Montreal Gazette

DND tried to hide Norman documents, witnesses say Also, Harper willing to waive cabinet secrecy

- BRIAN PLATT

• Lawyers for Vice-Admiral Mark Norman excoriated Crown prosecutor­s and the government on Tuesday, introducin­g evidence they say shows the state has obstructed Norman’s ability to defend himself against a criminal charge of breach of trust. One witness called by the defence to testify at a court hearing on Tuesday alleged that the Department of National Defence used a practice that kept records relating to Norman, the former second-in-command of the Canadian Forces, from being revealed publicly. The witness, whose name is protected by a publicatio­n ban because of fears of profession­al reprisal for coming forward, testified that his superior told him Norman’s name was deliberate­ly not used in internal files — meaning any search for records about Norman would come up empty. The witness said he was processing an access-to-informatio­n request in 2017 that returned no results. When he sought clarificat­ion, the witness testified, his superior smiled and told him: “Don’t worry, this isn’t our first rodeo. We made sure we never used his name. Send back the nil return.” “He seemed proud to provide that response,” the witness said. The witness told court he has no relation to Norman, and came forward only because it’s “the right thing to do.” “It just doesn’t seem right, the way the whole situation kind of played out, when I was thinking back about it,” the witness said. “I just wanted to make it known, whether it’s relevant or not.” Justice Heather Perkins-McVey described the testimony as “very disturbing.” It came on the last day of a five-day hearing on Norman’s defence team’s request for documents they say are crucial to their ability to defend Norman, who’s accused of leaking cabinet secrets. His lawyer, Marie Henein, pointed out to the judge that some of her own disclosure requests to the Department of National Defence have come back empty. Earlier, Henein presented the court with an email from Stephen Harper in which the former prime minister clarified that he is willing to waive the right to cabinet secrecy over all documents related to the Norman case that were created during his time in government. The email was sent on Tuesday morning to the clerk of the privy council, Michael Wernick. “In spite of the fact that I believe my view is clear, I continue to receive inquiries about my position regarding cabinet confidence­s pertaining to my government as relates to the case involving Admiral Norman,” Harper’s email said. “As I recently indicated publicly, I do not assert cabinet confidence for documents relevant to this proceeding.” Henein offered the email to the court as evidence of Harper’s position on the question of access to confidenti­al documents created under his administra­tion, during which the government signed a deal to lease a navy supply ship from Quebec-based Davie Shipbuildi­ng. After the Liberals defeated Harper’s Conservati­ves in the 2015 election, a committee of the new government’s cabinet decided to delay the deal. After word of the delay leaked to media, the Liberal government decided to continue with the project, but asked the RCMP to investigat­e the leak — an investigat­ion that has resulted in the charge against Norman. Henein said she has been trying since the summer to clarify whether the Crown ever asked for Harper’s waiver of cabinet secrecy, but hadn’t received an answer. She said she believes Harper’s reference to “inquiries” refers largely to her own defence team’s questions. “The passive position taken by the Crown throughout this investigat­ion and throughout this applicatio­n, in my respectful submission, is profoundly concerning,” she said. She called it evidence of “obfuscatio­n and gamesmansh­ip” on the part of the Crown. “How extraordin­ary that Vice-Admiral Norman, after three years, three years of this investigat­ion, that it is his counsel that has to try to unravel this, that has to try to bring the relevant informatio­n before this honourable court,” Henein told the court. Meanwhile, Henein accused federal government lawyers of inappropri­ately intervenin­g in the defence’s access to witnesses, and giving witnesses bad informatio­n. A witness called to the stand, former Privy Council Office analyst Melissa Burke, said justice department lawyers offered to sit in on her meeting with defence counsel. Burke declined and brought her own lawyer. Justice department lawyer Robert MacKinnon said their intention is to assist witnesses on what they’re allowed to discuss and what might violate cabinet secrecy. But Henein also told the court the justice department lawyers do not appear to have made an effort to disclose additional records that Burke had found. The only reason the defence lawyers knew about it was that Burke voluntaril­y came forward to tell them. “Troubling,” said Justice Perkins-McVey. “Very troubling.” Perkins-McVey will now start deliberati­ng over which records requested by the defence are likely relevant to the case and should be handed over. However, Henein has requested additional days for the hearing — and is planning to issue witness subpoenas to Gen. Jonathan Vance, chief of the defence staff; John Forster, former deputy minister at national defence; and the military official accused of saying Norman’s name was deliberate­ly avoided in internal records. The hearing is scheduled to return on Jan. 29, 2019, for three days.

 ?? WAYNE CUDDINGTON / POSTMEDIA NEWS ?? Vice-Admiral Mark Norman and lawyer Marie Henein leave court in Ottawa Tuesday, where a witness testified Norman’s name was not used in documents to avoid searches.
WAYNE CUDDINGTON / POSTMEDIA NEWS Vice-Admiral Mark Norman and lawyer Marie Henein leave court in Ottawa Tuesday, where a witness testified Norman’s name was not used in documents to avoid searches.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada