Canada’s historical House of Commons decision

Image via Wikipedia

A few days ago, I wrote about the Canadian House of Commons Speaker, Peter Milliken’s, upcoming, historical constitutional decision. Milliken has had to rule on a request by the opposition parties to find the government of Canada in contempt of Parliament for refusing to release documents relevant to the on-going scandal surrounding the possibility that Canada was complicit in the torture of Afghan detainees. Effectively, there’s a charge that Canadian troops handed over detainees to Afghan authorities knowing full well that they’d be tortured. The government’s refusal to release full, un-redacted documents relevant to that charge has been seen by the opposition to run counter to the procedures of Parliament.

Basically, what it comes down to is a decision on who has privilege, and whether the executive would still be accountable to the House of Commons. If Milliken ruled in favour of the government (that is, that the documents won’t need to be brought forward), it would have repercussions not only for Canada, but would set a precedent for Parliamentary systems worldwide.

In his 45-minute speech on the matter, Milliken referenced many (often obscure) parliamentary documents of the past but finally decided that yes, precedence ought to be upheld, making the point that it is the job of the House to hold the government accountable. That means that the documents ought to be released. He did give a caveat regarding documents of a sensitive nature, but didn’t find that the government had put up a good case (basically) as to why they ought to be withheld this time. As for Justice Frank Iacobucci (who the government hired to read the documents and decide what was sensitive or not), Milliken ruled that he was a separate entity, answering not to the House, but to the government. Therefore, Milliken asked that a process be put in place so that the documents can be released to the MPs, while still keeping the information secret – to that effect, he referenced past legislation (from Australia) where it’s been done successfully.

He did, however, give the Members a bit of a slap of the wrist, expressing his disappointment with the fact that there have been allegations made toward the government that there are ulterior motives in keeping the documents under wraps. He deemed those charges as “unhelpful,” and concluded by stating that he would make time in the House for discussion on how to go about making the documents available. Milliken has given the House two weeks to figure that out, otherwise he’ll come down with a more stringent ruling, perhaps finding the government to be in contempt of Parliament – a hefty charge indeed.

So that’s it: the documents will come forth, uncensored. Eventually.

For the record, the leaders of the opposition parties were all present in the House for the ruling from the Speaker, but Prime Minister Stephen Harper was not.