Annual Report
1998 – 1999
celebrating a decade of public service
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Cat. No. JS77-1/1999
ISBN 0-662-64349-6
Editing and translation: Prosebusters Communications
Solicitor General of Canada
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Dear Mr. MacAulay,
Pursuant to section 45.34 of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, I hereby transmit the annual report of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission for the fiscal year 1998-1999, for tabling in Parliament.
Yours very truly,
Shirley Heafey
Chair
June 1999
Table of Contents
Message from the Chair
Part One: About the RCMP Public Complaints Commission
Part Two: The Year in Review
Part Three: Expediting the Review Process
Part Four: A Retrospective on the Commission's First Decade
Part Five: The Years Ahead
Appendices
- Commission Members and Organization Chart
- Commission Budget
- Summary of Cases of Interest
Getting in Touch with the Commission
A police system does not only need to be efficient, it must be popular;
that is to say, it must conduct its operations with so scrupulous
a regard to the susceptibilities of the people that public sympathy and approval are not alienated.
W.L. MELVILLE LEE
A HISTORY OF POLICE IN ENGLAND, 1901
The RCMP Public Complaints Commission was established by Parliament a decade ago to provide a crucial service: to provide a forum for the public to voice a complaint about the conduct of any RCMP member while on duty. The Commission's mandate was to ensure that members of the public and members of the RCMP are treated equitably during the course of any given dispute. The Commission continues to serve this purpose admirably as it celebrates its tenth anniversary. After 17 months as Chairwoman of the Commission, I remain determined and committed to continue to boost the Commission's effectiveness and responsiveness to members of the public who need us.
That every Canadian citizen has the means and the opportunity to express a complaint about RCMP conduct is vital in nurturing accountability of the police to the people they protect. The search for a resolution of that complaint in a fair and equitable fashion for the public and the police goes to the heart of the Commission's existence. Herein lies the majority of our work: the resolution of relatively straightforward disputes between a member of the public and a member of the RCMP. This can often be accomplished by a simple exchange between the complainant and the police. Often the involvement of the Commission as a neutral third party can facilitate that resolution. That is my goal. One of the things I have been focusing on, as Chair, is to make this process less formal and adversarial and more responsive to the needs of both parties. This will allow the public greater access to the service the Commission provides, and allow us to better serve — a win-win situation.
On occasion, complaints raise issues that go beyond the interests of the parties involved and affect the interest of the larger public sphere. When this occurs, the Chair of the Commission has discretionary authority to establish a Public Interest Investigation, such as the one in progress in New Brunswick (involving 180 complainants), or a Public Interest Hearing, such as the ongoing APEC hearing. Cases such as these are often heavily covered by the media and are, therefore, highly visible. However, it is important to remember that the Commission steadfastly strives always to address the all-important needs of individual complainants. As I promised in my first annual report, a purposeful offensive was mounted against the large backlog of review cases that has accumulated since the mid-1990s. Thanks to the concerted effort and determination of exceptional staff at the Commission, I am happy to report that we cleared a record number of these cases in the past year. And there is still much being done.
By their very nature, public interest hearings and investigations are of interest not only regionally, but nationally as well. The media serve a crucial function in presenting the subject of proper use of police powers to the public for debate. This provides an opportunity for a larger segment of our society to contribute to an understanding, and ultimately, a consensus on what constitutes appropriate police conduct in a democratic society. This input from the public is very important, and welcomed by the Commission.
A decade of hearings and investigations has presented many challenges and changes to the way investigations and hearings are conducted. One of these changes has been in the way the parties involved represent themselves throughout the proceedings. What was intended originally to be an informal and easily accessible process has regrettably become more formal. A rise in the extent of legal representation has produced hearings that resemble trials. This has caused the complaints process to become less accessible to the public, and has led, at times, to a questioning of the role and the authority of the Commission itself. This may reflect a growing tension between the interests of individuals and the public interest, and will certainly be taken into account as the RCMP Public Complaints Commission evolves to suit the needs of a changing society.
As I issue this, our 10th anniversary report, the Commission has simultaneously mounted its largest Public Interest Investigation and its largest and most far-reaching Public Interest Hearing. We have also made a significant dent in the backlog of review cases that has accumulated in the past five or six years. Over the past year, the Commission has been restructured to make better use of its resources: making it more open, accessible and, therefore, better able to serve the public. With a record-breaking year behind us, and with the opportunities for growth provided by the recent high-profile investigation and hearing, the Commission is ready to meet the challenges the future will bring.
Shirley Heafey
Chair, RCMP Public Complaints Commission
The RCMP Public Complaints Commission is an independent body. It is not part of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. It receives complaints from the public about the conduct of members of the RCMP and, pursuant to the legislation, initially must refer these to the RCMP for investigation and disposition. If the person who made the complaint — the complainant — is not satisfied with how the RCMP has dealt with their complaint, they have the final possibility of asking for an independent review. The Commission may also initiate investigations, public hearings and hearings in the public interest.
The Commission is not a decision-making body; it makes recommendations to the RCMP Commissioner after public complaints have been investigated and/or reviewed. Copies of the Commission's recommendations are forwarded to the Solicitor General, who is the minister responsible for the RCMP. Such recommendations may deal with specific matters of conduct or address broad issues relating to RCMP policy and practice.
There are about 2,500 complaints made by the public about the RCMP each year, approximately half of which are made directly to the Commission, which refers them to the RCMP. The vast majority of these complaints are resolved by the RCMP to the satisfaction of complainants and without the necessity of further involvement on the part of the Commission. The Commission, at the request of complainants, reviews approximately 250 of these complaints each year. The preponderance of the Commission's reviews support the disposition of the complaints by the RCMP. In about one quarter of these review cases, the Commission disagrees with the RCMP findings and makes recommendations for further action, including action to meet complainants' needs and to remedy shortcomings of policy and procedure. These recommendations result in a range of corrective actions applied to individual situations, as well as broader policy changes with application across the RCMP.
Putting Complaints in Context
Canadians are fortunate to have a society and institutions that are among the most stable in the world. Canadians know that they live under the rule of law, and generally believe that their police forces respect
both the law and human rights.
