A democratic watchdog is demanding a thorough and independent investigation into a report by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) that reveals MPs and senators have helped foreign governments interfere in Canadian politics.Democracy Watch (DWatch) issued the call on Thursday, adding that public rulings on every allegation must be forthcoming.While commentators have called for political parties to deal with the allegations internally, or for all MPs and Senators to be identified now if they are alleged in intelligence reports to have participated in interference, DWatch co-founder Duff Conacher disagrees.Conacher says neither of those steps would ensure independent investigations and public rulings, or fairness that complies with the Charter protections of due process and justice given intelligence reports often contain rumours or very questionable evidence.All parties voted in the House of Commons in support of a resolution calling on the Hogue Inquiry into foreign interference to examine the allegations. The Inquiry issued a statement saying it is already examining the intelligence reports referenced by NSICOP. The problem, DWatch says, is that public inquiries cannot conduct investigations, charge or prosecute or find anyone in violation of any Canadian law, and won't name names of those only under suspicion.DWatch said the RCMP can’t be trusted to investigate the allegations because Commissioner Michael Duheme was chosen by, and serves at the pleasure, of the Trudeau Cabinet as do the Deputy Commissioners and heads of every RCMP division (see 5, 6 and 6.1 of the RCMP Act). Duheme made it clear he favours secrecy in foreign interference investigations in interviews with CBC and Global TV.DWatch added the RCMP "conducted incomplete, weak and very questionable investigations into Prime Minister Trudeau’s actions in the SNC-Lavalin scandal (which the RCMP tried to bury for years), and in the Aga Khan scandal."DWatch and others have called for a new, much more independent, expert, effective and transparent national police force is needed to investigate foreign interference, corruption and national security.Now that Bill C-70 has passed, CSIS is allowed to share intelligence information with police forces and other law enforcement entities. Therefore, DWatch has recommended the following:1. CSIS should share the intelligence information containing the information with provincial or local police forces (again, not the RCMP), and the Commissioner of Canada Elections, and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and Commissioner of Lobbying.2. The police forces, Commissioner of Canada Elections, ethics and lobbying commissioners should investigate each allegation that is referred to them by CSIS, and must issue a public ruling in each case, and;3. The public rulings should either be:a) an announcement that charges are being laid and a named person or entity prosecuted or found guilty for violating the law;b) an announcement that there is clear evidence that a named person or entity engaged in foreign interference activities but that for an explained reason they will not be charged, prosecuted or found guilty; orc) an announcement that does not name the person or entity because there is no good evidence that they engaged in foreign interference.
A democratic watchdog is demanding a thorough and independent investigation into a report by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) that reveals MPs and senators have helped foreign governments interfere in Canadian politics.Democracy Watch (DWatch) issued the call on Thursday, adding that public rulings on every allegation must be forthcoming.While commentators have called for political parties to deal with the allegations internally, or for all MPs and Senators to be identified now if they are alleged in intelligence reports to have participated in interference, DWatch co-founder Duff Conacher disagrees.Conacher says neither of those steps would ensure independent investigations and public rulings, or fairness that complies with the Charter protections of due process and justice given intelligence reports often contain rumours or very questionable evidence.All parties voted in the House of Commons in support of a resolution calling on the Hogue Inquiry into foreign interference to examine the allegations. The Inquiry issued a statement saying it is already examining the intelligence reports referenced by NSICOP. The problem, DWatch says, is that public inquiries cannot conduct investigations, charge or prosecute or find anyone in violation of any Canadian law, and won't name names of those only under suspicion.DWatch said the RCMP can’t be trusted to investigate the allegations because Commissioner Michael Duheme was chosen by, and serves at the pleasure, of the Trudeau Cabinet as do the Deputy Commissioners and heads of every RCMP division (see 5, 6 and 6.1 of the RCMP Act). Duheme made it clear he favours secrecy in foreign interference investigations in interviews with CBC and Global TV.DWatch added the RCMP "conducted incomplete, weak and very questionable investigations into Prime Minister Trudeau’s actions in the SNC-Lavalin scandal (which the RCMP tried to bury for years), and in the Aga Khan scandal."DWatch and others have called for a new, much more independent, expert, effective and transparent national police force is needed to investigate foreign interference, corruption and national security.Now that Bill C-70 has passed, CSIS is allowed to share intelligence information with police forces and other law enforcement entities. Therefore, DWatch has recommended the following:1. CSIS should share the intelligence information containing the information with provincial or local police forces (again, not the RCMP), and the Commissioner of Canada Elections, and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and Commissioner of Lobbying.2. The police forces, Commissioner of Canada Elections, ethics and lobbying commissioners should investigate each allegation that is referred to them by CSIS, and must issue a public ruling in each case, and;3. The public rulings should either be:a) an announcement that charges are being laid and a named person or entity prosecuted or found guilty for violating the law;b) an announcement that there is clear evidence that a named person or entity engaged in foreign interference activities but that for an explained reason they will not be charged, prosecuted or found guilty; orc) an announcement that does not name the person or entity because there is no good evidence that they engaged in foreign interference.
