurisdiction?

To the point about deploying RCMP members, it might not even be necessary to have them on site the entire deployment. The MPs could likely secure the evidence/scene locally, and have investigators come in from Canada as required.

I suspect there aren't enough sexual assaults on deployment to justify always having RCMP members on site just in case.

But it seems the stated goal is to cut MPs completely out of the process. Besides, depending on where a scene is, there are practical and evidentiary limits on how long a scene can be held.

Anyone accompanying the CAF on deployment is subject to the CSD.

Really? That's not how I read Sec. 60 unless that person is specifically designated. Could be wrong. If that were the case, rotsa ruck getting civilian police officers to volunteer.

 

[dapaterson]

Yeah no yeah my union says I'm entitled to a hotel, weekends off, and overtime.

You either joined the Air Force or got promoted CWO.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

You either joined the Air Force or got promoted CWO.

Oh, come on!

We don’t get overtime pay…

 

[Furniture]

But it seems the stated goal is to cut MPs completely out of the process. Besides, depending on where a scene is, there are practical and evidentiary limits on how long a scene can be held.

My understanding is the goal is to have the MPs not investigate, but it is possible that the goal is to remove them entirely from the equation. I just don't see the feasibility of having RCMP or other Canadian police along on every deployment just in case. Most Canadian police services are dealing with too much work, and too few staff. I can't see them giving up people continuously for the occasional sexual assault investigation in Latvia or the Arabian Sea.

There are also deployed CAF units like ships that have no MPs with them on deployment. If a crime was committed the evidence would have to be preserved by ship's staff until police could be brought out to investigate. It's just part of the nature of deployed CAF operations.

Really? That's not how I read Sec. 60 unless that person is specifically designated. Could be wrong. If that were the case, rotsa ruck getting civilian police officers to volunteer.

I suspect every position on a tour is designated, so that discipline can be maintained. I know PSP staff embarked on ships for deployments were subject to the CSD, as I was witness to a UDI for one who was AWOL.

 

[QV]

For a political hot topic like investigating CAF members overseas?

Yes. Imagine the scrutiny the first case would go through since it’s in a foreign country, and a non-CAF person did the investigation.

Minus the King. Maybe.

Sorry, CAF members are not that important. Almost all cases would most certainly be through the MJ system anyway because it's overseas.

What's more of an optic problem, the CAF investigating itself (MP), or separate actual police service investigating the CAF?

CIVPOL on a deployment is not a new thing.

 

[Takeniteasy]

I find it interesting that people here and members of CAF/DND get to speculate/speak/comment on the continued effort for culture and administrative change when the ones who have been directly affected are pushed aside. This thread for example went missing and then when it came back years of comments were deleted. Deny, deny, deny or delay, delay, delay; common spoken words and actions of those in power positions.
After years waiting I received the email inviting me to engage in the Restorative Engagement component. The interesting thing about this Restorative Engagement is that its still DND/CAF controlling how my experience gets told. My guess is that the Intake Officer will try to lead me in directions that are more considerate towards DND/CAF instead of speaking to the realities. I believe this to be a one way constructive (military style) discussion with me in the lead, lets see how they respond.

 

[brihard]

Deploying the RCMP would not be an ‘easy button’. International police deployments are complex and yes, joking about unions aside, absolutely there would be increased costs in deploying civilian police who have a union and collective agreement. It’s by no means insurmountable, it would just cost money.

But if Canada had RCMP overseas right now with CAF, and the Mounties walked in on a CAF member sexually assaulting another CAF member, that would give them no jurisdiction to lay charges. Criminal code sexual assault is not an offense with extraterritorial applicability unless some other provision of law explicitly makes it so.

There will have to be legislative change. Section 7(4) of the Criminal Code already covers extraterritorial reach for Public Service employees:

Offences by Public Service employees

(4) Every one who, while employed as an employee within the meaning of the Public Service Employment Act in a place outside Canada, commits an act or omission in that place that is an offence under the laws of that place and that, if committed in Canada, would be an offence punishable by indictment shall be deemed to have committed that act or omission in Canada.

A similar provision, properly deconflicted with the NDA, could extend sexual assault provisions of the Criminal Code to CAF OUTCAN. That would give civilian police - for simplicity, let’s say RCMP - some jurisdiction to swear an information and initiate a prosecution.

But, other cats that would have to be skinned would be how police could obtain judicial authorizations. Let’s say RCMP are investigating a sexual offense committed in Latvia, and they need a search warrant to search the accused’ barracks, and seize and examine the contents of his phone, plus a production order for the contents of his DWAN email- which court could grant that search warrant, would they have to go through foreign courts, and would that evidence be reliably admissible in Canada? To Supreme Court unfortunately passed up a chance to tackle this last year in McGregor.

Investigation and prosecution isn’t just someone with a badge and a gun who can be pointed in the direction of a suspect. A lot of legal authorities and powers have to get hammered out. Flawed as it is, CFNIS equipped with s.130 NDA at least have most of what they need legally… The results just haven’t been great. But shifting investigation of OUTCAN sex crimes to RCMP and prosecution to civilian courts is a complex question of various jurisdictions and foreign state sovereignty.

