The Government has released the mandate for the special rapporteur, previously named as David Johnston, a former Governor General and University president. Mr. Johnston was appointed by the Government without the agreement of the main opposition parties, as they had demanded. Where that would have gone is anybody’s question.
You can read the mandate letter here:
https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/independent-special-rapporteur/terms-conditions.html
Two things stand out immediately. One is that the special rapporteur is to report publicly on a “rolling basis,” (good!) but that Mr. Johnston will be on the clock. And what a clock it will be—six months from start to finish, with completion “of all work by the end of October 2023.” Mr. Johnston will face a steep learning curve in coming to understand how the Canadian national security and intelligence system works, what it knows, and how it advises government.
I am not sure that Justice Rouleau managed a similar feat within a year, supported by a sizeable bank of lawyers. This is not to denigrate Mr. Johnston’s skills or wisdom. It is just to recognize that the world of intelligence and national security is challenging and complex.
There is one advantage: as the special rapporteur gains in knowledge he will also appreciate what Canadians also need to know. He is starting from the same place.
But the six month clock is bonkers. (Unless all that someone thinks we need is a shallow analysis).
The other headline grabber is that Mr. Johnston is to make “interim recommendations,” including with regard to the need for a public inquiry, by May 23, 2023. This is the truly bonkers part. It means that the special rapporteur will need to make recommendations at the very earliest stages of his work (within two months) and at least a year before the results of the reviews to be conducted by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) and the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) are published. There is a (also bonkers) suggestion in the mandate that the special rapporteur should be able to intuit what the two review bodies will say. I suppose that is OK, because Mr. Johnston will have to wrap up his work before the two review bodies complete their’s.
The May 23 deadline is an open invitation for Mr. Johnston to recommend a public inquiry before he has any reason to believe there is a need for one. And, by the way, it is not a recommendation. The Trudeau government, in a decision of extraordinary panic, and in response to political and media campaigns, has already said it would accept whatever recommendation regarding a public inquiry the special rapporteur makes. So get set for a public inquiry, needed or not.
I find this process bonkers, but maybe I am not clever enough to see that is may form part of a very smart plan by PMO to conduct a strategic retreat. Hand over any decision on a public inquiry to an eminent person, get it over quickly (the decision, not the public inquiry—that will take time) and move on. I commend to you the argument made in this regard by the Globe’s Campbell Clark.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-trudeau-retreats-and-retreat-is-his-best-political-strategy/
There are, to be fair, non-bonkers parts of the mandate, including assurances about access to classified records, including those protected by cabinet confidences. There are, of course, no assurances about what Mr. Johnston will be able to say about classified material in his final report. Mr. Johnston is also to “engage with political parties on information flows and actions taken” (but will not be able to share classified information or cabinet confidences in that regard). He can also receive written submissions from “interested persons.” He may receive a deluge—I hope so. More material to digest within six months.
The establishment of a special rapporteur was always a way to deflect media attention and opposition political challenges (including from the semi-partners in governance, the NDP). On its own it made no sense. But as the Prime Minister stated in his press conference on March 7 announcing the creation of the special rapporteur, he knows Canadians don’t have sufficient trust in the work of the new review and accountability system for Canadian national security and intelligence.
That is the great shame of this political manoeuvre.
An e nuanced Analysis. Very fair and comprensive
Hugh Segal