Frank Iacobucci to screen Afghan detainee documents

Retired Supreme Court justice to act as the government’s gatekeeper


The federal government is tapping retired Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci to decide just how much of the government’s documents on Afghan detainees should be released to opposition MPs. The government has so far resisted the opposition’s repeated demands to release the documents that detail what the government knew (and when it knew it) about the alleged torture of Afghan suspects handed over to local authorities, releasing only heavily-censored versions of the documents. Iacobucci’s appointment comes after the House of Commons foreign affairs committee heard last fall from Canadian diplomat Richard Colvin, who said he’d issued repeated warnings to government officials that Afghan prisoners captured by Canadian troops were being abused by local authorities.


Filed under:

Frank Iacobucci to screen Afghan detainee documents

  1. His opinion is irrelevant in this matter. Why does the narrative suggest it is?

    Oh, saw the source. No shame.

  2. He's not even a sitting judge. It's all a delaying tactic on the part of the CPC. Parliament has the right to see these documents period.

  3. O.k. the documents get reviewed.. an opinion is made…then what happens after that ?? Not a whole lot probably….

    • Well, the Cons will be able to say they've looked into it, and found it threatened national security……..

  4. The recent allegations of what the documents might reveal is extremely troubling and saddens me. That this is a potentially, mammoth coverup angers me. Is Canada "the peacekeeper" a relic from the past? We should not stand by and allow this to happen. Delaying the truth will not change the truth.

  5. Mr. Frank Iacobucci is now an ordinary citizen like you and I. He should have no right to deny sworn-in "Honorary Members", of Parliament access to the documents. Any attempt to do so, will only be a new strategy to cover up the truth.

  6. Mr harper if you are so sure you are right get a ruling from the SCOC. A retired judge’s opinion is just that a opinion. I think the constitution of Canada says parliment has the final say not the government. I think you are afraid you will loss if you go to the final upholders of the law The SCOC

  7. If the Conservatives were really intent on dealing with these documents in a forthright manner they would not be appointing a retired judge to be looking at them. He is not a sitting judge with any authority behind his decision, whatever that may be. And, why is a retired judge privy to these documents when our swore Parliamentarians are not? These documents have been called for by Parliament. Parliament is its own supremacy. This is a stall, a delay tactic by Mr Harper et al.

  8. The whole Afghan detainee issue is a red herring. The opposition tries the best to besmirch the government while demoralizing the military that is killed almost daily by LEDs planted by the poor innocent Afghans that are posing as non combatant. What does the treasonous opposition wants? Import to Canada the detainees as refugees? Or maybe set up a Canadian Gitmo somewhere in Canada? Is the government of Canada responsible for the conduct of the Government of Afghanistan and its agencies?
    Harper should declare that all people that are captured during military operation and suspected of being combatants are handed over to the Afghans and that ends the responsibility of Canada, period. If the oppositions wants to defeat the Government on this issue let it be and have Canadian voters final say

    • Balabu

      You are one of the few commentators that have correctly identified what the Conservative Government should do with this phony opposition issue . Immediately stop all participation by the government in any committee or media interviews , and issue the unilateral declaration that you suggested in your comment .

      Namely , that any future , or past prisoners of WAR that the Canadian armed Forces capture in the Afghanistan conflict be immediately handed over to the local Afghanistan government . and the involvement of any Canadian – be they Governmental or Armed Forces shall be finished , once and for all. I am sure that all our NATO partners in that conflict will welcome this initiative – but if they don't – do we care ?

      The continuance of this issue – principally by our ( un loyal ) opposition . and abetted by our Canadian slobbering media – makes the sacrifices that our Armed Forces have , and continue to make in our names in that country ( I would have used " nation " but that is not even close to the truth ) a veritable fiasco that only serves to make a mockery of our Canadian politics and our commitment to this WAR.

      So much for reasoned comment by our elected MP's – and the hang dog writers that pose as independent political observers – and their editors who support the continuance of this attack against our government . it is surely past time that we put this issue to bed !

  9. I would not trust Taliban Jack not to leak these documents to the MSM

    • It turns out that 'ol Taliban Jack was correct all along – now the American Commander in Afghanistan agrees with "Taliban Jack' that they MUST speak to the Taliban if NATO ever wants to withdraw from that poor country.

      "Selected leaks' to the media by the PM and his gang of psudo-christians is more to be worried about. While Jack was trying to find way out the conflict, Mr. Harper was busy deciding with detainee to torture.

  10. Whether or not the Justice is retired, he retains his expertise in matters of the law and as such, understands the legal importance of maintaining the privacy of the people who may have been named within those documents and have not consented to have their identities and information released to members of Parliament. Perhaps you recall Ms. Valerie Plame in the USA, who was outed as a spy in the CIA by Scooter Libby and a few reporters. Their blundering put both Ms. Plame and other CIA spies at risk. Surely we can trust the judgment of a retired supreme court justice or are we that far gone in partisan politics that we would rather put operatives at risk than trust anybody?

  11. Healthcareinsider—“are we that far gone in partisan politics that we would rather put operatives at risk than trust anybody?”
    The SCOC is trustworthy, if their option can not be trusted then I do not know who is trustworthy. They have the ability to make a ruling on the powers of parliament ,which this whole thing is about. The detainee issue is secondary. For our childerns sake democracy is important.

  12. Frank Iacobucci misled Parliament on at least one occasion in 1987 when he authorized a false statement in the Act to implement the federal Statute Revision (1985), to wit, that the draft-Revision had been examined by two parliamentary committees. As is apparent from the Senate Committee Report (May 28,1987), it hadn't. Frank Iacobucci dismissed a whistleblower from the Justice Department on May 31, 1988. Louis Côté was dismissed after making a complaint with the Commissionner of Official Languages.Frank Iacobucci co-authored a 1979 Consumer and Corporate Affairs Report supporting a federal securities Act. As a Supreme Court of Canada judge, he gave the area an international dimension, making it a federal jurisdiction

Sign in to comment.