Lawyers Allegedly Behaving Badly

[FJAG]

People in power abusing more vulnerable people is not just a military or legal community issue. It's universal.

The same is true of peers hearing rumours and not reporting the issue even if there is a requirement to do so.

I find it interesting that QR&Os 4.02e and 5.01e have both been repealed in 2022. These were the "duty to fink" provisions requiring officers to:

report to the proper authority any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions governing the conduct of any person subject to the Code of Service Discipline when the officer cannot deal adequately with the matter.

or NCMs to:

report to the proper authority any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions governing the conduct of any person subject to the Code of Service Discipline, except if they are made aware of the infringement in the context of a restorative engagement program organized by the Department, the Canadian Forces or on behalf of either of them.

Effectively these could be used to deal with individuals who knew of an improper situation but failed to report them.

Maybe @dapaterson has some insight as to why they were removed. They certainly were not used very often when dealing with incidents involving peers or superiors and, occasionally, even relating to subordinates.

 

[dapaterson]

People in power abusing more vulnerable people is not just a military or legal community issue. It's universal.

The same is true of peers hearing rumours and not reporting the issue even if there is a requirement to do so.

I find it interesting that QR&Os 4.02e and 5.01e have both been repealed in 2022. These were the "duty to fink" provisions requiring officers to:


or NCMs to:


Effectively these could be used to deal with individuals who knew of an improper situation but failed to report them.

Maybe @dapaterson has some insight as to why they were removed. They certainly were not used very often when dealing with incidents involving peers or superiors and, occasionally, even relating to subordinates.

As I recall, the challenge with "duty to report" was the conflict with that principle and the intent to permit individuals who had experienced sexual misconduct to have agency in addressing what has happened to them, and to avoid the risk of re-traumatizing them or even potentially charging them for failing to report that they had been assaulted.

 

[FJAG]

As I recall, the challenge with "duty to report" was the conflict with that principle and the intent to permit individuals who had experienced sexual misconduct to have agency in addressing what has happened to them, and to avoid the risk of re-traumatizing them or even potentially charging them for failing to report that they had been assaulted.

Right. This was well after I left but in the back of my mind it seems that I'd heard something to that effect. IMHO, that could have been dealt with as an amendment rather than a repeal. Thanks.