 

[RedFive]

Further to Booter's point, the CSD itself has this in its introduction;

60 (1) The following persons are subject to the Code of Service Discipline:

• (d) subject to such exceptions, adaptations and modifications as the Governor in Council may by regulations prescribe, a person who, pursuant to law or pursuant to an agreement between Canada and the state in whose armed forces the person is serving, is attached or seconded as an officer or non-commissioned member to the Canadian Forces;
• (e) a person, not otherwise subject to the Code of Service Discipline, who is serving in the position of an officer or non-commissioned member of any force raised and maintained outside Canada by Her Majesty in right of Canada and commanded by an officer of the Canadian Forces;
• (f) a person, not otherwise subject to the Code of Service Discipline, who accompanies any unit or other element of the Canadian Forces that is on service or active service in any place;

I cut out the fluff to focus on those three points. I'm no lawyer, but I could see all three of those being a possible candidate to place members of the RCMP under the CSD.

In any case, I'd love to take that gig, and to screen out potential idiots from getting that "good go" I'd suggest to RCMP NHQ that only RCMP members with previous CAF experience be made eligible.

 

[dapaterson]

In any case, I'd love to take that gig, and to screen out potential idiots from getting that "good go" I'd suggest to RCMP NHQ that only RCMP members with previous CAF experience be made eligible.

Where I would be team prior CAF experience is what you don't want - you want fresh eyes.

 

[RedFive]

Where I would be team prior CAF experience is what you don't want - you want fresh eyes.

As far as the investigation for sure, but I promise you you don't want some of our prima donna members showing up expecting a five star hotel and wifi connection to conduct their work between the hours of 9 and 5 only.

Every year I deploy to the fires here in BC, and every year there's at least a handful of people who whine and complain while on double time to help a city that is burning to the ground, who can't wrap their heads around why they're there and that people around them are losing literally everything. Mind boggling.

Anyways, if I was going to be an NCO in charge of an RCMP Det going over with a CAF unit I'd either want all CAF vets if it was short notice, or time to "manage expectations" if I had time to train them.

 

[dapaterson]

As far as the investigation for sure, but I promise you you don't want some of our prima donna members showing up expecting a five star hotel and wifi connection to conduct their work between the hours of 9 and 5 only.

Every year I deploy to the fires here in BC, and every year there's at least a handful of people who whine and complain while on double time to help a city that is burning to the ground, who can't wrap their heads around why they're there and that people around them are losing literally everything. Mind boggling.

Anyways, if I was going to be an NCO in charge of an RCMP Det going over with a CAF unit I'd either want all CAF vets if it was short notice, or time to "manage expectations" if I had time to train them.

Challenges of prima donna members are not unique to either Force. As you highlight, managing expectations and pre-deployment selection and training are important.

 

[brihard]

I’d by curious to know, given the discussion is specifically around sex offences, how many person-hours-per-year the MPs spend investigating OUTCAN sex offences, and what portion of that work actually needs to be done outside of Canada? Because are you e batting around the idea of deploying two or three RCMP for something that might happen once or twice per rotation?

 

[Eaglelord17]

Flawed as it is, CFNIS equipped with s.130 NDA at least have most of what they need legally… The results just haven’t been great. But shifting investigation of OUTCAN sex crimes to RCMP and prosecution to civilian courts is a complex question of various jurisdictions and foreign state sovereignty.

I would argue the results delivered by the MPs are better than the results generally delivered by civilian police (tons of botched cases civilian side).

At this point CFNIS is likely the best sexual assault investigators in the country due to how many they handled in the last decade and the fact they generally have a much lighter workload than your average civilian police to devote the time to it.

If they truly decide to go this way, why even keep the MPs at this point if we can’t trust them to lay charges?

 

[Booter]

I would argue the results delivered by the MPs are better than the results generally delivered by civilian police (tons of botched cases civilian side).

At this point CFNIS is likely the best sexual assault investigators in the country due to how many they handled in the last decade and the fact they generally have a much lighter workload than your average civilian police to devote the time to it.

If they truly decide to go this way, why even keep the MPs at this point if we can’t trust them to lay charges?

You literally just made this up like you were saying something insightful that you have literally no insight in to. That’s wild.

You cant argue that because you have no experience, training, insight, or knowledge on the subject.

 

[Eaglelord17]

You literally just made this up like you were saying something insightful that you have literally no insight in to. That’s wild.

You cant argue that because you have no experience, training, insight, or knowledge on the subject.

You can google all sorts of screwed up sexual assault cases in the civilian courts where the police dropped the ball.

From talking with people who have dealt with civilian police for sexual assault cases, it left a lot to be desired. Not to mention dealing with civilian police is a mixed bag due to the amount of different police forces in the country with different expertise levels investigating.

I have also dealt with CFNIS investigating first hand and I don’t think they could be more professional. Your experiences may vary but if I had to choose having civilian police or CFNIS investigating my case again, I would choose CFNIS every time.

 

[Booter]

You can google all sorts of screwed up sexual assault cases in the civilian courts where the police dropped the ball.

