Canadian Forces drops secrecy in suicide case
Canada’s a democracy, not a dictatorship where high-handed conduct might be tolerated, writes Shaun Fynes .
The Canadian Forces has retreated in its attempt to put a cloak of secrecy over its response to concerns raised by a special commission looking into the suicide of an Afghan veteran.
The move comes after the Citizen reported earlier this week that the military and the Department of National Defence had slapped a “secret” order on its response to the high-profile Military Police Complaints Commission report on the 2008 suicide of Afghanistan war veteran Cpl. Stuart Langridge.
The “Protected B” designation over the response would have meant that neither Langridge’s family nor the public would ever know whether the military had either accepted or implemented the recommendations that emerged from the commission’s public inquiry.
The commission has gone to Federal Court to try to force the military to back down from its position.
But on Friday, Col. Rob Delaney, the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal and commander of military police, said he was lifting the “Protected B” designation and that the military’s response to the recommendations would be publicly available Tuesday. He said it was never his intention to keep his organization’s response secret.
Delaney said he was instead trying to make the point to the Military Police Complaints Commission that they should include his response within the report itself, not as an appendix to the main document.
“How it was going to be included in the report is the issue here,” Delaney told the Citizen.
Delaney denied he was trying to dictate to the independent commission how it should do its job. “It’s not me trying to dictate — it’s my understanding of the intent of the legislation and the process we’re following.”
Delaney apologized for the grief he has caused Langridge’s parents, Shaun and Sheila Fynes. “It was certainly not intended to offend the Fynes family,” he said. “It was not intended to cloud this in secrecy.”
Sheila Fynes has called the military and government’s actions reprehensible. “It’s an example of how we’ve been treated all along,” she said.
“In Canada we are an open democracy, not some dictatorship where that type of high-handed conduct might be tolerated,” she added in a statement released Friday.
Military Police Complaints Commission spokesman Michael Tansey said Delaney’s decision will now allow the commission to distribute the military’s response when it releases its report on Tuesday.
Langridge, an Afghan war veteran who had struggled with depression and alcohol and drug abuse, committed suicide at Canadian Forces Base Edmonton on March 15, 2008, shortly before his 29th birthday.
His parents claim that he was dismissed as a drunk and ill-treated by his superiors when, in fact, he was suffering from what are now widely recognized as symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder — an illness that has affected many veterans of the Afghanistan conflict. Langridge, once a highly effective, dedicated soldier, had attempted suicide several times before his death.
The military never told the family about the existence of a suicide note, which was addressed to them, withholding it from them for 14 months.
The Canadian Forces had also sent Fynes a legal letter forbidding her from contacting the military as she tried to sort out her son’s estate. It has also steadfastly refused to give the Fyneses a complete copy of an internal Board of Inquiry into Langridge’s death.
Controversy over the Langridge hearings reached the floor of the House of Commons, with former Defence minister Peter MacKay citing solicitor-client privilege when he refused to allow the Military Police Complaints Commission access to potentially crucial documents.
Defence insiders say the military’s initial refusal to make the response public had the full backing of the Conservative government.
Michel Drapeau, the Ottawa lawyer who represents the Fyneses, said Delaney’s explanation doesn’t make sense. Drapeau noted the military could have dropped their secrecy designation on their response any time but only did so when the commission went to court and the news media started reporting on the issue.
“When they had no place to hide they finally backed down,” said Drapeau. “They were trying to undercut the commission but it failed this time.”
Liberal defence critic Joyce Murray had called on Defence Minister Jason Kenney to support the family and reverse the secrecy decree.
“These actions are legally wrong, and act to deny the family of Corporal Langridge, and indeed all Canadians, the right to know exactly how the government plans to respond to this heartbreaking tragedy,” Murray noted in a letter she sent to the minister.
Kenney’s office did not respond to the Citizen for comment.
But on Thursday, Foreign Affairs Minister Rob Nicholson defended the government’s actions. He said the military and Conservative government considered the interests of the family when it decided to make the response secret.
In Canada we are an open democracy, not some dictatorship where that type of high-handed conduct might be tolerated.
