ARCHIVED - Military Police Complaints Commission - Report

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Chairperson’s Message

I am pleased to present the Military Police Complaints Commission’s (the Commission) 2009-10 Departmental Performance Report (DPR).

The Commission was established by the Government of Canada to provide independent civilian oversight of the Canadian Forces Military Police, effective December 1, 1999. This was executed by an amendment to the National Defence Act, Part IV of which sets out the full mandate of the Commission and how complaints are to be handled. As stated in Issue Paper No. 8, which accompanied the Bill that created the Commission, its role is “to provide for greater public accountability by the military police and the chain of command in relation to military police investigations.” On December 1, 2009, the Commission celebrated a decade of oversight leadership and service.

The Commission identified two priorities in its 2009-2010 Report on Plans and Priorities: improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process and improving governance. I am pleased the Commission has effectively addressed these priorities while responding to significant workload demands, increasingly complex cases, and challenges associated with the Afghanistan Public Interest Hearings.

During 2009-10, the Commission delivered its Outreach Program to five (5) Canadian Forces bases to increase awareness in the military police community regarding the Commission’s mandate and complaints’ resolution processes. Through these visits, further insight is also gained into the many challenges faced by the Military Police.

The Commission also took a number of important initiatives to further reinforce the effectiveness of its operations. These initiatives included: collaborations in a working group with representatives of other Administrative Tribunals resulting in the development and implementation of common protocols for the website publication of tribunal decisions; an operations workshop for investigators, legal staff, registry and other operational staff to review current procedures, best practices, professional standards and opportunities to further strengthen its operations; and a management review to assess the information technology environment and the adequacy of systems and procedures.

On December 11, 2009, I was honoured to have been appointed Acting Chairperson of the Commission. The Commission’s performance and accomplishments are a reflection of the dedication and professionalism of Commission staff. I very much appreciate their exceptional efforts and support. I would also like to recognize the ongoing contributions of the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal, professional standards staff and the broader military police community to the oversight work of the Commission.

---

Glenn Stannard
Chairperson
September 16, 2010

Section I – Departmental Overview

1.1 Summary Information

Raison d’être

On behalf of all Canadians, the Military Police Complaints Commission (the Commission) exists to provide greater public accountability by the military police and the chain of command in relation to military police activities. The Commission derives its mandate from Part IV of Canada’s National Defence Act.

Responsibilities

Anyone, including civilians, may make a complaint about military police conduct including those individuals not directly affected by the subject matter of the complaint. Such complaints are handled in the first instance by the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal (CFPM) and the Commission monitors the CFPM’s investigations. The Commission may at any time during a CFPM investigation, assume responsibility for the investigation or call a public hearing if it is deemed in the public interest to do so. Complainants can request the Commission review the complaint if they are not satisfied with the results of the CFPM’s investigation or the disposition of the complaint.

A member of the military police conducting or supervising an investigation is also able to complain about improper interference encountered in the conduct of an investigation. The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over complaints of interference.

The Commission ensures the military police complaints process is accessible, transparent and fair to all concerned. The Commission, in its review of conduct or interference complaints, identifies and makes recommendations regarding opportunities for improvement, be it in the conduct of individual military police members or in systemic areas such as the policies and procedures that govern the conduct of all military police. These recommendations for change, when implemented, support the military police in maintaining the highest standards of professional conduct and in assuring the integrity of military police investigations. The effective discharge of the oversight activity by the Commission also provides assurance to members of the Canadian Forces, and ultimately to all Canadians, that they are being served by a military police service of the highest quality.

The Commission is a micro-agency. Operating out of Ottawa, the Commission currently has 19 full time employees (FTEs) and a program budget of $3.4 million. As a result of the Public Interest Hearing and the Federal Court application, the Commission requested and received an additional $5.0 million over three fiscal years ending in 2010-11.

The Commission is one of eight distinct but related organizations in the Defence Portfolio. It reports to Parliament through the Minister of National Defence. However, all members of the Commission are civilians, and totally independent of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces. 

Strategic Outcome and Program Activity Architecture

The Commission has one strategic outcome: to ensure conduct complaints against the military police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner, and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.

Program Activity Architecture

Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution program	Improving Governance

Strategic Outcome
Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.

Complaints Resolution	Internal Services

1.2 Summary of Performance

Financial and Human Resources  

2009-10 Financial Resources ($ thousands)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending
$6.0M	$7.0M	$4.7M
2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned	Actual	Difference
22 FTEs	14 FTEs	8 FTEs

As a result of the Public Interest Hearing and the Federal Court application, the Commission requested and received an additional $5.0 million over three fiscal years: $1.2 million in 2008-09; $2.6 million and 3 FTEs in 2009-10; and $1.2 million and 2 FTEs in 2010-11.

Strategic Outcome: Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.
Performance Indicator	Target	2009-10 Performance
1. Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process	Ongoing	Successfully Met
2. Improving governance	Ongoing	Successfully Met

Program Activity	2008-09 Actual Spending ($ thousands)	2009-10 ($ thousands)				Alignment to Government of Canada Outcome
		Main Estimates	Planned Spending	Total Author- ities1	Actual Spending2
Complaints Resolution	$3,054	$4,480	$4,480	$5,243	$3,507	Maintaining safe and secure communities in Canada and abroad
Internal Services	$1,018	$1,493	$1,493	$1,748	$1,169

Notes:

1. Includes $1.018M received in the Supplementary Estimates primarily for the costs of conducting the Public Interest Hearing and of responding to judicial challenges to the Commission’s mandate in Federal Court.
2. Includes $1.395M spent on the Public Interest Hearing and Federal Court costs.

