On October 26, the man in charge of the Public Order Emergency Commission, Commissioner Paul Rouleau, made a ruling that pre-emptively destroyed any credibility the inquiry might have with the Canadian public.. Justice Paul RouleauJustice Paul Rouleau .The Government of Canada had requested that portions of the evidence it will be bringing forth be received in the absence of the public. This secret evidence will be heard only by Commissioner Rouleau. It will not be aired publicly as the other evidence brought before the Commission has been. (Look here for past webcasts and transcripts.) Even the other parties to the inquiry, who are usually permitted to question each witness after he or she testifies, will be excluded from this portion of the hearing, which is expected to take three hours..The Government of Canada claims that the secret evidence would be injurious to national security if disclosed to the public. It is apparently based on a classified report about the involvement of CSIS (the Canadian Security Intelligence Service) during the Freedom Convoy. There will be two witnesses: one from CSIS and from ITAC (The Integrated Terrorism Assessment Centre), who will give a portion of their evidence publicly, but will withhold the “classified” portion for Commissioner Rouleau’s ears only..After he hears the secret evidence, Commissioner Rouleau will make another ruling on what portions of it — if any — didn’t really need to be kept secret and should be released to the public. However, we will all have to take his word for it. The decision will be made by one person, who will not be subject to any scrutiny or criticism for it because —barring a leak — nobody will have any idea what to criticize him for..As well, Commissioner Rouleau will not have had the opportunity of having brought to his attention any weaknesses, inconsistencies, or other credibility issues of the secret evidence that are usually turned up by cross-examination of the witnesses. He’ll have to look for all the chinks in the evidence himself, and it will be a tough job to replace the minds of the numerous other lawyers participating in the hearings, all coming at the evidence from different perspectives..The Government of Canada provided a list of five possible injuries that might result to national security if it were compelled to make its evidence public. They’re summarized in his decision, (written in language guaranteed to make most people’s eyes glaze over) but I’ll attempt to express in plain language what they seem to mean..First, CSIS wants to conceal its interest in various individuals, groups or issues. If it was already keeping files on any of the protesters or their supporters, they don’t want those people to find out. They also want to hide their methods of operation and investigative techniques, including whether or not those techniques have been successful or dismal failures..Then, they want to hide their relationships with other police, security and intelligence agencies, as well as any information they’ve exchanged in confidence with such agencies..They don’t want to blow the cover of any undercover CSIS employees or their methods..Finally, they don’t want to identify anyone who provided information to CSIS..Personally, given all the recent news we’ve read about the Chinese Communist Party openly establishing “police stations” here in Canada, and the abundant evidence that foreign entities such as the World Economic Forum have influence over at least half the federal cabinet — including the prime minister and deputy prime minister — I consider Canadian “security” to be a big joke. No wonder CSIS wants to conceal both its record of successful investigations and its record of failures..The acceptance of secret evidence from the Government of Canada is a huge disappointment to me. I had hoped that something useful might actually emerge from the proceedings of the inquiry, but this certainly casts a big shadow over it. No doubt many other Canadians will feel the same..The only way that Commissioner Rouleau could undo the damage his ruling has already done would be to decide that the secret evidence he hears should all be disclosed to the public, every bit of it. This would involve re-calling the witnesses in the presence of counsel for the parties, who should all have a chance to cross-examine.
On October 26, the man in charge of the Public Order Emergency Commission, Commissioner Paul Rouleau, made a ruling that pre-emptively destroyed any credibility the inquiry might have with the Canadian public.. Justice Paul RouleauJustice Paul Rouleau .The Government of Canada had requested that portions of the evidence it will be bringing forth be received in the absence of the public. This secret evidence will be heard only by Commissioner Rouleau. It will not be aired publicly as the other evidence brought before the Commission has been. (Look here for past webcasts and transcripts.) Even the other parties to the inquiry, who are usually permitted to question each witness after he or she testifies, will be excluded from this portion of the hearing, which is expected to take three hours..The Government of Canada claims that the secret evidence would be injurious to national security if disclosed to the public. It is apparently based on a classified report about the involvement of CSIS (the Canadian Security Intelligence Service) during the Freedom Convoy. There will be two witnesses: one from CSIS and from ITAC (The Integrated Terrorism Assessment Centre), who will give a portion of their evidence publicly, but will withhold the “classified” portion for Commissioner Rouleau’s ears only..After he hears the secret evidence, Commissioner Rouleau will make another ruling on what portions of it — if any — didn’t really need to be kept secret and should be released to the public. However, we will all have to take his word for it. The decision will be made by one person, who will not be subject to any scrutiny or criticism for it because —barring a leak — nobody will have any idea what to criticize him for..As well, Commissioner Rouleau will not have had the opportunity of having brought to his attention any weaknesses, inconsistencies, or other credibility issues of the secret evidence that are usually turned up by cross-examination of the witnesses. He’ll have to look for all the chinks in the evidence himself, and it will be a tough job to replace the minds of the numerous other lawyers participating in the hearings, all coming at the evidence from different perspectives..The Government of Canada provided a list of five possible injuries that might result to national security if it were compelled to make its evidence public. They’re summarized in his decision, (written in language guaranteed to make most people’s eyes glaze over) but I’ll attempt to express in plain language what they seem to mean..First, CSIS wants to conceal its interest in various individuals, groups or issues. If it was already keeping files on any of the protesters or their supporters, they don’t want those people to find out. They also want to hide their methods of operation and investigative techniques, including whether or not those techniques have been successful or dismal failures..Then, they want to hide their relationships with other police, security and intelligence agencies, as well as any information they’ve exchanged in confidence with such agencies..They don’t want to blow the cover of any undercover CSIS employees or their methods..Finally, they don’t want to identify anyone who provided information to CSIS..Personally, given all the recent news we’ve read about the Chinese Communist Party openly establishing “police stations” here in Canada, and the abundant evidence that foreign entities such as the World Economic Forum have influence over at least half the federal cabinet — including the prime minister and deputy prime minister — I consider Canadian “security” to be a big joke. No wonder CSIS wants to conceal both its record of successful investigations and its record of failures..The acceptance of secret evidence from the Government of Canada is a huge disappointment to me. I had hoped that something useful might actually emerge from the proceedings of the inquiry, but this certainly casts a big shadow over it. No doubt many other Canadians will feel the same..The only way that Commissioner Rouleau could undo the damage his ruling has already done would be to decide that the secret evidence he hears should all be disclosed to the public, every bit of it. This would involve re-calling the witnesses in the presence of counsel for the parties, who should all have a chance to cross-examine.