Even with Canada's record as law-abiding society with strong, respected law enforcement institutions, Parliament established this Commission to reinforce public confidence in the RCMP by making it accountable for the conduct of its members. The Commission acts in the public interest, both to protect the rights of citizens and to protect members of the RCMP who may be accused unfairly of improper conduct. Complaints about RCMP members frequently arise from the stresses of policing, both for individual officers and for the members of the public they serve. Usually, the issue is more about police demenour that about serious violations of Canadian standards and values.
The Commission's role is to focus its attention on the relatively few cases where the conduct of members of the RCMP may have fallen short of society's expectations. These are high expectations, and the instances when they are not met should not detract from the RCMP's overall record of good policing.
The Commission carries out its functions as objectively as possible. When evaluating a complaint, the Commission does not act as an advocate either for the complainant or for RCMP members. Rather, its role is to conduct an independent inquiry and reach objective conclusions based on the available information.
Complaints may be made:
- by a member of the public directly to the RCMP;
- by a member of the public to the Commission or provincial policing authorities; or
- as an initiative of the Chair of the Commission.
Once a complaint has been made:
- the RCMP investigates; and
- the Commissioner of the RCMP reports the results of these investigations to the complainant and the police officer(s) involved.
Complainants who are not satisfied with how the RCMP has dealt with their complaint may:
- ask the Commission for an independent review of the RCMP's disposition of the complaint.
After the Commission has reviewed the complaint, the Commission Chair may:
- ask the RCMP to investigate further, if the investigation seems to have been inadequate;
- initiate the Commission's own follow-up investigation;
- initiate a complete investigation by the Commission, whether or not there was a prior investigation by the RCMP; or
- institute a hearing.
If, after the Commission's independent review of the complaint, the Chair is satisfied with the RCMP investigation and disposition, the Chair will send a final report:
- to the complainant;
- to the RCMP members involved;
- to the Commissioner of the RCMP; and
- to the Solicitor General.
If the Chair of the Commission is not satisfied, the Chair sends an interim report to the Commissioner of the RCMP and the Solicitor General. This report is treated as follows:
- The Commissioner informs the Chair and the Solicitor General in writing of any action to be taken to respond to the Chair's findings and recommendations; this includes a decision not to take action, for which an explanation must be provided.
- The Chair then prepares a final report that includes the text of the Commissioner's response, and sends it to the complainant, the RCMP members involved, the Commissioner of the RCMP and the Solicitor General.
Each panel seeks to establish the facts of a complaint by questioning
all those involved in the complaint, including witnesses and experts who may help the panel better understand the information being presented.
The Chair of the Commission may institute a public hearing to inquire into a specific complaint at any time that she considers further inquiry is warranted, but usually does so after weighing the information gathered during the RCMP or Commission investigation. The Commission Chair can also exercise her discretion, when she deems it advisable in the public interest, to inquire into a complaint about conduct whether or not there was a prior investigation by the RCMP (a public interest hearing). A hearing panel has traditionally been composed of three members of the Commission, one of whom must be from the province or territory where the conduct occurred. Single-member panels also have been established in some cases.
Each panel seeks to establish the facts of a complaint by questioning all those involved in the complaint, including witnesses and experts who may help the panel better understand the information being presented. A hearing report by the Commission sets out its findings and makes recommendations to improve RCMP operations or to correct inadequacies that may have led to the complaint.
The panel's findings and recommendations are sent to the Commissioner of the RCMP, the Solicitor General, the complainant, the RCMP member(s) complained against, and members of the public who ask to be informed.
The RCMP Commissioner is required to respond to the report indicating whether the RCMP will act on the report's findings and recommendations. If the Commissioner decides not to act on the recommendations set out in the report, the Commissioner must include the reasons for not doing so. After considering the Commissioner's response, the Chair of the Commission issues a final report.
The legislation establishing the Commission provides for a Chair, a Vice-Chair and a maximum of 27 other members or alternates. The Chair serves full-time; other members may serve full-time or part-time. The Commission has a member from each province or territory that contracts the RCMP to provide policing services (i.e., all provinces and territories except Ontario and Quebec). In addition, the legislation provides for the appointment of three persons as members-at-large. All members except the Chair may be represented by an alternate.
The federal government appoints the Chair and Vice-Chair for a fixed term of up to five years. The members of the Commission representing each province and territory are appointed by the federal government in consultation with the minister responsible for police affairs in that province. For a list of the current members of the Commission, please see Appendix A.
The Chair of the Commission is the Chief Executive Officer of the Commission and directs the work of the Commission and its staff.
Over the past year the Commission made substantial progress
in meeting these objectives, particularly in reducing thebacklog of cases and streamlining its processes.
Several important developments highlight the Commission's work in 1998-1999. The best known of these are the Commission's hearings into public complaints of RCMP conduct during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit held in Vancouver in the fall of 1997. The Commission also undertook a major public interest investigation of complaints about RCMP conduct during disturbances in northeastern New Brunswick in the spring of 1997.
The Commission also initiated important internal measures to improve its efficiency and effectiveness. These included the reorganization and renewal of the Commission, streamlining of the review process and reversal of the trend toward an ever-growing backlog of cases.
In last year's report, the Commission set out five priorities to guide its work in the years ahead. These were:
- to eliminate the backlog of complaint cases;
- to speed up the review process by making procedures more flexible;
- to develop a method of settling complaints by alternative dispute resolution;
- to improve the overall efficiency of hearings; and
- to increase public awareness of the responsibilities and activities of the Commission.
Over the past year the Commission made substantial progress in meeting these objectives, particularly in reducing the backlog of cases and streamlining its processes.
The Commission's priorities for the current and future years are discussed in Part Five of this report.
In February 1998, the Chair of the Commission established a public interest hearing into numerous complaints by members of the public about the conduct of some RCMP members during the APEC conference held in Vancouver in November 1997. After several months of identifying and interviewing witnesses and gathering evidence, the panel began the hearing in September 1998.
A number of challenges were brought by various parties during the course of this hearing. Ultimately, the Federal Court concluded that it was necessary to suspend the hearing until the Court had considered some of the issues. Before these matters could be dealt with by the Court, the Chair of the Panel resigned, followed by the remaining two Panel members a short time later. On December 23, 1998, the Chair of the Commission re-established the public interest hearing, to be presided over by the Honourable Ted Hughes, who was appointed alternate member of the Commission for British Columbia. Mr. Hughes got the new hearing under way in January 1999, and expects to hear approximately 130 witnesses over a period of about 10 months before delivering the report of his findings and recommendations.
