Skip to main content
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Military ombudsman Greg Lick issued a strong rebuke of Canada’s defence minister on Thursday, after Harjit Sajjan suggested Lick’s predecessor could have done more with an allegation of sexual misconduct against Gen. Jonathan Vance.

Testifying before the House of Commons committee on the status of women, Lick said former ombudsman Gary Walbourne had no other avenue but to bring the allegation directly to Sajjan in March 2018 – and that he would have followed the exact same steps.

That includes refusing to speak to senior officials in the Privy Council Office after Sajjan referred the allegation to them, which Walbourne has previously said was against his wishes and those of the complainant.

Story continues below advertisement

“The current reporting structure of the ombudsman is directly to the minister of national defence, not to the Privy Council Office or any other body,” Lick told committee members in his opening statement.

“Had I been faced with the same facts, I would have done exactly as my predecessor did: I would have reported the facts within my direct reporting structure. There is no other body to which the matter could have been referred.”

Sajjan suggested to the same committee earlier this week that Walbourne had numerous avenues available to him, including reporting the matter to the military’s civilian-run sexual misconduct response centre or military police.

Lick, like Walbourne, was adamant: Without the complainant’s permission, the only place to go was the minister.

“My office cannot go to any external body without the consent of the complainant,” Lick said. “That’s the most important part in this whole discussion.”

Even as Lick was insisting that Walbourne could not have taken the allegation anywhere else but the minister, the commander of the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service indicated to the committee that Sajjan himself could have referred the matter to his unit.

Lt.-Col. Eric Leblanc told committee members that anyone can ask his unit to look into an allegation, including those dealing with sexual misconduct, and that the defence minister’s doing so would not constitute interference or otherwise be inappropriate.

Story continues below advertisement

But Leblanc, who repeatedly defended the independence and professionalism of his officers, said only the provost marshal – the military’s top police officer – can actually order him to launch an investigation.

“Nobody outside of the provost marshal can direct me to conduct an investigation,” he said. “Folks can report an allegation to us and then we’ll decide whether or not we proceed with an investigation or not.”

The CFNIS investigates criminal cases as well as serious offences under the military’s disciplinary code.

It is currently investigating Vance following a Global News report last month alleging the former chief of the defence staff had an ongoing relationship with a subordinate starting in 2001 and which continued after he was named defence chief in 2015.

He is also alleged to have sent a lewd e-mail to a much more junior service member in 2012.

The allegations against Vance have not been independently verified and he has declined repeated requests from The Canadian Press for comment. However, Global has reported that he denies any wrongdoing.

Story continues below advertisement

The CFNIS is also investigating Vance’s successor, Admiral Art McDonald, who temporarily stepped aside last month after only a few weeks as commander of the Canadian Armed Forces following an unspecified allegation of misconduct. McDonald has not commented on the allegation.

Leblanc would not comment on any specific investigations, though he did confirm that his unit was not asked to investigate what a former member of Stephen Harper’s Conservative government described as a “rumour” about Vance before he was named defence chief in 2015.

Ray Novak, who served as Harper’s chief of staff at that time, said the rumour related to a relationship that Vance was alleged to have had with a subordinate in CFB Gagetown starting in 2001. He said the matter was investigated by the Privy Council Office.

The Conservatives have in opposition been attacking Sajjan for referring the allegation flagged by Walbourne to the PCO, the department that supports the Prime Minister’s Office.

Leblanc also acknowledged having heard Sajjan’s order that the military revisit a Navy-led investigation into an alleged incident involving a comment that was made about a female naval officer’s “red room” during a group video call that some interpreted as a sexual reference.

However, he added, “nothing has been referred to my unit for investigation at this time.”

Story continues below advertisement

Lick used his appearance before the committee to again bang the drum on the need for real independent oversight over the military, echoing statements made to The Canadian Press last month about how his office does not fit that bill.

“We have been making the argument for full independence since our creation, but there has been no political will to act,” he said.

“The issue of sexual misconduct is an unfortunate illustration of how constituents fall between the cracks of a closed system with no fully independent recourse mechanisms.”

The committee also heard from retired Supreme Court justice Marie Deschamps, whose explosive report on sexual misconduct in the ranks in 2015 launched the military’s current efforts to address the problem.

Underscoring the importance of strong leadership in eliminating sexual misconduct, Deschamps said: “The years that passed only made it more difficult to restore the trust in the leadership. I can only hope the new leaders will have understood the situation and will rise to the challenge.”

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies