Stephanie Larocque

About me:

Written By: Stephanie Larocque

There has been nothing so transparently self-serving as the manipulation of the ongoing House Committee investigation into the possible torture of prisoners turned over to Afghani forces by Canadian forces. Between attempts to block witnesses, smear witnesses, and the withholding of relevant documentation, the only thing that is absolutely clear is that this committee will never be the venue that fully resolves the issue. But behind all of the rhetoric, I think that a simple recitation of the timeline as documented thus far in the press is instructive:.

2005 December Canada in Kandahar signs its agreement to hand over its Detainees to the local government.

2006 April, diplomat Richard Colvin starts work in Kandahar and later Kabul

2006 May Richard Colvin starts broadcasting information by email about the torture of transferred detainees

2006 May 12 Steven Harper says the detainees won't be harmed but has no assurances from the Afghans.

2006 August Steven Harper and his Ministers deny the government has received information about the torture of Detainees.

2007 March, Minister O'Connor says Canada does not need to monitor detainees since the Red Cross does it for us. The Red Cross refutes that statement and the Minister had to apologize for deceiving Parliament. 2007 April 23 Globe and Mail reports that 30 prisoners were mistreated, and that Foreign Affairs (CFA) received a report from its diplomats. CFA flatly denied such a report existed. 2007 April 26, Defense Minister O'Connor announces Canada has now got an agreement so it can visit the local detention centers. Human rights groups request the ICC start an investigation. 2007 May 3 Mackay etc informs the Federal court that there is now an agreement in place in addition to that of 2005, in response to Amnesty International's request to stop the transfers. ..2007.. Summer, Canadian government redefines information about detainees as part of national security, removing it from reports and FOIs. 2007 October 29 LaPresse reports detainees are still being tortured based on interviews with prison bosses and rights groups. 2007 November 4, In secret, Government finds credible evidence of torture, halts transfers but does not inform Parliament or the public. 2007 November 13 Amnesty International report slams Canada for incompetent/biased follow ups of detainees and calls for transfers to be suspended. 2007 November 14 Minister Bernier admits one detainee may have been tortured/abused.

So let's consider this with some simple observations. Mr. Harper, in early 2006, stated outright that we had no assurances that detainees would not be tortured, but nothing was done to try and mitigate the possibility. Within three months he was being questioned on reports - possibly Colvin's - that had reached the press relating to the mistreatment of prisoners. Harper denied receiving such reports, but again we have to note that no attempts to investigate the allegations were initiated despite it being raised in the press. Indeed, even five months later the Minister of Defense clearly states the government position remains that Canada has no need to monitor the detainees. Not no desire, but no need. It is a month later - over a year after the transfers began, and with mounting pressure underway - that the government finally sought and received permission to visit the detention centers.

Fast forward to today, and the current Minister of Defense keeps insisting that no mistreatment happened, and that he can be certain of this because we have no proven, documented cases until November of 2007.

I'm sorry, but stating that it couldn't have happened over the year when we turned a willfully blind eye to the detainees is fatuous logic. It's like saying that my kids can't possibly have been sneaking extra treats while also admitting that I never actually check the cookie jar, and hiding the receipts for how many bags of Fudgeos I've had to buy to refill the jar.

The real truth is that we were diligently not trying to find out the fate of our detainees. That we weren't taking the reports of abuses seriously and immediately trying to resolve the allegations. That 2006 was a year where the Prime Minister was questioned repeatedly on the subject but we never made the slightest effort to have the issue investigated.

We have Mr. Colvin, our diplomat on the spot who sent out so many emails that his boss told him to stop the paper trail and phone it in instead, but according to the highest levels of both Defense and Foreign Affairs no one in any power actually read the emails. These emails are now deemed so detailed that their release would be a national security risk. We have Colvin's boss (Mulroney) claiming that the request to stop writing reports on the subject was not an attempt to muzzle the diplomat, but who also admits to having heard about prisoners being tortured at the time from corroborating sources. And yet we still must believe that this information never made it up the ladder. Mulroney also stated that he had not known if the reports of tortured prisoners that he had received from multiple sources were of prisoners transferred by Canadian troops to the Afghanis, but he also admits that he has no knowledge if they weren't, and that nothing much beyond reading the reports was done to investigate this question. Indeed he notes that we didn't even keep a record of the names of the detainees that we turned over until after the visiting agreement was made in 2007, which presumes that cross-referencing torture reports and prisoner names from 2006 may well be impossible.

And that is the crux of the problem. We know we sent people to those jails. We know that people in those jails were tortured. What we don't know is if any of the people we sent were amongst those tortured. We know that we didn't try and find out for nearly a year despite multiple sources raising it as a serious concern. And what is absolutely certain is that, under the circumstances, the government opinion that it couldn't have happened to our prisoners is simply not believable. Of course it could have happened. The system itself was set up with a total lack of accountability, and every warning raised was ignored. Willfully.

This government's position on it is all too clear: We didn't know. We didn't care. We didn't bother looking in to it. And we don't want anyone to look into the records of 2006 now

But let's be honest - it probably happened. You know it. I know it. Everybody knows it, and according to a recent poll - 70% of us would be appalled if it were proved true. And that 70% is exactly why Harper is refusing all requests for a proper inquiry. After Gomery, the potential fallout from a full and proper independent investigation is too well known to all. The notion that Harper would risk his party to suffer on that same crucible over this issue is wishful thinking at best. Because at the very best, an investigation would accuse Canada of willful blindness. At worst, names would be named and the Conservatives as a group would be as damaged as the Liberals were by Adscam.

And that is why we will never get the investigation that this issue merits. Why we will never get the answers we deserve and why our country will remain under the cloud of suspicion of having allowed torture to happen on our watch. Mr. Harper didn't get where he is by taking risks like this, and he's not going to risk his career or his party in that way either. He's just not that dumb.

Where there is smoke there is fire, and where there is a politician stonewalling there is a truth that he doesn't want you to hear, and a hope that he can survive your suspicion when he knows that he wouldn't survive your certainty.

Politically Sound is a light hearted look at politics and the world around us.

Powered by ShareThis

Some thing new to talk about...

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis

Powered by ShareThis