In May 1997, a provincial government decision to close the French schools in Saint-Simon and Saint-Sauveur led to demonstrations by the residents of these two communities. In early 1998, the Commission received information that many residents were unhappy about the conduct of the RCMP during the demonstrations; this information was soon confirmed by a large number of complaints sent to the Commission. On March 20, 1998, the Chair established a public interest investigation, which is currently in progress. Commission investigators have interviewed almost 300 people — complainants, independent witnesses, citizens and members of the RCMP — and analyzed many thousands of pages of documents. The investigation should be completed by the autumn of 1999, and the investigation report is scheduled to be completed by the Chair a short time later.
The Commission issued two final reports on matters that had been the subject of earlier public hearings.
Complaints of Stephen Peter-Paul and Theresa Brake
These complaints arose out of an incident that occurred when the RCMP responded to a reported disturbance near Halifax, Nova Scotia. One complainant alleged that he had been unlawfully arrested; both complainants alleged that some RCMP officers had used excessive force. A panel was convened to conduct a public hearing into the matter. Ultimately, the panel concluded that the complaints were unjustified. The Commissioner of the RCMP, in his response to the Commission's interim report, agreed with all the findings of the panel. The final report on the hearing was issued on January 19, 1999.
Complaints of John Farness
Complaints in this case arose out of an altercation involving an off-duty, out-of-uniform member of the RCMP and the complainant. The matter was referred to a panel to conduct a public hearing. The panel found that the RCMP member had approached the complainant's vehicle intending to point out shortcomings in the complainant's driving skills, but first demanded production of a driver's licence without having identified himself as a police officer. An altercation ensued. In investigating the various complaints, the Panel was concerned with establishing clear guidelines governing the conduct of off-duty RCMP members required to intervene as police officers. The Commissioner of the RCMP, in his response to the Commission's interim report, stated that he did not favour such guidelines in general, but preferred to rely on each RCMP member's understanding of the basic principles of police conduct. The final report reiterated the panel's recommendations and pointed out that, in the course of the hearing, it had become clear that RCMP members did not have a consistent view of the basic principles, and would therefore profit from the establishment of clear guidelines.
High-Speed Chases and Other Pursuits
Accidents, injuries and deaths resulting from high-speed chases are a long-standing public concern and the subject of several complaints received by the Commission. One such complaint was received from the parents of two young adults who were killed during a high-speed pursuit by an RCMP officer in British Columbia. The Commission is now conducting an in-depth review of this matter, focusing particularly on the adequacy of RCMP policies governing high-speed pursuits. It is examining all available data in Canada and the United States regarding this important issue. The Commission has received valuable inspiration from the progressive new guidelines developed by the Attorney General of British Columbia in 1998. The Commission's reports of its review and recommendations are scheduled for completion in the fall of 1999.
Use of Force (Pepper Spray and Police Service Dogs)
The Commission continues its interest in RCMP policies and procedures for authorizing and managing the use of force during public disturbances, focusing particularly on the use of pepper spray and police service dogs. This work will likely be brought to fruition following the completion of the Commission's public interest investigation of the events at Saint-Simon and Saint-Sauveur, New Brunswick, and the public interest hearing arising from the APEC summit.
In response to the Auditor General's findings and recommendations,the Commission has taken a number of steps to become more effective and efficient...
Reorganization and Renewal of the Commission
In his annual report for 1996-1997, the Auditor General was critical of the backlog of complaint cases, which date back over a period of five years. In response to the Auditor General's findings and recommendations, the Commission has taken a number of steps to become more effective and efficient, including:
- reorganizing the Commission's operations, particularly by consolidating regional operations in a Western Region Office in Surrey, British Columbia;
- restructuring the Commission staff, including hiring a Director, Review to focus on speeding up the review process and eliminating the backlog;
- appointing a Vice-Chair to help the Chair deal with the backlog of review cases;
- strengthening the management team in several areas, notably by creating the position of Registrar/Director of Special Projects to give more effective direction to large investigations and to streamline the public hearing process;
- upgrading the information technology and corporate management systems and streamlining internal processes;
- giving greater emphasis to public communications and raising public awareness of the Commission by, for example, setting up a Web site that includes the Commission's reports and information about the Commission;
- improving the access to relevant training for Commission members; and
- obtaining additional funding from Treasury Board to support these initiatives.
The Commission and its staff made big progress in speeding up the pace of work. During the past year, the Commission completed 347 reviews: a Commision record amounting to three times the number completed in 1997-1998.
Clearing out the Backlog
The Commission and its staff made big progress in speeding up the pace of work. During the past year, the Commission completed 347 reviews: a Commission record amounting to three times the number completed in 1997-1998.
This significant improvement was the result of two major changes. First, the new Director, Review simplified the internal review process. Second, a Vice-Chair was appointed and given authority from the Chair to approve reviews, making it possible to process many more reviews than in previous years, when only the Chair could give approval.
More detail on improvements in the management and disposition of complaints is provided in Part Three of this Report.
Commission Reports in 1998-1999
| Final reports after Commissioner's notice |
28 |
| Final reports after review (paper hearing) |
279 |
| Final reports after review (oral hearing) |
3 |
| Interim reports |
16 |
| Non-Part VII reports |
13 |
| Withdrawals of request for review |
8 |
| Total number of reports signed |
347 |
Case Load: Complaints, Reviews, Investigations and Hearings
During 1998-1999, the Commission received 1,554 complaints that fell within its mandate: a 19 percent increase from the previous year. After the RCMP's initial investigation and disposition of their complaint, 260 complainants asked the Commission to conduct an independent review. This is an increase of 3.5 percent from 1997-1998.
The Commission asked the RCMP to conduct further investigations of two complaints in 1998-1999; both investigations have been completed. The Commission initiated three of its own follow-up investigations in 1998-1999, and completed four follow-up investigations that had begun in previous years. At the end of the reporting period, seven follow-up investigations are in progress.
During 1998-1999, the Commission initiated one public interest investigation, and continued work on another that began in 1997-1998 (New Brunswick). Currently, the only public interest hearing ongoing is the APEC hearing in Vancouver, which was also initiated during 1997-1998.
Changes in Commission Membership
...the Commission benefited from several new staff appointments
during 1998-1999, directed primarily at speeding up the review process.
Last year saw two changes to the Commission membership: the Honourable Ted Hughes was appointed alternate member for British Columbia to carry out the public interest hearing concerning the 1997 APEC summit, and John Wright, the member for Yukon, was appointed Vice-Chair of the Commission.
