Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF

[QV]

Could it happen like this?

After a rugby game somebody is going to get a good game slap in the junior ranks and take high offence, CAF and MPs won't want to make the call this isn't criminal because of the climate and very vocal complaint by the recipient, will push the file to civ pol who will investigate and decline any sort of sex assault/assault charge (not for sexual purpose and trifling). And when it comes back to the CAF the subject will be hung under the gallows of sexual misconduct (because hand on ass) through administrative measures or maybe the CSD via S. 129 for breaking rules.

 

[Haggis]

Would it be appropriate for the civilian police to inform the military police and members unit that they were the subj3ct of a police investigation that found no grounds to lay charges?

And let the member's unit decide if the alleged transgression was a conduct deficiency to be dealt with via an AR?

 

[Booter]

I believe Cold Lakes PILT saga and court decisions are available and continuing. They are the most recent and largest I am aware of. Theirs is ongoing and endorsed by the federation of municipalities. They are my closest example I have some working knowledge on.

The property valuations are argued to be too low- and the supporting arguments are the access and drain to services funded by the municipality, traditionally policing isn’t a service used by the base- it will be included once this starts. Even by a small margin- the argument will be that it is one more thing and the outdated PILT amounts are wrong- hence the disputes.

 

[Booter]

And let the member's unit decide if the alleged transgression was a conduct deficiency to be dealt with via an AR?

There just needs to be an info campaign. They divert the criminal to the POJ and then if the COC is aware they launch their concurrent misconduct investigation, and the two don’t touch each other.

There’s some issue because of the nature of the NDA and the what gets dealt with first. But really it doesn’t need to be complicated.

 

[dapaterson]

I believe Cold Lakes PILT saga and court decisions are available and continuing. They are the most recent and largest I am aware of. Theirs is ongoing and endorsed by the federation of municipalities. They are my closest example I have some working knowledge on.

The property valuations are argued to be too low- and the supporting arguments are the access and drain to services funded by the municipality, traditionally policing isn’t a service used by the base- it will be included once this starts. Even by a small margin- the argument will be that it is one more thing and the outdated PILT amounts are wrong- hence the disputes.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/federal-appeal-court-rules-in-favour-of-cold-lake-in-fighter-base-tax-dispute-1.7597926

From what I can see, the debate was on whether certain works (water and sewer) were to be considered in the valuation or not.

Full case (my evening reading): https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fca/doc/2025/2025fca138/2025fca138.html

 

[Booter]

I’m not sure if you’re being myopic or if I’m just doing a really bad job explaining my future based suspicion of what will happen next ( it’s probably that) - the city services argument is with regards to what has been traditionally used- water and sewer and that the traditional PILT valuations of property are unfair to the municipality. Policing isn’t included because it isn’t provided to the base. Once there is an expectation that this is the case- it will be argued that it is a service being used. Cold Lake has tried previously to link costs for policing to the base but the argument has been that they do their own. Municipalities have recently been getting more successful on their arguments with the PILT.

Now they policing isn’t counted or included.. So it will be argued that this is a service being used when it starts in the future- unlike health care and schooling that the government says is provided for already.

Also, Cold Lake and several bases are PPSA/MPSA contracts where the police are a mix of provincially funded positions and municipal.

I wonder if an idea is that there may be a way to fund a partial position with the understanding that they provide that service to the base.

 

[brihard]

I'm curious how that would look.

18 year old civilian cleaner tries to make a complaint to military police police about dirtbag NCO making sexual advances, "accidental" pictures which she deleted, and sexual comments. MP stop her before hearing the complaint and send her to civilian police due to C-11. She complains to civilian police and they decline to investigate.

The civilian police aren't going to inform the NCO's chain of command.

If the civilian tells her supervisor who informs the NCOs chain of command, would the NCOs unit conduct a UDI? I wouldn't expect the JAG would support WO so and so conducting a UDI for sexual misconduct when MP aren't allowed to do so, and civilian police turned it down.


On the other hand maybe unit NCOs and officers conducting UDIs for sexual misconduct will be the loop hole to investigate this stuff.

I’m sure CAF will figure it out. Any major employer deals with misconduct issues through their own administrative processes. If CAF wanted to adjust a portion of its conduct system to an administrative balance of probabilities disciplinary system (noting that this takes things like jail off the table), they could probably look to legislation and regulation applicable to police services as a start point. The RCMP have a statutory and regulatory internal disciplinary system that can and does run in parallel to criminal investigations, and even offers its own legal authority for things like search warrants. CAF could give off the criminal prosecution side of member discipline and create an easier administrative system for smaller stuff. And that’s not to say they could not still maintain certain more serious CSD offences as criminal offences to be handled that way.