Where are the documents? (II) - Macleans.ca
 

Where are the documents? (II)


 

Sources tell the Sun that the first disclosures from the Afghan detainee document review committee will be released Wednesday.

If this does indeed come to pass, the next question will be whether the review committee will be reinstated. It was established with the agreement of the leaders of the Conservatives, Liberals and Bloc Quebecois. I’ve asked both the Conservative and Liberal sides whether they are respectively interested in restarting the process, but both have so far avoided answering the question directly.


 

Where are the documents? (II)

  1. I understood they were supposed to be released today….how hard can this be anyway?

    Parliament adjourns Thursday does it not?

    It won’t be all the docs in any case….only a small bunch of them

  2. Doesn’t any release show that the government was overzealous in hiding documents due to “national security”.

    • It might be conceivable that some documents that were militarily sensitive no longer are. Especially once Canadian troops have withdrawn.

  3. I wonder if these are just loose documents – wasn’t there was to be a report from the judges?

  4. “But former speaker Peter Milliken ruled the government had breached the privilege of Parliament by denying MPs access to the unredacted documents.”

    Aaron do you know if Milikin’s ruling is still in effect? And is Parliament able to revisit it if the committee isn’t reinstated…presumably the conservatives would just vote it down anyway.

  5. “If people don’t know what you’re doing, they don’t know what you’re doing wrong.” Sir Humphrey

    I find it odd that all parties seem to be in agreement that Afgahn docs are not going to be released in their entirety. 

    The only thing that makes sense to me is that Canadian officials and/or soldiers inadvertently committed ‘war crimes’ and pols are trying to protect bureuacrats or soldiers from being sent to The Hague.

    • You can’t “inadvertently” commit a crime, it does take intent. But in this case there are many legitimate reasons why documents should not be placed on the public record, for example, those which might identify by name Afghan citizens who have provided information to our soldiers. Publicly identifying them would be tantamount to a death sentence.  There are other legitimate concerns that any government would have to take into account in balancing the needs of parliament to have information with the dangers or releasing documents that should not be seen by everyone. That is why every freedom of information act has a procedure for identifying which documents should be public and which should not.

      There is still no evidence that the Canadian forces acted in anything other than an exemplary manner in dealing with Afghan detainees.

      • There is still no evidence that the Canadian forces acted in anything other than an exemplary manner in dealing with Afghan detainees

        Of course there isn’t; we’ve had nothing but committees sworn to secrecy and no public airing of Colvin’s charges. Unless you qualify the pitiful response of the govt at the time as constituting an acutal response beyong yelling : ” you lie! It was not so!

  6. There will be nothing in this document dump that supports Richard Corvin’s allegations.  Any documents that allege prisoner transfer to torture chambers will never see the light of day, as per the original purpose of the three-party committee.