‘What would be helpful is for the Defence minister and prime minister to show a decisive course of action,’ says Queen’s University professor Stéfanie von Hlatky.

PUBLISHED May 13, 2015, THE HILL TIMES

The public is getting mixed messages about what is actually being done to address sexual harassment and misconduct in the Canadian military and it’s time for the minister and prime minister to step up, say two military experts.

“What would be helpful is for the Defence minister and prime minister to show a decisive course of action,” Queen’s University professor Stéfanie von Hlatky told The Hill Times. “We’ve seen sexual misconduct in other professional organizations and the best course of action is for leaders to acknowledge the problem and present a strategy. Anything short of decisive and proactive action is damaging to the organization at this stage.”

Michel Drapeau, a lawyer and retired military colonel, said he doesn’t believe that there is any movement on dealing with the scathing report from former Supreme Court justice Marie Deschamps on sexual harassment and misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces, and previously told The Hill Times the federal government is “missing in action” on the issue.

“I am anything but convinced or impressed about the purported commitment by the CF leadership to now respond to this worsening crisis of confidence in the military justice system,” he told The Hill Times, noting that he sounded the alarm about under-reporting of sexual assaults at the Royal Military College in 2013 and nothing was done.

“The Canadian military is still equivocating about its [an independent accountability centre] value and necessity to provide a safe trusted external avenue for reporting sexual assault.”

In her report, Ms. Deschamps said that the Canadian Armed Forces fosters a hostile culture that is “disrespectful and demeaning to women. Further, she noted, “there was a broad perception among participants that the senior leadership of the CAF condones sexually inappropriate conduct.”

The year-long review found that addressing sexual harassment and misconduct “is not a priority for CAF leaders” and that “senior leaders are perceived as ‘burying the issues’ and as being ‘desensitized.’”

Chief of Defence Staff Tom Lawson ordered the external review last year when Maclean’s reported that there were approximately 178 incidents of sexual misconduct within the military investigated every year. The House Defence Committee questioned him about it at the time, but he said he needed more information.

Ms. Deschamps was appointed to lead the review, with a mandate to look into “the extent to which Canadian Armed Forces members report alleged incidents of sexual misconduct or sexual harassment and if applicable, any reasons why reporting may not occur, including the role of military culture and the chain of command as it relates to the reporting of incidents.”

In response to a CBC report stating that Mr. Lawson issued an order to top military brass to ignore the recommendations coming from the Deschamps report before it was even released, Mr. Lawson said that he was “disappointed” by it because “we clearly recognize the seriousness of this issue and are committed to responding to it.”

In a lengthy statement, Mr. Lawson said he proactively assembled a team to examine the final report and develop an action plan to deal with it. “The directive I issued for this included planning assumptions, provided to Major-General [Chris] Whitecross to guide her work. These planning assumptions should in no way be viewed as restrictions or orders for her to ignore the recommendations of the final report. Any such suggestion is quite simply false.”

Mr. Drapeau said he disagrees with the chief of defence staff because Ms. Deschamps “was purposely prevented from reviewing any aspect of the military justice system which reports directly the minister of National Defence.” He also noted: “One of the planning assumptions issued by the CDS also clearly places ‘out of bounds’ the entire military justice system including the military police which has recently been the subject of severe criticism about their competence and capacity to investigate serious crimes. Yet, as Ms. Deschamps has reported, an overwhelming majority of victims of sexual misconduct do not report these instances primarily because they do not trust either the chain of command or the military justice system.  Most obviously, the military justice system has become a ‘sacred cow’ for the military elite despite the fact that, at its core, the Code of Service Discipline was never designed to be the court of first resort for the prosecution of offences under the Criminal Code of Canada.”

When he released the Deschamps report, Mr. Lawson said he accepted two of 10 recommendations and the others “in principle,” which had to be investigated further. He said specifically on the recommendation for an independent accountability centre to take charge of sexual harassment and assault claims that he accepts it “in principle” and that Ms. Whitecross is “actively examining these models to develop recommendations for what will be the best fit in Canada.” He said they are looking at the Australian and U.S. models, both of which, however, still have a strong link to the military chain of command.

“This might mean, for example, something that draws from the Australian model, which empowers victims, but also strengthens the chain of command’s ability to lead and care for the well-being of its members, and reports regularly to their chief of the defence force through the Chiefs of Service Committee. We are also looking at the U.S. system, which is led by a two-star general who reports to an under-secretary of defense.”

“To be absolutely clear, we have accepted this recommendation in principle, and Major-General Whitecross is now actively examining these models to develop recommendations for what will be the best fit in Canada.”

Mr. Drapeau said, however, that they don’t need to travel to other countries to find a solution. An easy, made-at-home one could include amending section 70 of the National Defence Act to remove jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute sexual assaults from the military.

“Such a change could be done overnight by a Conservative government who currently enjoys a majority in both Houses of Parliament,” he told The Hill Times, adding, “I reject the notion that anything will be done to ‘empower victims.’”

Ms. von Hlatky said that while it’s important to look at what our allies are doing on the issue, more needs to be done to collect qualitative and quantitative data on what’s happening in the Canadian context.

“We need to address some of the underlying causes of underreporting, such as fear of negative professional repercussions and social exclusion. An independent accountability centre is one model and there are others the government and the Armed Forces can explore, but what isn’t working is the status quo,” she told The Hill Times.

“I would expect greater political leadership to set some guidance on the way forward. So far, this has not happened. As would be the case with any organization, the leaders should take ownership of the problem and demonstrate their commitment to fixing it. It’s not constructive to downplay the report’s findings or to only accept the recommendations ‘in principle.’ It comes off as defensive.”

Meanwhile, in response to a question from NDP MP Jack Harris (St. John’s East, Nfld.) during Question Period today on whether Defence Minister Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Alta.) would “guarantee that the Canadian Armed Forces will establish an independent body to handle sexual misconduct, yes or no,” Mr. Kenney said “Yes.”

In his statement, Mr. Lawson said the military’s response has been clear. “We will remain resolute in our commitment to addressing it. Inappropriate sexual behaviour has no place in today’s Canadian Armed Forces, and we will take strong steps to initiate positive change.”

Ms. von Hlatky also said that while emphasis has been put on the senior leadership to address the issues, “I would encourage military professionals at all ranks to decide how they will support positive change in the organization. It’s important for every service member to take a stance in favour of eradicating sexual misconduct.”