Why is the CAF Still Dithering on the Most Important Commitment to Addressing Military Sexual Violence?
In 2022 the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) committed to changing the jurisdiction of sexual offences from the military to the civilian justice system. Yet, two years later, nearly half of sexual misconduct cases still remain within the military system, a number of cases have been stayed (essentially meaning dropped) because of long delays in transfers, and victims seem to be left with a confusing set of options, rather than enhanced support. How is it possible that there is so little progress on the most important of the 48 recommendations to come out of Justice Arbour’s 2022 Report examining sexual misconduct in the CAF?
The recommendation to change the jurisdiction of sexual misconduct cases is captured in Recommendation #5 of the Arbour Report. The CAF has held concurrent, but not exclusive, jurisdiction over sexual offences since 1998. The rationale is that this allows the organization to maintain standards of efficiency, discipline and morale above and beyond Canadian civilian standards. Yet, as has been made clear in recent years, this intent has not been realized.
Despite the Minister of National Defence’s December 2022 Report to Parliament indicating that military police had been directed to transfer allegations of sexual offences to the civilian system, recent reports have shown that almost half of cases have remained within the military. The head of military police, the Canadian Forces Provost Marshall (CFPM), has stated that these cases have remained with the military system because of a “victim-centered approach” where those coming forward with allegations are given the choice between the two jurisdictions.
While this appears to demonstrate a sensitivity from the CAF towards the needs of potential victims, it may actually achieve the opposite. The Arbour Report explicitly stated that leaving the decision of whether cases should be kept within the military or transferred to the civilians system up to individuals simply places an unrealistic burden on victims. This choice forces those in compromised situations to make decisions based on little-to-no information about their options for justice. Equally troubling is the fact that the “victim-centered approach” claimed by the CFPM is not explained or defined beyond its name. This reflects an unfortunate pattern within the CAF’s past efforts at addressing system sexual violence in the way it claims its objectives (ie. protecting victims) without explaining the strategies for achieving them or the justification for those strategies.
Additionally, the rollout of Recommendation #5 has demonstrated significant challenges in communication and consistency amongst the various government bodies involved in the current efforts for reform. When questioned about the high number of cases remaining within the military, despite official statements indicating the complete transfer to the civilian system, Defence Minister Blair simply stated that this was not in line with the government’s intentions.
A public interest investigation was launched by the Military Police Complaints Commission in January 2024 to look into allegations that the CFPM had gone against this ministerial directive to transfer all sexual offence cases to the civilian police. However, this investigation was soon closed after it discovered that neither the current Minister of National Defence, nor his predecessor, had actually provided specific direction to the CFPM regarding the transfer of files. While initiated to investigate the disparity between the apparent direction and the conduct of the CFPM in not transferring all files, the Chairperson ultimately noted on page 5 of the Decision Regarding Public Interest Investigation MPCC 2023-084:
“The wording of the CFPM’s policy is particularly concerning given the clear and public support of those recommendations by the Ministers of National Defence. It is puzzling that the CFPM references Madame Arbour’s recommendation in his policy, while implementing directions that contradict it.”
The specific case of Arbour’s Recommendation #5 demonstrates the challenges in cohesive and systematic planning from the CAF and DND in their current efforts for institutional culture change. While the organization has voiced its commitment to culture change and the complete implementation of Arbour’s 48 recommendations, these efforts continue to be undermined by the lack of a guiding framework and continuity amongst all government bodies involved in this work.
