Saturday, January 24, 2004


Prompted by comments to this post below by Dennis (who happens to be my Dad), in which I am referred to as "an RCPM apologist" I have this to say.

I certainly do not support the RCMP investigation of Ottawa Citizen reporter Juliet O'Neill, which included the search of her home. These tactics serve to intimidate the press and its sources and infringe on its ability to act freely. The recent operations of the force with regards to the entire Maher Arar affair serve to remind us of why the RCMP was relieved of its intelligence gathering responsibilities twenty years ago. It is becoming increasingly clear that Canada's 2001 anti-terror legislation, which returned certain intelligence powers to the RCMP, needs to be reviewed.

The Prime Minister recently indicated as much. But what was the PM doing commenting on the RCMP raid and investigation? As Dennis pointed out in the comments, since when does the Prime Minister comment on an ongoing investigation of federal officiers? This is certainly bizarre. I happen to agree with the PM's opinion in this case but that doesn't make it right for him to speak out in such a manner. Is he going to make a habit of commenting on such investigations? Are on-going Supreme Court cases next?

What is obvious about this entire fiasco is that a public inquiry into the entire Arar affair and the operation of our security services since September 11, 2001 is absolutely necessary. James Travers believes that the search of O'Neill's house makes an inquiry inevitable. I hope he's right.

Posted by Matthew @ 2:54 a.m.