From talking with people who have dealt with civilian police for sexual assault cases, it left a lot to be desired. Not to mention dealing with civilian police is a mixed bag due to the amount of different police forces in the country with different expertise levels investigating.

I have also dealt with CFNIS investigating first hand and I don’t think they could be more professional. Your experiences may vary but if I had to choose having civilian police or CFNIS investigating my case again, I would choose CFNIS every time.

Complete nonsense.

CFNIS and the military police in general suffer from no more and no less than the same issues as civilian police. They are as hit or miss as every other police agency in Canada.

I’ve assisted and been involved in their investigations several times at multiple levels- including sexual assault at Shilo where the guardhouse started the investigation and it transitioned to CFNIS and was one of the most ridiculous investigations I’ve ever been part of. I also dealt with CFNIS and another military police unit on an outside of Canada file that was fairly complex and had scenes in Afghanistan and somewhere else- they were awesome.

I’ve also done outside agencies and RCMP sexual assault investigations in five provinces. The quality of the investigation and its outcome in court has everything to do with the investigator and almost zero to do with the agency,

The idea that you have talked to all these people with sexual assault investigations behind them and came to the conclusion that because someone has nothing to do, and less experience, that somehow do a better job is absurd,

I’ve maintained the MPs are fully capable of these investigations and that the problem with the court outcomes is in the court system- the outcomes for every agency in canada being low and unsatisfying for victims.

But your idea is wild. That said- I do believe that you are correct about your point of “why even keeps the MPs if that’s the case.

 

[Good2Golf]

I find it interesting that people here and members of CAF/DND get to speculate/speak/comment on the continued effort for culture and administrative change when the ones who have been directly affected are pushed aside. This thread for example went missing and then when it came back years of comments were deleted. Deny, deny, deny or delay, delay, delay; common spoken words and actions of those in power positions.

Interesting how? This is a private site run by a private individual and a cadre of various supporters and contributors, and is in no way an official DND or GoC website/forum, so anyone is able to participate/‘speak’/comment/speculate, as long as they respect the site owner’s reasonable conduct guidelines.

This thread specifically is one of the oldest on the site. In a few years it will be a quarter CENTURY old, and had not been deleted or censored.

After years waiting I received the email inviting me to engage in the Restorative Engagement component. The interesting thing about this Restorative Engagement is that its still DND/CAF controlling how my experience gets told. My guess is that the Intake Officer will try to lead me in directions that are more considerate towards DND/CAF instead of speaking to the realities. I believe this to be a one way constructive (military style) discussion with me in the lead, lets see how they respond.

Years waiting for what? From whom? From what agency? According to what process?

Many site members here have had adverse experiences along the subject topic, yet have been able to speak their minds or say their peace, as long as they respect the site owner’s conduct guidelines.

You should feel free to participate and provide further insight to your experience(s) as you feel comfortable doing, but by prejudging others and assuming you will be ‘pushed aside’ (per your earlier quote) is unfounded. There is a difference between individuals potentially discussing, even respectfully debating issues, and out of hand dismissal or negative conduct to those wishing to participate in the dialogue.

Regards,
G2G

 

[Booter]

I find it interesting that people here and members of CAF/DND get to speculate/speak/comment on the continued effort for culture and administrative change when the ones who have been directly affected are pushed aside.

how do you know the experiences behind the user names here? I was also recently contacted for “restorative engagement” as well. I just don’t agree with the changes proposed in some cases. Is my opinion more or less valid now?

 

[lenaitch]

CIVPOL on a deployment is not a new thing.

On a CIVPOL mission under a UN mandate, not acting in an extra-territorial Canadian law enforcement capacity.

Under the authority of the CDS or not doesn't necessarily extent their law enforcement authority.

You can google all sorts of screwed up sexual assault cases in the civilian courts where the police dropped the ball.

I'm not saying that every investigation is textbook, but don't equate an acquittal or dismissed/stayed charges with a flawed investigation. Most sexual assault cases, by their nature, happen in private and the credibility and evidence of the victim is key. Sometimes the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' principle raises its head.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Interesting how? This is a private site run by a private individual and a cadre of various supporters and contributors, and is in no way an official DND or GoC website/forum, so anyone is able to participate/‘speak’/comment/speculate, as long as they respect the site owner’s reasonable conduct guidelines.

This thread specifically is one of the oldest on the site. In a few years it will be a quarter CENTURY old, and had not been deleted or censored.



Years waiting for what? From whom? From what agency? According to what process?

Many site members here have had adverse experiences along the subject topic, yet have been able to speak their minds or say their peace, as long as they respect the site owner’s conduct guidelines.

You should feel free to participate and provide further insight to your experience(s) as you feel comfortable doing, but by prejudging others and assuming you will be ‘pushed aside’ (per your earlier quote) is unfounded. There is a difference between individuals potentially discussing, even respectfully debating issues, and out of hand dismissal or negative conduct to those wishing to participate in the dialogue.

Regards,
G2G

Must be terrible going through life feeling so hard done by all the time eh G2G!?