Transparency lacking at Manitoba Justice
Advertisement
Read this article for free:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
To continue reading, please subscribe:
Monthly Digital Subscription
$19 $0 for the first 4 weeks*
- Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
- Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
- Access News Break, our award-winning app
- Play interactive puzzles
*No charge for 4 weeks then billed as $19 every four weeks (new subscribers and qualified returning subscribers only). Cancel anytime.
Read unlimited articles for free today:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 26/06/2022 (869 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
IN A recent editorial, this newspaper called for increased transparency from Manitoba Justice when it comes to explaining why its Crown prosecutors decline to lay charges in cases of significant public interest.
It’s the right stance to take. The public deserves better than what it currently gets in terms of disclosure and transparency in such cases from the Manitoba Prosecution Service (MPS).
I am not a legal expert or a lawyer. I am, however, a person who watched and studied provincial prosecutors at work over a number of years as a courts reporter for various local media outlets, including the Free Press.
For what it’s worth, Manitobans should be proud of the work done by their Crown attorneys. Those on the criminal side deal often with cases involving factual circumstances and legal issues which are complex and, one suspects, take a psychological toll due to the levels of violence and cruelty in much of the crime in this province.
They don’t get enough thanks for what they do, which from my experience is quality public service work. The role of a Crown prosecutor is often misunderstood in general society.
But it’s fair to ask, how can that knowledge gap be bridged when so much of what Manitoba Crowns do is cloaked in secrecy, abetted by an old-fashioned legal tradition of prosecutorial discretion and a virtually non-existent public communications presence?
One example: despite the power the department wields and the budget it commands, there’s no official spokesperson in the MPS for the media to take questions to. Instead, any communication comes through nameless provincial spokespeople.
In my experience, official answers to questions about decision-making on cases are skimpy and opaque. Almost always, they hew to a generic overview of how prosecutors assess their cases instead of actually pointing to specifics that might help the general public understand what is happening and, more to the point, why.
A key example would be the decision to not lay charges in the RCMP’s Winnipeg police headquarters investigation. The 400-word press release issued by MPS on Dec. 13, 2019, announcing this consequential decision doesn’t contain an ounce of specific information that would actually allow a member of the public to understand the decision that was made (or who actually made it) beyond stating “we felt there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction.”
In British Columbia, things are done differently. It’s a model Manitoba would do well to follow.
There, the prosecutions branch will, in cases of significant public concern, issue what are called “clear statements,” which detail key evidence gathered in a case and the legal rationale for deciding not to proceed with a prosecution. The statements are published online for any interested party to read. The department says issuing these statements is aimed at helping maintain public confidence in the justice system.
Having reviewed several “clear statements,” they do foster understanding of why prosecutorial decisions are made and dispel the notion things are being kept hidden from public view.
Notable as well, the department will make Crown counsel available to answer questions to explain their reasoning to not proceed with charges.
B.C. is also one of several Canadian provinces that make available online their manuals of prosecution policies, which can also go a long way to explaining the “why” of the decisions made. Here, only a smattering of MPS’s policies are online — if you can find them.
Naturally, there will be times where non-disclosure is necessary to maintain the integrity of an ongoing investigation or to protect victims. But the time has come for MPS to embrace a new spirit of openness in line with what we see happening elsewhere in Canada — for the sake of the general public it serves and its own standing in the minds of Manitobans.
James Turner is a former Free Press justice reporter who now teaches journalism at Red River College Polytechnic.
Twitter: @heyjturner
Instagram: @WinnipegTails