Appendix A provides a list of the members of the Commission, as well as some biographical information.
Staff
Most of the Commission's staff is located at the head office in Ottawa. The Commission also has a Western Region Office in Surrey, British Columbia, to deal with the large number of cases originating in the Territories and Western Canada. Many of these complaints come from British Columbia, where the RCMP not only provides provincial policing services, but is also the municipal police force in several large communities on the lower mainland.
As noted above, the Commission benefited from several new staff appointments during 1998-1999, directed primarily at speeding up the review process.
Appendix A provides an organization chart setting out the reporting relationships of the Commission.
Budget
The Commission's budget during 1998-1999 was $5,346,000. Budget details can be found in Appendix B.
Professional Activities
The importance of conducting hearings as efficiently as possible grows as the Commission's hearings continue to become more complex. With this in mind, most of the members of the Commission were trained in the conduct of hearings during the past year. In addition, at the annual general meeting in June 1998, the Commission Chair arranged presentations by well-known experts on issues relevant to the orderly conduct of Commission hearings.
During the year, representatives of the Commission participated regularly in meetings and conferences with other organizations with similar mandates in Canada and elsewhere, including the International Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (IACOLE) and the Canadian Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (CACOLE). The Chair of the Commission spoke about the Commission's goal to introduce alternative dispute resolution measures into its process at the CACOLE conference in October 1998.
During the course of the year, officials from a number of other countries visited the Commission, including Dr. Benedito Domingos Mariano, Ombudsman, Säo Paulo State, Brazil; Mr. Eucher Luc Joseph, Inspector General of the National Police, Haiti; and Dr. Jose Gregory, National Secretary of Human Rights, Brazil. Such meetings provide opportunities for management and staff of the Commission to exchange information with and learn from their counterparts in other countries, and to promote civilian oversight of law enforcement as an integral part of a democratic society. International exchanges are particularly relevant as a way to help countries that are just beginning to build the frameworks necessary to establish and nurture democratic rights and responsibilities.
International exchanges are particularly relevant as a way to help countries that are just beginning to build the frameworks necessary to establish and nurture democratic rights and responsibilities.
Pursuant to the RCMP Act, the Commission is required to conduct a review
of any complaint referred to it by a complainant who is dissatisfied with the
disposition of the matter by the RCMP. Over the past five years, the Commission has been asked to review about 1,250 complaints. During that period, for various reasons, the Commission cleared fewer cases than it received, accumulating a backlog of some 500 cases. These cases are at various stages in the review process; some are near completion, others are under active review, while still others are yet to be undertaken.
This part of the report sets out the measures the Commission has set in place to deal with this backlog and to prevent a similar one from developing in future.
Since the appointment of a new Chair and Executive Director, the Public Complaints Commission has been restructured to permit greater flexibility in the conduct of reviews. A Director, Review was appointed, internal procedures have changed and a more disciplined approach is being taken to the review process. In future the Commission will be looking for less formal and more efficient options for resolving complaints — measures designed to expedite the review process while ensuring impartiality, fairness and transparency. Where appropriate, alternate dispute resolution techniques, such as mediation, will be explored to assist the complainant and the police in settling their differences in a timely and mutually agreeable fashion. As indicated in last year's annual report, RCMP management has expressed great interest and support for this initiative.
The Commission also sought and received supplementary resources to assist in implementing some of these new measures. Steps were taken to create a new position, Director, Enquiries and Complaints, and to recruit someone to fill it. The new Director, Enquiries and Complaints will have responsibility for revising the complaints intake procedure and for developing and implementing the alternative dispute resolution process at the complaints stage. The appointment of this individual, and the progress in this new direction, will be reported on in the next annual report.
Policies and Procedures for Reviews
The steadily increasing backlog of review cases in recent years necessitated a thorough re-examination of how the Commission was undertaking reviews. With a view to introducing new policies and procedures that allow for both more efficient processing of review reports and improved quality, an assessment of the review process was begun in 1998-1999.
The Review Process
Several inefficiencies were identified. For example, each review file was subjected to a cumbersome and time-consuming committee process. During 1998-1999, this committee approach was abandoned. Now one staff member, guided by senior management, is assigned to each review file: a change that speeds up the review process without sacrificing the thoroughness and fairness that each case demands. Moreover, previous review reports tended to be lengthy and legalistic. In 1998-1999, the Commission adopted a more concise and succinct report writing approach as well as a plain language style. These changes have both expedited the preparation of reports and made them easier for all the parties to understand.
In 1998-1999, the Commission adopted a more concise and succinct report writing approach as well as a plain language style. These changes have both expedited the preparation of reports and made them easier for all the parties to understand.
Scope of Reviews
The Commission has also recently adopted several new policies that reflect a more stringent approach to the scope of reviews to be undertaken. For example, in 1998-1999, 13 requests for review were determined not to fall within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Most of these cases involved complaints by current serving members of the RCMP, for whom another statutory process is available under the RCMP Act. Accordingly, in cases where the conduct complained of more appropriately falls under the mandate of other regulatory processes, the Commission will not assume jurisdiction.
Moreover, in the past, when new information (such as that pertaining to conduct not included in the original complaint) came to light in the course of a review, the Commission would consider this new information and make findings and recommendations on the matter in its review report without having first provided the police officer the opportunity to respond. The Commission no longer accepts this approach. All reviews now focus exclusively on the conduct of the RCMP member(s) identified in the original complaint. This ensures that any new allegations concerning the conduct of a police officer are afforded full due process. It also eliminates any possibility that the Commission will review matters that have not been investigated in the first instance by the RCMP. However, if new information that comes to light during a review appears to merit investigation, the Commission Chair may lay a separate complaint.
Results Achieved
The Commission will continue to develop new policies and procedures as part of a sustained exercise to refine and enhance the manner in which it carries out its reviews. While true progress can only be assessed over the long term, early indications are very positive.
The reduction in the case backlog speaks for itself: in 1998-1999, the Commission processed 347 review cases, more than it had in any other single year in its 10-year history. In this respect, 1998-1999 marked a turning point in which, for the first time since 1994-1995, the Commission resolved more cases (347) than it received (260).
The year's results hold great promise for the Commission's goal of eliminating its review case backlog by the end of March 2001. The ultimate aim, however, is not only to eliminate the backlog, but also to free the Commission to undertake reviews in a timely and appropriate manner for many years to come.
