Monday , June 27 2022

A witness at the Mark Norman hearing claims that DND is trying to keep files hidden from seeing the public


OTTAWA – Solicitors of the Mark Norman Subgroup of Crown and government prosecutors on Tuesday, presenting the evidence they say show that the state has prevented Norman's ability to defend itself against a criminal breach of breach of trust .

One witness called by the defense to testify at a court hearing on Tuesday alleged that the National Defense Department had used a practice that kept records relating to Norman, the pre-order of the Canadian Forces order, from being disclosed publicly.

The witness, whose name has been protected by a prohibition of publication due to fears of professional opposition to submit, has certified that his secondary state tells him that the Norman name was not used & # 39 ; deliberately in internal files – making any search for Norman records becoming empty.

The witness stated that he processed an access to information application in 2017 that did not return any results. When he asked for clarification, the witness testified, if his secondary school smiled and said to him: "Do not worry, this is not our first rodeo. We made sure that we have never used his name. Send the return back . "

"It seemed pleased to provide that response," said the witness.

The witness told the court that he had no relationship with Norman, and he only proceeded because he was "the right thing to do."

"It does not seem right, the way the whole situation appeared, when I was thinking about it," said the witness. "I wanted to notify it, whether relevant or not."

Justice Heather Perkins-McVey described the evidence as "a real interference."

The last day of a five-day hearing on the request of a Norman defense team for documents they say is essential for Norman protection, accused of discharging cabinet secrets. Her lawyer, Marie Henein, referred to the judge that some of her own disclosure requests to the National Defense Department had become vacant.

Earlier, Henein introduced an email to the court by Stephen Harper where the former prime minister explained that he was ready to abolish the right to cabinet confidentiality over all documents related to & # 39 ; the Norman case created during its period of government. The e-mail was sent on Tuesday to private council clerk, Michael Wernick.

It does not seem fine, the way in which the whole situation appeared, when I was thinking about it

"Despite the fact that I believe my opinion is clear, I will still receive queries regarding the situation regarding the confidentialities of the cabinet that are related to government related to the case related to Admiral Norman, "said Harper's email. "As I said in public recently, I do not confirm the confidence of the cabinet for documents that are relevant to this process."

Henein offered the email to the court as evidence of the situation of Harper on the question of access to confidential documents created under his administration, and the government signed a bargain to lease a novel supply ship from Davie's Ship Building in Quebec. After the Liberals defeated the Harper Conservatives in the 2015 election, a committee of the new government cabinet decided to defer the bargain. After the delay dropped to the media, the Liberal government decided to continue with the project, but asked the RCMP to investigate the release – an investigation that has led to the pay against the Normans.

Henein said he had been trying since the summer to explain whether the Crown had ever asked for the confidentiality to omit Harper's cabinet, but had not received a reply. He said she believed Harper's address to "inquiries" was mainly referring to her own defense team's questions.

"The passive situation taken by the Crown through this investigation and throughout this application, in my respectful presentation, is a great deal of attention," he said.

He referred to as evidence of "stimulus and craft games" on behalf of the Crown.

"How unusual was the Vice Chairman of Norman, after three years, three years of this investigation, that his advice is to try and resolve this, he must try to bring the information relevant to this honorable court, "said Henein at court.

In the meantime, Henein accused federal government lawyers from inappropriate interruption when accessing the witnesses to the defense, and giving bad witnesses information. A witness told the stand, former Office of Office Privy Melissa Burke analyst said justice lawyers solicit to sit on his meeting with a defense adviser. Burke refused and brought his own lawyer.

Justice lawyer Robert MacKinnon said their intention is to assist witnesses about what they are discussing and what could break the cabinet's confidentiality.

But Henein told the court that justice department lawyers do not seem to endeavor to disclose additional records discovered by Burke. The only reason the defense lawyers knew about was that Burke voluntarily had come on to tell them.

"Troubling," says Justice Perkins-McVey. "Very scared".

Perkins-McVey will now begin to discuss which records the protection request is likely to apply to the case and should be transferred. However, Henein has asked for additional days for the hearing – and intends to give a witness ispoene to General Jonathan Vance, the main defense staff; John Forster, former minister of national defense; and a military officer accused of saying that Norman's name is deliberately avoided in internal records.

The hearing is expected to return on January 29, 2019, for three days.

• E-mail: [email protected] Twitter:

Source link