Review of the RCMP's Public Complaint Records
Part One: Analysis of the Review of the Record
In accordance with RCMP policy AM XII.2- Public Complaints, a public complaint cannot be disposed of informally if:
- a complaint alleges serious misconduct; or
- a situation involves a subject member being arrested or a warrant to arrest being issued.
The term "serious misconduct" is not defined by the RCMP and does not match any of their 16 complaint allegation categories listed on Form 4110. This rather ambiguous and subjective term can lead to confusion and can result in public complaint allegations being miscategorized and inappropriately disposed of. This is especially true of "Improper Use of Force" allegations.
The Commission maintains that improper use of force allegations should, typically, not be informally resolved and that a formal complaint investigation should be initiated. Unfortunately, the Commission saw a number of improper use of force allegations that should have been classified as serious misconduct that were subsequently resolved informally.
During the analysis of the documents related to the Review of the Record, the Commission noticed that 8% of the total informal resolutions dealt with allegations of improper use of force and that 14% of all use of force allegations resulted in an informal resolution. Further broken down, just under half of all allegations (48%) of improper use of force complaints that were informally resolved were disposed of in a manner that the Commission deemed inappropriate. Improper resolutions for use of force allegations occurred most often in "G" and "V" Divisions.
While there may be cause to informally resolve less serious allegations of improper use of force allegations, such as a member putting handcuffs on too tight or a person being arrested, in general, the very nature of this type of allegation is not conducive to this type of resolution, as it undermines police oversight by eliminating any outside agency review. Some of the informal resolutions for improper use of force have allegedly involved the deployed or threatened deployment of a conducted energy weapon and the use of pepper spray. Clearly, in these cases the Commission does not believe that these allegations should be informally resolved because they involve weapons or intermediate devices.
Further, even when the force resulted in an identified injury that required medical attention, the Commission still saw allegations of improper use of force informally resolved. The Commission's concern is that these types of informal resolution undermine accountability and that it is only privy to this information due to the Review of the Record Project.
When the Commission received information that an improper use of force allegation had been informally resolved, the Commission either requested further information to determine the seriousness of the allegation or noted that given the information on Form 4110 an informal resolution was not the most appropriate disposition of the public complaint. The RCMP's response to this has been generally good; however, there has been reluctance at times to send a complaint record back to the divisions for further information or investigation and to obtain information as to how the RCMP is going to act on the Commission's requests.
In one case there was no information related to the complaint other than the identification of the complaint allegation categories and the statement that there had been an "informal resolution". No other details were provided for on Form 4110. The Commission went back to the RCMP noting its concern and requested further information in order to determine if in fact the disposition of the complaint was appropriate. The RCMP responded with, "Although the details on the 4110 are brief, they are sufficient and self-explanatory" and the Commission's request for further information was not actioned.32
In another case, two separate "Improper Use of Force" complaints involving the same member within a short period of time were informally resolved. The Commission questioned the validity of these informal resolutions and expressed its concern about a member having two such complaints within such a short period of time involving very similar circumstances. No response from the RCMP was forthcoming, even after repeated follow-ups. However, while there was no initial feedback from the RCMP with respect to these two complaints, the Commission has since learned that a District Advisory NCO went to the detachment to address both complaints and although the matter was improperly disposed of by way of an informal resolution, it was correctly investigated by the RCMP.
Conversely, other times the Commission questioned an informal resolution the RCMP Headquarters agreed that it should not have been disposed of in such a manner and requested that the appropriate division conduct a proper investigation. In one such case a complaint was re-investigated and the Final Report (RCMP) noted: "[...] the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP advised that they would not accept the informal resolution and requested that your allegations by fully investigated."
In a similar case an informal resolution was sent back to the RCMP; it was determined at the divisional level that "[t]his matter was not investigated properly; it is an incomplete/inadequate investigation." The file was reopened and a further investigation was initiated.
One division even went so far as to conduct an internal audit of the informal resolutions for improper use of force complaints to determine if indeed they adhere to RCMP policy. The results of this review are still pending.
The foregoing shows the value of civilian review of the entire public complaint system and how integrity and trust in such a system by members of the public can be enhanced through independent vigilance.
31 A more fulsome quality assessment report of all the dispositions will be released by the Commission in the near future.
32 Pursuant to the RCMP Act the Commission Chair can initiate a complaint in situations deemed appropriate. While an option in this case, the Commission chose to continue working with the RCMP on this issue informally.