The reduction in the case backlog speaks for itself:
in 1998-1999, the Commission processed 347 review cases, more than it had in any other single year in its 10-year history.
The idea for the RCMP Public Complaints Commission first surfaced in the 1976 report of the Marin Commission as a recommendation to establish an independent body charged with reviewing complaints relating to the conduct of federal police. Judge René Marin had been appointed in 1974 to examine RCMP policy and practices dealing with discipline, grievances and public complaints. In its report, the Marin Commission contended that, although the RCMP was best placed to investigate public complaints of RCMP misconduct, there was a need for a federal police ombudsman to review those investigations as needed.(1)
The next year, the McDonald Commission was established to inquire into various activities of the RCMP. This Commission reported in 1981, and it too recommended the creation of an independent review body, this time an office of the Inspector of Police Practices, which would report directly to the Solicitor General.(2) Like the Marin Commission, the McDonald Commission recommended that the RCMP retain general responsibility for investigating public complaints, but that the Inspector be empowered to undertake independent investigations in certain circumstances.
These two reports laid the foundation for the federal government's ultimate decision to establish an entity independent of the RCMP to review complaints about the conduct of RCMP officers acting in the course of duty. To that end, Bill C-65 was introduced in the House of Commons in 1985 and became law in 1986, creating the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission. The Commission opened its doors in September 1988.
In its first annual report, the Commission noted that the external review and investigation of police conduct was emerging as an essential safeguard for free and democratic societies. In retrospect, it appears that the role envisioned for the Commission has been and continues to be realized. The Commission provides an avenue for members of the public to complain about the conduct of any member of the RCMP performing his or her duties under the RCMP Act. It has helped ensure that the extraordinary powers vested in the police are subject to a fair and workable system of checks and balances.
Systemic Benefits
The existence of the RCMP Public Complaints Commission has contributed over time to changes in both the complaints process and policing practices. These improvements have been driven by individual complaints and have evolved out of the growing cooperation between the Commission and the RCMP in the satisfactory handling of public complaints.
It is worthwhile to consider some of the improvements that relate not only to improved police methods, but also to refinements in the complaints process.
The Commission provides an avenue for members of the public to complain about the conduct of any member of the RCMP performing his or her duties under the RCMP Act. It has helped ensure that the extraordinary powers vested in the police are subject to a fair and workable system of checks and balances.
Evolution of the Complaints Process
Civilian oversight of policing began attracting supporters in the 1970s and 1980s. Until that time, internal oversight had been considered sufficient. By the 1980s, civilian oversight agencies, most often complaint bodies or ombudsman-type offices for addressing police misconduct, were beginning to develop in many countries. The International Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (IACOLE) was founded in 1983 and the RCMP Public Complaints Commission opened its doors in 1988. Not surprisingly, the relationship between the Commission and the RCMP was awkward in the early years, but over time, the RCMP began to understand the benefits of an independent oversight body. The cooperation of the RCMP in the complaints process has been essential to the success of the system. In the last 10 years, both organizations have worked toward strengthening that cooperation, to the benefit of the entire public complaints process.
The first significant refinement in the complaints process occurred in the first year of the Commission's existence, when, in response to requests by the Commission, the RCMP began to provide substantially more detail in its responses to complainants.
Other refinements followed. For example, the Commission asserted that it should be the final arbiter of whether a complaint falls within the parameters of Part VII of the RCMP Act, the part of the Act that sets out the Commission's mandate. After considerable debate between the Commission and the RCMP, the RCMP Commissioner agreed that doubtful cases would be referred to the Public Complaints Commission for determination. The RCMP Commissioner also acceded to the Commission's proposal that complainants turned away by the RCMP Commissioner under section 45.36(5) of the Act (complaints considered not appropriate or worthwhile to investigate) should be advised of their right to have the Commission review that decision.
The first significant refinement in the complaints process occurred in the first year of the Commission's existence, when, in response to requests by the Commission, the RCMP began to provide substantially more detail in its responses to complaints.
Meaning of the term "Member of the RCMP"
Another issue the Commission faced in its first decade involved the scope of the definition of "member of the RCMP" under the RCMP Act. The clarification of this definition would determine who could be the subject of a complaint under Part VII of the Act. The Commission considered the question important enough to refer to the Federal Court for determination. The Court's decision confirmed the Commission's opinion that the Commissioner of the RCMP is a "member" and also that a former member can be the subject of a review by the Commission, provided that a complaint is initiated before the member leaves office. This decision was confirmed on appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal and leave to appeal was subsequently denied by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Release of Information about Disciplinary Measures
Sometimes improvements come about as a result of interventions by other parties, such as the courts. For example, the Commission had called for the RCMP to advise complainants about disciplinary measures taken against members who had been the subject of complaints. This was in response to requests by complainants for this kind of information. The RCMP's position was that disclosures of this kind would violate the Privacy Act. The Commission disagreed, and prepared to refer the question to the Federal Court for determination. Before the Commission's reference was to go forward, however, the Ontario Court (General Division) released a decision that settled the question. Southam v. The Attorney General of Canada, issued on November 5, 1997, ruled that disciplinary hearings could not be conducted behind closed doors; rather, they were required to be open to the public. In light of this judgment, the RCMP Commissioner announced that the RCMP would release the details of disciplinary action taken pursuant to a complaint.
Over the last decade, many factors have contributed to advances in RCMP policing, and not least among these has been the work of the Commission.
Improvements in RCMP Policing Practices
Policing policy and practice generally reflect society's values and philosophies, evolving roughly in tandem with the changing times. Over the last decade, many factors have contributed to advances in RCMP policing, and not least among these has been the work of the Commission. Below are some examples of the impact the Commission has had in bringing about changes in RCMP policy and policing practices.
- After one of its early hearings, the Commission recommended that relevant radio communications be preserved when a complaint is filed. Until then, the practice had been to destroy such records after a set period of time. In a later hearing, the Commission commended the RCMP for having followed through on this recommendation, stating that the radio communications presented as evidence in the later hearing had been of invaluable assistance.
- Over the years, the Commission has made numerous recommendations regarding the use of the carotid control technique, a potentially lethal means of restraint (for a description of the carotid control technique, see the first case summaries in Appendix C under "Use of Force"). Partly because of these comments, the RCMP eventually improved training in relation to this technique and limited its use to life- threatening situations.
