Justice Committee on April 1st, 2009

[C/Supt Todd G. Shean]

To begin to answer that question, we identified that--and I believe Superintendent Aubin did when he was answering Mr. Murphy's question--in some of our cases we have seen that organized crime has attempted to corrupt public officials. We want to highlight to this committee that it's an important consideration to have, and we have to have that type of awareness out there because it does exist for them to thrive.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I'm sorry. I was left with the impression by two of your statements that they weren't just attempts, but they were successful operations where public officials had been corrupted. That's what I'd like you to comment on.

[Supt Michel Aubin]

That's correct, sir. As an example, in Montreal there have been some specific cases, investigations covered, that individuals working for a public body accessing information were corrupted and passing information on. They were subsequently dealt with, whether it was criminally or administratively.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Was that corruption as a result of financial incentives or threats of violence against the individuals?

[Supt Michel Aubin]

To the best of my knowledge, in those cases it was mainly financial incentives. I add that, based on my experience investigating organized crime. Organized crime in some cases has a knack, if you wish, or an ability to identify individuals who are more susceptible, and will in a progressive fashion bring them on board. We see that. There were some organizations where there were concerted efforts to do it.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Mr. Ladouceur.

[Staff Sergeant Bernie Ladouceur, Criminal Investigative Services, Criminal Intelligence, Ottawa Police Service]

I apologize for not having all the details, but I do recall an investigation of a project that was taken down, where there was a hearing officer from the immigration sector. It was in the province of Quebec; I suspect it was in Montreal. I don't have the project name, but this official was taken down as part of allowing organized crime members to enter Canada. It dates back, probably, two to two and a half years.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I think I'm aware of that particular incident, but I don't think it involved organized crime. I think that was just corruption on the part of that particular individual, but that's my recollection of that event.

Mr. Trudell, I don't think I entirely caught this. At the time you were talking specifically of first-degree murder amendments that are in Bill C-14 when you talked about this type of piecemeal amendment to the code clogging the system. Could you expand on that? I didn't catch that point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

A short answer.

[William Trudell]

A short answer? Okay.

When you add an element to an offence already existing in the Criminal Code, that element has to be proved. It doesn't lend to efficiency if it's not necessary. Use the first-degree murder example. If you are going to allege that a first-degree murder becomes a first-degree murder because the murder is done in association with or to the benefit of a criminal organization, you have to start by proving the criminal organization, proving the benefit, proving the involvement, as opposed to simply proving planning and deliberation, or a conspiracy or group.

The other thing, of course, is if you're convicted of second-degree murder, the punishment is life imprisonment. Aggravating circumstances are going to bring your parole eligibility close to 25 years.

If the committee ever gets a chance, look at the Bonner case in terms of what Madam Justice Fuerst had to go through in establishing a criminal organization. I think we were talking about the Hells Angels in that case. When we're trying to run an expedient system, if you add an unnecessary element, then I would respectfully submit it's going to add a complexity of time, cost, expense, and delay in the system where it's not necessary. That's my point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

Chief Superintendent Shean, you mentioned there was something you might be prepared to share in camera. If we have unanimous consent here at the table, we could make some time at the end of our meeting to hear you in camera. Or would you rather come back?

[C/Supt Todd G. Shean]

We would prefer to have someone in that area come back. We have people with that expertise who could give an explanation that would be more beneficial to the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

We'll take note of that. Thank you.

We'll move on to Mr. Moore for seven minutes.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

We've had a pretty good and wide-ranging discussion. Thanks for your feedback on the questions so far.

On the approach we're taking now as a government, it's been mentioned that this is a step in the right direction, but it's not the be-all and end-all. That's certainly not what we've held it out to be. Our approach is to take steps in the right direction with each of our pieces of legislation. In the last Parliament, that included mandatory and minimum penalties for gun crimes, reverse onus on bail for gun crimes, the changes regarding house arrest, raising the age of consent, and impaired driving legislation. In this Parliament we've introduced this bill as well as legislation dealing with illicit drugs, credit for time served, and, most recently, ID theft.

So we are taking an approach that looks at a specific problem and tries to move our justice system in the right direction, taking into account the concerns that front-line police officers, victims of crime, and other stakeholders in the justice system have raised.

We have representatives here from Halifax, the RCMP, as well as from Ottawa. Halifax and Ottawa are cities that cover very large geographic areas with urban and rural components. Today we're studying organized crime. I know the perception--and what we see on the news--is that this is often an urban downtown issue. We're also having challenges in rural areas.

