DND DECLARES NORMAN GUILTY
No charges had been laid in RCMP probe
The Canadian government has rejected Vice-Admiral Mark Norman’s request for financial assistance with his legal bills because it has determined the senior officer is guilty of disclosing confidential information, despite an year-long RCMP investigation that has not resulted in any charges.
Government officials reached that stunning conclusion — contained in a Justice department letter leaked to Postmedia — even though Norman has not been charged and has not been interviewed by the police, and though no formal internal investigation has been carried out.
Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jon Vance suspended Norman from his job as second-in-command of the Canadian Forces more than a year ago after the RCMP alleged he tipped off Davie Shipbuilding that the federal government was considering delaying a key navy program in which the Quebec firm would convert a commercial ship into a naval supply vessel. Details about the government’s decision leaked to the media, and the resulting embarrassment forced the government to back down on its plans.
Norman and at least one other federal government employee — who remains on the job — have been under RCMP investigation for more than a year, but during an April hearing a judge questioned the validity of some of the allegations the police made against Norman in a sworn information to obtain a search warrant for his home.
Norman’s lawyers made the request for financial assistance, available under a special program for public servants facing legal issues arising from the course of their employment with government.
However, in a letter dated Nov. 20, 2017, and sent to Owen Rees, an Ottawa-based lawyer for Norman, Department of National Defence/ Canadian Forces senior general counsel Michael Sousa wrote, “In disclosing confidential government information respecting a Government of Canada procurement initiative to a third party without authorization, he does not meet the eligibility criteria.”
Sousa also sent his response to Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan and Jody Thomas, the deputy minister. Sousa’s letter does not name that third party, nor provide any evidence to support the claim against Norman.
DND sources tell Postmedia that the department has not conducted a separate investigation into the Norman case; the determination of the vice-admiral’s guilt was made by a small number of senior department officials.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has also predicted that Norman will face trial, though Trudeau’s office has declined to comment on where the prime minister received that information.
Ottawa lawyer Michel Drapeau said Monday that the decision by a small group of bureaucrats to declare Norman guilty when he has not been charged goes against Canada’s Charter of Rights.
“It is not only unfair but it goes against the fundamental principle in this country of a presumption of innocence,” said Drapeau, a retired colonel who has been involved in a number of cases against DND but has no connection to this issue. “At the moment Mark Norman is as innocent as any one of us.”
There is the possibility Norman could apply for compensation later. “Should new evidence or information demonstrate that basic eligibility criteria were met, or should any additional information or events warrant it, there is scope to reconsider decisions of this nature,” DND spokesman Dan Le Bouthillier said Monday.
The alleged leak sprang from a Nov. 19, 2015, meeting of Liberal cabinet ministers who decided to delay the supply ship project after receiving a letter from the Davie’s east coast rival, Irving Shipbuilding.
Irving has denied allegations it was involved in any political meddling.
The Liberals were furious about the leak and called in the RCMP, who eventually focused on Norman.
Norman wasn’t at the cabinet meeting but searches of electronic devices and computers at Davie showed he had exchanged emails with one company official.
But in examining a media request to unseal documents related to the Norman case, Ontario Superior Court Justice Kevin Phillips ruled in April 2017 that it was not unusual that the vice-admiral would be communicating with the company about the ship project.