- As a result of one complaint, the Commission recommended that RCMP members be trained better in dealing with victims of violence, especially children. The RCMP subsequently announced that it was setting up a family violence training program, which would make this specialized training accessible to as many police officers as possible.
- A Commission hearing was held into the complaint of a sexual assault victim who was forcibly taken from British Columbia to the Northwest Territories to testify at her attacker's trial after she failed to comply with a subpoena. The Commissioner of the RCMP agreed with many of the findings and recommendations of the Panel presiding at the hearing. As a result of the unfortunate experience of this complainant, RCMP policy was amended to ensure that recipients of subpoenas from another jurisdiction are given the name of a contact who can explain their obligations (because, in this case, the complainant had been misled). As well, RCMP policy was amended to ensure that an accused and a victim are never transported to
the trial together. Finally, RCMP policy was amended to ensure that anyone in custody for a prolonged period of time (in this case, a reluctant witness) is permitted to attend to their personal hygiene needs since the opportunity to do so had been denied to the victim.
The following charts highlight aspects of the Commission's work over the past decade.
Complaints Received
Since the Commission opened its doors in September 1988, it has received 10,093 complaints from members of the public. This figure does not include general inquiries or complaints and other matters that the Commission must respond to but that fall outside its statutory mandate. As explained earlier, the legislation requires that all complaints be sent initially to the RCMP for investigation. Most of these are resolved to the satisfaction of the parties involved and without further involvement of the Commission.
* The first operational year of the Commission was only 6 months; the organizational and administrative duties of the Commission began on September 30, 1988.
Note: All RCMP totals are of complaints received from the public and the Commission and concluded during the calendar year. Commission totals include only complaints received.
Requests for Review
When a complainant remains dissatisfied with how the RCMP dealt with his or her complaint, the complainant may request that the Commission carry out an independent review of the complaint. Since 1988, the Commission has received 2,441 such requests.
Further Investigations by the RCMP
Since September 1988, the Chair of the Commission has requested and obtained agreement from the Commissioner of the RCMP to conduct a further investigation of 22 complaints. These were instances where the Commission did not consider the initial RCMP investigation satisfactory.
Further Investigations by the Commission
The Commission may decide to conduct its own further investigation after receiving the RCMP Commissioner's report on how the RCMP investigated a complaint. In the last 10 years, the Commission has conducted 43 further investigations.
Public Interest Investigations
Public interest investigations are launched whenever the Chair of the Commission believes that it is advisable in the public interest to do so. Since the Commission's inception, the Chair has initiated 22 such investigations. The outcome of 10 of these led the Chair to institute a public interest hearing.
Hearings
Since 1988, the Commission has undertaken a total of 17 public hearings, 12 of which were initiated because the Commission Chair deemed it advisable in the public interest. The remainder were initiated because the Chair considered the particular complaints warranted further inquiry by way of a public hearing.
Reports and Recommendations
Since 1988, the Chair of the Commission has issued 1,906 review reports. In 1,396 of these reports, the Chair was satisfied with the RCMP's disposition of the complaint. The other 510 reports contain 561 recommendations and the RCMP Commissioner concurred with 481 of them — more than 85 percent of the recommendations.
* Commission is satisfied with RCMP's disposition. Since 1988, the Commission has undertaken a total of 17 public hearings, 12 of which were initiated because the Commision Chair deemed it advisable in the public interest.
Timeliness is of great importance in conducting reviews and issuing reports to complainants. The Commission remains committed to eliminating its backlog of cases.
The priorities set out by the Commission in last year's annual report remain pertinent to its ongoing work:
- Eliminate the backlog of complaint cases by the end of fiscal year 2001.
- Speed up the complaints review process by increasing the flexibility of the Commission's procedures to deal with reviews.
- Develop an alternative dispute resolution method of settling complaints.
- Improve the overall efficiency of Commission hearings.
- Increase public awareness of the responsibilities and activities of the Commission.
The Commission Chair will pay particular attention to two matters of continuing concern:
- RCMP policy on high-speed pursuits; and
- the authorization for and application of force by police officers on duty;
AND
include a third subject of concern:
- the death of detainees in RCMP custody.
... the Commission has decided to develop alternative dispute resolution models for use in dealing with complaints. The Commission expects to launch a pilot project by the fall of 1999.
Backlog of Cases
Timeliness is of great importance in conducting reviews and issuing reports to complainants. The Commission remains committed to eliminating its backlog of cases. The restructuring and streamlining of the Commission made possible a significant increase in the number of review reports issued. The 347 reports issued in 1998-1999 represented a substantial increase over 1997-1998. A substantial backlog remains, however, and the top priority of the Commission will be to continue reducing that backlog. The goal is to eliminate it by the end of fiscal year 2000-2001. At that time, the Commission also expects to reach its target of an average 120-day turnaround to complete review reports.
Speeding up the Complaints Review Process
The Commission also revised and streamlined its internal processes for conducting reviews in 1998-1999. Bottlenecks were reduced or eliminated. A Vice-Chair was appointed to help the Chair prepare review reports. At the same time, quality control and accountability have been strengthened. Further improvements will be made in the coming year, including hiring more staff to carry out reviews and to analyze complaints.
Developing Alternative Dispute Resolution
For some time the Commission has believed that many complainants as well as members of the RCMP would benefit from a less adversarial system of dealing with their disputes. During the past year, the Commission consulted informally with various parties, including experts in the field, about the desirability and feasibility of using alternative dispute resolution techniques early in the complaints process. All parties, including the RCMP, support this idea, so the Commission has decided to develop alternative dispute resolution models for use in dealing with complaints. The Commission expects to launch a pilot project by the fall of 1999.
Streamlining Commission Hearings
Although the Commission wants to keep its processes as simple and accessible as possible, it must also recognize the trend to larger and more complex public hearings. It is, therefore, important to take every opportunity to ensure that public hearings are capably and efficiently conducted. To this end, the Commission will continue training its members and to provide members and staff with opportunities to learn about the most effective ways to conduct such hearings.
Last year the Chair of the Commission issued terms of reference to a public interest hearing, the first time such direction had been given. The Chair intends to continue this practice to provide a general focus for Commission members conducting hearings.