As parents of the late Cpl. Stuart Langridge, my wife and I were looking forward to our trip to Ottawa for the release next Tuesday of the Military Police Complaints Commission Final Report into the three military police investigations stemming from the death of our son on March 15, 2008 in Edmonton, Alberta.
Stuart had been ordered to report to his unit from a psychiatric hospital where he had taken himself, desperately seeking help for symptoms of post-traumatic stress and depression. Only days later he took his own life. Now, seven years later and with the last four spent in search of the truth by the Commission, we have again been astounded by the continuing and unmitigated obfuscation. We have learned that the military tried to keep secret its formal response to the Commission. On Friday, Defence Minister Jason Kenney reportedly said it would be released after all. Since they had been provided with an exclusive advance copy of that report in May of 2014, it was surprising to learn only now of this latest attempt to suppress the truth and avoid public scrutiny and accountability of the facts.
In Canada we are an open democracy, not some dictatorship where that type of high-handed conduct might be tolerated. Canadians have a right to expect transparency and accountability from our government institutions.
This new wrangling to hide the truth, much as it angered us, was just the latest milestone on our journey. It is profoundly disappointing that our government, our military, their leadership or some combination is so quick to avoid ownership or accountability for their actions. A quotation from Sir Liam Donaldson appears to be appropriate “To err is human, to cover up is unforgivable, and to fail to learn is inexcusable.”
The systemic failures that resulted in our son’s death need to be explored, identified and then be seen to be corrected in order to assure better medical outcomes for those who follow. It should not be about protecting “the brand” of the Canadian Forces, but about actually caring for those who have stepped up to serve.
Sadly, I have come to believe that when our young men and women volunteer for military service they unwittingly surrender some of their rights as Canadians. They can, for example, be ordered into harm’s way, not be accommodated for acquired disabilities, or simply just be sent whenever, wherever and for however long. By accepting relinquishment of some of their rights that others take for granted, members of our military seemingly devalue their own human worth. Ironically, instead of cherishing their devotion to this country, we seem to repay them with patronizing platitudes when they are injured or in need as a result of their service. They are relegated to valuation as an unnecessary expense or as pieces of equipment that can simply be discarded if damaged.
We had actively, if mistakenly, encouraged our son to pursue a military career because we had previously perceived the army as being representative of honour, integrity and courage. We had believed in the military ethos and trusted that the chain of command would never squander a soldier’s life. Our first-hand and bitter experience has disabused of that thinking and now we advocate for those who wear or did wear uniforms to receive full measure for their service. Our formerly proud military is broken if this how they devalue their personnel and deliberately marginalize their families.
Absolute power apparently does corrupt and that is at the root of the problem. Soldiers are subjected to a closed military justice system which in our experience protects the chain of command and political masters and is impermeable to civilian oversight. As a result, the military is not answerable or open in their actions. It is unclear if they are simply rogue or falling on their sword when their conduct has become arrogant and egregious. The non-combat death of our son should have been investigated by the police of local jurisdiction, not by the military, followed by a coroner’s inquest. By every best practice any real investigation requires arm’s length independence and protection from even unconscious bias. An investigation should simply be to determine the truth of the matter in review. However capable or skilled military investigators might believe themselves to be, they are not competent to investigate such deaths because they are themselves part of the military. Elsewhere we hold expectation that for the public to be trusting of the results, police forces are no longer deemed competent to investigate themselves.
We still also await formal release of a military board of inquiry report from 2009. We have however seen a draft copy that was appended to a military police report and could not comprehend their determination that Stuart could not have acquired PTSD while patrolling in Afghanistan. Since Stuart was employed within Recce Squadron, whose mission is to advance deep in the enemy territory, he had spent his time outside the wire. It is apparent that our son was held to a different standard in a number of areas. Our dismay is complete and our distrust of the military well earned.
I would call upon those in government or in command within the military to stop hiding from failure, but to learn and move on to constantly seek to be better tomorrow than they are today. In closing, we are deeply grateful to those members of the veterans community and others whose generosity and kindness has borne us up through our ordeal.
I would call upon those in government or in command within the military to stop hiding from failure, but to learn and move on to constantly seek to be better tomorrow than they are today.