The Foreign Interference judicial inquiry, formulated after a series of backroom talks between the political parties that stretched across the summer, has now cautiously peered from behind its curtain to issue its very first press release. The press release may have been prompted by questions about what, if anything, was going on with the inquiry since Justice Hogue’s appointment was announced nearly two months ago. (For specific dates, note that her appointment was announced on September 7, but was to be effective starting on September 18—its never been clear why the delay and PCO has refused to answer that question)
What did we learn?
The press release reiterated the inquiry’s terms of reference and its two phase nature. It didn’t quite say so, but phase one will essentially repeat the work of the Johnston report as special rapporteur, looking into interference operations by “China, Russia and other foreign actors” into the 2019 and 2021 elections. Expect the expected—the focus will be on China. It remains to be seen how the Hogue inquiry will deal with the contentious issue of the veracity of media reporting on Chinese election interference.
The first phase of the inquiry must wrap by the end of February 2024--yes, in four months from now. The news release says that it plans to hold public hearings for the first phase of its work “in early 2024.” Hard to see how it will have time to incorporate any substantive findings from such hearings into a report also due in “early” 2024.
The news release also promises “further information regarding its work plan” on November 10. That day marks the launch of the Inquiry’s website. The website will also include a “call for applications for standing by interested parties.” Here we go, all the bells and whistles of a full legal show.
We are told that the work of the inquiry is progressing “steadily.” I suppose that is one description for a process in which it took two months to issue a minimal press release and create a web site.
But I am being completely unfair. Judicial inquiries have their mechanisms—selection of a commissioner; appointment of legal staff; acquisition of security clearances; decisions on processes for hearings and “interested parties”—even before work gets underway on actually studying the issues at hand. These things take time. Judicial inquiries are not meant to be racehorses. That is one reason (among others) why they may be so ill-suited to coming up with recommendations for better protecting Canadian elections and democratic practices as a matter of some urgency (as the Johnston report stated).
The problem is plain—the Hogue Inquiry faces impossible time constraints, dictated by purely political rationales, not by any desire to ensure a real process of learning, even without the added challenge of how much learning can be done in public given national security considerations. On that front the Hogue Inquiry promises an effort to strike a “difficult balance.” Or, stay tuned.
Two months to create a website. That leaves only four months to finalise a first report. (I am leaving a bit of time for translation—and no time for an upcoming holiday season, poor elves).
You get the picture.
The Hogue Inquiry will have to show a lot more urgency if it is to accomplish anything of value. It will also have to trim its sails in terms of public hearings (a real shame) and the time allotted for the interventions of “interested parties” (perhaps less a shame).
The Liberals want this whole matter swept under the carpet. We are seeing the same thing with the failure of the CBC to accurately cover the Hamas terrorist attacks and the frightening displays of anti-semitism in Canada.
A Federal Inquiry, Slow to get going, a wide mandate & short time period all adds up to “nothing to see here” & we are doing just fine! Everyone will be exceptionally well paid - it is Ottawa after all - the report will be in French & English and the Liberals will hope no one remembers why the Inquiry was originally called in the first place - CCP interference in the last two Federal Elections!