Increasing Public Awareness of the Commission
Public awareness of the existence and role of the Commission has grown over the years, particularly over the past year with the media's coverage of the APEC hearings in Vancouver. The real need for the Commission, however, is to find ways to reach out to specific groups and communities to ensure that they are more fully aware of the services provided by the Commission. To this end, the Commission will develop a comprehensive communications strategy and tailored communications products to raise awareness of the Commission's role in helping to ensure the fair resolution of complaints. The Internet provides one means of reaching out, and the Commission will have a Web site in operation by the summer of 1999.
The real need for the Commission, however, is to find ways to reach out to specific groups and communities to ensure that they are more fully aware of the services provided by the Commission.
High-Speed Chase Study
A study of high-speed chases by police officers is nearing completion, and a report will be issued in autumn 1999.
Use of Force
The report of the public interest investigation into the complaints arising from the disturbances at Saint-Simon and Saint-Sauveur in the Acadian Peninsula of New Brunswick will also be issued in 1999. That report will address the issue of the use of force, including, but not limited to, the use of police dogs, tear gas and issues related to the right to protest guaranteed by the Charter.
The Commission's priorities for 1999-2000 link the improvements of the past year to the Commission's long-term objectives for the years ahead.
The first important goal is to make the Commission more efficient and effective by keeping its procedures simple, increasing its accessibility to the public and ensuring the timely execution and completion of its investigative, review and hearing processes.
The second goal is to generate the type and quality of investigations and recommendations that will enable the RCMP to develop policies and procedures that will help its members maintain the highest professional standards and avoid public complaints.
Chair
Shirley Heafey
Ms. Heafey was appointed Chair of the Commission on October 16, 1997. She served as a member-at-large of the Commission from 1995 until 1997. Prior to her appointment as full-time Chair of the Commission, Ms. Heafey was a barrister and solicitor in private practice in Ottawa and specialized in administrative and human rights law. She was also an ad hoc counsel to the Security Intelligence Review Committee and to the City Solicitor of Ottawa.
Vice-Chair
John Wright
Mr. Wright was appointed as Vice-Chair of theCommission on August 26, 1998. He was a major in the Canadian Armed Forces specializing in military policing. He has been involved in several community criminal justice programs, is a labour arbitrator and mediator, and was the chief federal land claims negotiator in the Yukon Territory. Mr. Wright also currently serves as Chairperson of the Yukon Workers' Compensation Health and Safety Board.
Other Members
British Columbia: Vina Starr
Ms. Starr is a lawyer in private practice. Before opening her own law office, Ms. Starr worked 10 years with the Faculty of Law at the University of British Columbia's Indian Self-Government Program. She has a strong background in native legal issues.
Alternate: E.N. (Ted) Hughes, Q.C.
A former judge of the Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan, Mr. Hughes has served as British Columbia's Deputy Attorney General and as Commissioner of Conflict of Interest for both British Columbia and Yukon. He has chaired numerous task forces and commissions of inquiry, including the Task Force on Legal Aid Services in British Columbia and the Independent Review into the April 1996 riot at Headingley Correctional Institute in Manitoba.
Alberta: Joyce E. Webster
Ms. Webster is the owner/publisher of the Coronation Review, a community newspaper. She is a former president of the Alberta Weekly Newspaper Association and was honoured with Coronation's "Business Person of the Year Award" in 1989.
Saskatchewan: Gerald M. Morin
Mr. Morin is a partner in a law firm in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, and has been a member of the Northern Justice Society since 1989.
Manitoba: Currently Vacant
New Brunswick: Richard Gorham
Mr. Gorham served for many years in Canada's diplomatic service and had numerous postings abroad, including that of ambassador to the People's Republic of China from 1984 to 1987. He was awarded an honourary doctorate of law by the University of New Brunswick in 1988.
Nova Scotia: Currently Vacant
Prince Edward Island: Graham W. Stewart, Q.C.
Mr. Stewart is a partner in a Charlottetown law firm. He is a former Deputy Attorney General of Prince Edward Island and is active in many community organizations.
Newfoundland: Ronald S. Noseworthy, Q.C.
Mr. Noseworthy was admitted to the Bar of Newfoundland in 1969 and is a partner in a law firm in St. John's. He is also the Director of the Salvation Army Grace General Hospital.
Yukon Territory: John Wright
See Vice-Chair
Alternate: Cheryl McLean
Ms. McLean is a board member of several Yukon institutions and is the Executive Assistant of the Council for Yukon Indians.
Northwest Territories: John U. Bayly, Q.C.
Mr. Bayly has practised law in Yellowknife since 1974. He has a special interest in native rights law and has represented several Aboriginal organizations. Mr. Bayly was the first Executive Director of the Northwest Territories Legal Services Board. He chaired the territorial government's Task Force on Spousal Assault in 1984-1985.
Members-at-large
Richard Bell
Mr. Bell is a barrister and solicitor in private practice in Fredericton, New Brunswick. He served several years as Executive Director and Legal Counsel for the New Brunswick Police Commission.
Line Ouellet
Ms. Ouellet was admitted to the Bar of Québec in 1980 and is a member of a Québec City law firm. She has extensive experience in civil, administrative and commercial law, and has published several legal texts.
Organization Chart
Summary of Spending by Standard Object ($000)
|
|
Actual Spending 1998-1999 |
Planned Spending 1999-2000 |
| Salaries,wages and other personnel costs |
1,874
|
1,790
|
| Contributions to employee benefit plans |
370
|
358
|
| Subtotal |
2,244
|
2,148
|
| Other operating expenditures |
3,102
|
2,730
|
| Total net spending |
5,346
|
4,878
|
Use of Force
- During a routine traffic check, the driver of a stopped vehicle became uncooperative and aggressive toward an RCMP officer. The driver was consequently placed under arrest. While being booked in at the detachment, the man continued to be insulting and uncooperative. When the man refused to have his photograph taken, the officer applied the carotid control technique.
- In a second very similar case, a man who had been stopped during a traffic violation was placed under arrest and transported to the detachment. This man was uncooperative and verbally abusive to the arresting officer. When the man failed to provide his personal effects as requested at the book-in counter, the arresting officer administered either a chokehold or the carotid control technique to render the man compliant.