Is this a problem just in the urban areas, or should we all be concerned, whether we're urban or rural, as members of Parliament or Canadians?

I throw that open to any of those I mentioned to answer.

[S/Sgt Christopher Renwick]

I can speak from my experience here in the city of Ottawa, with a population of a little over 800,000. It is an urban problem we're having with street gangs. We are not seeing that type of activity in the rural areas. Our experience is that those involved in the illicit crack trade with the violence, guns, and all the trimmings that go with it come into the urban core for that specific purpose. All the shootings and the instances we've been investigating over the past few months have been confined to the urban areas. We've done some warrants in the rural areas, but they've been more specific to firearms offences rather than gang or street gang offences.

[C/Supt Todd G. Shean]

I was just out in some of the western provinces. We see urban problems with gangs there, but we also see gangs in the rural areas. So it's more widespread than simply urban, in my experience with the different agencies for the RCMP I've dealt with.

[Chief Frank A. Beazley]

Can I speak for Halifax?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Sure.

[Chief Frank A. Beazley]

The majority of what I see is in the urban core. But in the last couple of years we've found, particularly with drive-by shootings and criminals meeting criminals at different locations, it doesn't really matter where they are. We've seen shootings happen in our suburban areas. Organized crime is using our coastline and our rural areas to bring in drugs and smuggle in contraband cigarettes. But the indiscriminate use of firearms and shootings, particularly against these rival drug gangs, sadly occurs wherever they happen to meet each other. So it could be downtown Halifax or Fall River, Nova Scotia. Homes have been shot up in suburban areas as well as urban areas.

I hope that helps.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Yes, it does. Thanks.

Chief Beazley, obviously we know that there have been gangs forever, really, and there has been violence forever, but you mentioned in your comments that the level or the intensity of violence is new. You mentioned something like that. I'm wondering if you could comment specifically, because obviously, sometimes there are high-profile incidents in the news, and they get people riled up.

The approach we've taken is that we have to be consistent about this. We cannot only react to one or two situations. We have to have an overall agenda, moving forward, that takes into account that sometimes there's going to be a dip in what happens and sometimes there's going to be a spike.

You mentioned that there had been a change, in your view. Can you give an example of that? How are things different now?

[Chief Frank A. Beazley]

What I'm saying is that I'm seeing a change in the intensity of violent crime. If you look at the statistics, let's say for youth offenders, they may say that youth crime has gone down over the past 10 years. But the increased violence, the higher violence, has actually increased. That's whether you're looking at assaults or at robberies.

In 2005 we had eight attempted homicides in Halifax. Three of them were drive-by shootings. In 2006 there were three, two of which were drive-by shootings. In 2007 there were four, and two of those were drive-by shootings. In 2008 there were twelve, five of which were drive-by shootings. So far, since January 1, there have been five attempted murders, and one of those...actually two of them, as of today, were drive-by shootings.

We're finding that the gangs that initially were carrying firearms as a status symbol have moved on. Once they start shooting, they start shooting, and it doesn't matter where you are. I mentioned the IWK hospital. This is where babies are born in Halifax, and they just started shooting it up just outside the front lobby. It's wherever they meet these rival gangs.

So we're seeing it increase. We're seeing violent crimes becoming more violent, and of course I'm only talking about the use of guns. We've had 18 cases since January in which people were stabbed. So the violence itself is getting more violent. That's the best way I can convey it to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you, Chief.

We'll move on to Mr. Dhaliwal for five minutes.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the panel members and welcome your suggestions here as well.

My question is to Mr. Renwick. I have heard that it's difficult to prove that someone is a gang member, so prosecutors have difficulty using laws designated and designed especially for gang members. Can you tell us what we, as legislators, can do to improve that situation?

[S/Sgt Christopher Renwick]

Our section has been up for a few years now, and we just recently achieved expert witness status in court as gang experts. One of our detectives, Detective O'Brien, was there in January giving evidence at a sentencing hearing.

It is a process, and it's a fairly new process for us. First there is the definition of a street gang. Second, we're applying the six-point criteria that were set up by Criminal Intelligence Service Canada. There are six questions about involvement: are they self-possessed members of a gang; have they been involved with crimes? Actually, I have the six criteria here, if you're interested in hearing them.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Sure.