We need an inquiry into Ottawa shootings

On Oct. 22, 2014, Hamilton’s Cpl. Nathan Cirillo, standing guard at the National War Memorial in Ottawa, was shot to death. The perpetrator, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, then entered the Centre Block of Parliament with his loaded rifle, creating the worst security breach on Parliament Hill in Canada’s history.

Cirillo lost his life, and his family and friends suffered grievously. The repercussions of the event, however, go beyond this. Stephen Harper’s government used this attack, as well as an assault on two soldiers on Oct. 20, 2014 in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, near Montreal, to push Bill C-51 through Parliament. This controversial bill, now law in Canada, gives intelligence agencies increased power and diminishes the civil rights of Canadians.

On Oct. 22, 2014, CBC news anchor Peter Mansbridge said that Canadian journalists, as well as members of Parliament, would relentlessly investigate the attack. This has not happened. Instead, the anniversary of Cirillo’s death has been used as an occasion for flag waving, even though key questions about the case have not been answered.

If the perpetrator had lived, there would have been a public trial and the central facts would have been disclosed. But when security forces killed Zehaf-Bibeau they ended the possibility of a trial.

We have not even had an inquest. Ontario’s chief coroner could have ordered an inquest into the death of Cirillo or the death of Zehaf-Bibeau but has not done so.

In 2015, several police reports related to this case were released, but these did not ever raise the most important questions, much less answer them.

How was this homeless man able to buy the car that was crucial to his crime? Since he was evidently a good planner, why did he take the risk of driving this car for three hours on the highway without licence plates? Since he had a police record that prohibited him from purchasing firearms, how did he get hold of a rifle? Where did he acquire his bullets and knife? Why did police initially confirm that there had been more than one perpetrator? Why did the RCMP commissioner say there had been “no advance warning” when the evidence suggests there were at least six warnings? Why was the B.C. legislature taking precautions because of these warnings while security forces in Ottawa were caught flat-footed? Why did security forces find it necessary to shoot Zehaf-Bibeau 31 times? Was he wearing body armour in Centre Block as some have claimed and, if so, where did he get it?

There is a troubling lack of transparency about the government’s treatment of these events. Canadians have a right know that their physical security and the security of members of their armed forces, such as Cpl. Cirillo, are being honestly addressed. They also have a right to see the evidence in a case where inroads are being made on their civil rights.

The fact that a police killing has prevented a trial from taking place is no excuse for withholding evidence from the public.

We need a public inquiry into the events of Oct. 22, 2014.