The chokehold involves the officer placing an arm around the subject's neck from behind and applying pressure to the front of the throat. The pressure cuts off the supply of air to the lungs by compressing the windpipe. The use of the chokehold by RCMP officers was banned in 1979. By comparison, the carotid control technique is one in which the officer places an arm around a subject's neck from behind. The elbow forms a "V" directly in front of the subject's chin. The other arm is placed behind the subject's head to control and prevent the head from turning. Pressure is applied with equal force to both sides of the neck, reducing the supply of blood through the carotid arteries, ultimately resulting in the subject's loss of consciousness. The RCMP's national operational policy on the use of the carotid control hold recognizes the technique as being potentially lethal and thus stipulates that the technique may be used only defensively when the life of a member or other person is at stake.
In both of these cases, the Commission found that the officers' use of the chokehold and/or the carotid hold in the circumstances contravened the national policy and constituted an excessive use of force. The Commissioner of the RCMP concurred with the Commission's findings in both cases and promised that appropriate measures would be taken to ensure that the use of force on uncooperative prisoners would comply with the law and policy.
- A man was arrested for assault and transported to the local RCMP detachment. When one of the arresting officers proceeded to search the man during the booking-in procedure, a physical altercation ensued, ending with the officer spraying the man with pepper spray. The man alleged that he was assaulted by the officer and wanted the incident investigated by the Commission with a view to laying criminal charges.
Criminal Code empowers peace officers to use no more force than is necessary in the enforcement and administration of the law. The RCMP officer was acting within the lawful course of his duties when he arrested the man. Given that the man continually and increasingly used threatening and aggressive behaviour, the Commission found that the officer's use of pepper spray to control his behaviour was justified.
Laying of Charges
- A man was admitted to a health care facility after having consumed a substantial amount of alcohol. The attending nurse found a bottle of liquor and what she believed to be a handgun among the man's personal effects. The RCMP was called when the man became very agitated and demanded the return of the liquor and the handgun. On arrival at the scene, an RCMP officer determined the handgun was, in fact, a loaded starting pistol. The man was arrested for possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace, handcuffed and removed from the facility. The man alleged that the officer used excessive force in making the arrest and wrongfully charged him.
Entry into Private Dwellings
- While conducting an investigation into a report that four youths had threatened someone with a knife, RCMP officers attended the home of one of the alleged youths. When the mother of the youth answered the door, two of the officers said they were looking for her daughter, passed through the doorway and proceeded into the home in search of the girl. Although repeatedly requested to leave the premises by the girl's father, the officers did not depart until they had spoken with the girl and determined that she was not the person they were seeking.
In this case, the Commission found that the officers entered the private residence without a warrant, that they were not in "hot pursuit" of a fleeing suspect and that they did not have the occupant's consent to be in the home. Accordingly, they did not have lawful authority to enter the residence. The Commissioner of the RCMP agreed with the finding, issued an apology to the family and had the matter reviewed with the officers to prevent a similar recurrence.
- An RCMP officer attended the home of a man while investigating a parking complaint made by the man's neighbour. When the man answered the door, he was advised of the complaint, whereupon he became very upset and told the officer to leave his property. The officer ignored this request and continued with his investigation, eventually forcibly gaining entry into the man's home.
- In response to a report that a couple had refused to pay a cab fare, the RCMP attended the residence to which the couple had been delivered by the cab. After the officers had repeatedly knocked on the door of the residence and called out to the occupants, the man inside the house yelled to the officers to get off the property. After a further exchange of words, the officers forcibly broke down the door, entered the residence and arrested both the man and woman.
- A dispute developed between a man and the director of a search and rescue team of which he was a member. While discussing the team's activities with another person, the man said, in regard to an upcoming meeting of the team, "Maybe I should just go in with a sawed-off shotgun and blow everyone away." The other person reported these words to the RCMP and also informed the RCMP of the dispute between the man and the director. Two RCMP officers visited the man's residence to ask him to relinquish any firearms in his possession. They did not obtain a search warrant. A friend of the man allowed the officers to enter the residence. After discussion between the officers and the man, the RCMP obtained one firearm in the residence and a second firearm elsewhere. The man contended that the officers had unlawfully entered his residence and had unjustifiably seized his firearms.
Arrest and Detention
- Three RCMP officers attended a family residence in response to a report that a husband was upset and had been verbally abusing his wife for several hours. The RCMP confirmed that, while he had not physically assaulted her, the husband had been verbally abusive toward his wife and that she appeared to fear for her safety. The officers concluded that without their intervention the abusive behaviour would most likely continue and they arrested the man for breach of the peace. The RCMP held him at the detachment overnight and drove him back to his home the next day. The man complained about several aspects of the RCMP conduct in this incident, including that his arrest was improper.
Abuse of Authority
- At a local community pool a dispute erupted between one of the lifeguards on duty and the mother of several children swimming in the pool. Animosity between the disputants and their respective families was long-standing and well known in the community. Immediately after the encounter, the lifeguard's father, an RCMP officer, was informed of the incident. Although not in uniform, the officer was at the detachment and on duty at the time of the call. The officer made his way to the pool where he accused the mother of committing a breach of the peace by not leaving the pool as requested by his daughter. He instructed the mother to leave the pool or she would be placed under arrest.
Demeanour
- Thieves stole several items from a woman's car. The woman believed that the offenders included two young persons who lived nearby. She went to the residence of one of these persons on two occasions to persuade the young person and his parents to return the stolen property. The parents called the RCMP to report that the woman had harassed them and that they were worried the woman would return. Three RCMP officers visited the woman at her residence. After the meeting between them, she complained that they had acted in an intimidating manner, that one of them had threatened to arrest and charge her if she returned to the residence of the young person, that one of them laughed at her and that they did not identify themselves.
Head Office
Mailing Address
RCMP Public Complaints Commission
Service Bag 1722
Station B, Ottawa ON
K1P 0B3
Telephone and Fax
General inquiries: 613-952-1471
Toll-free for complaints: 1-800-267-6637
Fax: 613-952-8045
Western Region Office
Address
RCMP Public Complaints Commission
National Intake Office
P.O. Box 88689
Surrey, BC V3W 0X1
Telephone and Fax
General inquiries: 604-501-4080, 604-501-4091
Toll-free for complaints: 1-800-665-6878
Fax: 604-501-4095
1. Report of the Commission of Inquiry Relating to Public Complaints, Internal Discipline and Grievance Procedures within the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, 1976).
2. Freedom and Security Under the Law, Second Report of the Commission of Inquiry Concerning Certain Activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, 1981), Vol. 2, p. 976.