Contribution of Priorities to Strategic Outcome

Operational Priorities	Type	Performance Status	Linkage to Strategic Outcome
1. Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process. Resolution of complaints in a timelier manner and the provision of meaningful recommendations increase the likelihood that the specific and systemic issues identified for change will be agreed upon and the improvements recommended will be implemented. The changes made will improve the quality of military policing and contribute directly to maintaining the confidence and support of those the Military Police serve.	Ongoing	Successfully Met	Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces. The Commission can do no better than to have 100% of its recommendations accepted. However, the Commission will continue work with its partners in DND and the CF to identify additional opportunities for collaboration that may further streamline the complaints resolution process and contribute to the quality of recommendations made.
		100% of the Final Reports’ recommendations were accepted by the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal (CFPM).
Management Priorities	Type	Performance Status	Linkage to Strategic Outcome
2. Improving governance The Commission continues to seek ways to work more efficiently, in compliance with the requirements of both the Commission and the central agencies, while ensuring its resources are applied in a manner to achieve the best results. The Commission will continue to review and strengthen its staffing, succession planning, and knowledge retention practices wherever needed in order to ensure the continued effective delivery of Commission services.	Ongoing	Successfully Met 100% completed Various initiatives were undertaken including: implementation of 21 management and accountability policy frameworks; implementation of recommendations from 3 audits on: contracting for professional services; expenditure controls of high risk payments; and travel and hospitality. 2 management reviews were undertaken: one on Information Technology and one on the Performance Measurement Framework. Staffing, contracting and service agreements with other government departments provided the Commission with a relatively stable, qualified, and experienced work force.	Provide effective governance to assist in the effectiveness of the complaints resolution process. Provide resources and expertise to efficiently and effectively deliver programs and services of the MPCC in order to meet its mandate.

Risk Analysis

Capacity and Timeliness

The Commission continues to address issues that are both unique and complex. In addition, the time required to conduct investigations and to complete the necessary research and analysis is increasing. The complexity of the cases is resulting in thousands of pages of evidence and the need to identify, schedule and interview multiple witnesses across Canada and abroad. All of these factors contribute to extending the duration of an investigation and the length of time required to write Interim and Final Reports. The additional time involved increases the costs. The Commission will continue to examine opportunities for other options such as the use of technology in order to identify further cost and time savings.

Resources

The Commission is not resourced to conduct large Public Interest Hearings. Prior to 2008-09, the Commission had one public interest hearing which cost approximately $100 thousand and was paid for out of the existing resource base. However, the estimated cost of the public interest hearing regarding the handling of Afghanistan detainees was beyond the existing resources of the Commission. As a result, the Commission sought and obtained additional funds over the three year period ending in 2010-11 to cover the one-time costs of both the Public Interest Hearing and Federal Court challenges. Should such a requirement arise once again, additional funding will again need to be obtained and perhaps consideration of a permanent increase in its reference level.

Collaboration

The Commission will continue its practice of ongoing discussions with the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal and senior military police staff to address and resolve issues and even further strengthen the complaints resolution process. It will also continue its mutually beneficial collaborations with other government departments and agencies, professional associations and intra-government affiliations.

Recommendations for improvements in the Commission’s Interim and Final reports are not binding on the Canadian Forces and the Department of National Defence. The Commission will continue to foster quality working relationships in order to facilitate the conduct of the investigations and the likelihood that recommendations will be accepted and implemented. For the 4th year in a row, 100% of the Commission’s recommendations have been accepted for implementation by the CFPM.

Human Resource Planning

The success the Commission has achieved is due in large part to its knowledgeable and stable workforce. But like all small and micro- agencies, it is difficult to retain employees when, for the most part, the size and flatness of the organization limit opportunities for advancement.

The Commission undertook a review of its organization structure and amended it to ensure adequate succession planning, provide opportunities for advancement and realigned positions to stabilize the Commission in areas such as the Registry, Information Technology, legal, and Finance. The Commission will continue to stress effective human resource planning, anticipating potential staff turnover and developing staffing strategies to help ensure that knowledge is retained and vacancies are quickly filled.

Expenditure Profile

The Commission works effectively with a reference level of $3.4M to support its program activities regarding Complaints Resolution and Internal Services which also includes the Office of Chairperson.

Due to the Afghanistan Public Interest Hearing, the financial resources of the Commission have increased for the three year period ending 2010-11. As mentioned earlier, the Commission sought and received additional funding to address the Public Interest Hearing and the related Federal Court applications.

Almost the entire amount can be attributed to the costs of the Public Interest Hearing and the Federal Court challenges . The actual costs charged to the Hearing were $1.077 million; the remainder of the costs, in excess of $300 thousand, were absorbed by the Commission.

The spending trends set out below show the changes and identify the costs related to the Public Interest Hearing.

Spending Trends

[D]

Voted and Statutory Items ($ thousands)

Vote or Statutory Item	Truncated Vote or Statutory Wording	2007-08	2008-09	2009-10
		Actual Spending	Actual  Spending	Main Estimate	Actual Spending
20	Program expenditures	2,726	3,627	5,665	4,408
(S)	Contributions to employee benefit plans	183	240	308	268
	Total	2,909	3,867	5,973	4,676

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page