Justice Committee on April 13th, 2010

[C/Supt Thomas Bucher]

In 2008-09, for example, there were 15 admissions into the program. Those numbers can fluctuate in any given year, depending on the number of investigations we carry out and depending on a number of other factors.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

The $7 million was for new and existing protectees, then.

[C/Supt Thomas Bucher]

It was for the current year, that year of operating.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Yes--for new and existing protectees in that year. It was for all clients, so to speak.

[C/Supt Thomas Bucher]

Yes.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

So it's almost impossible to...

How many people were in the program in that year? For $7 million, how many people were in the program? There were 15 new inductees; how many others?

[Inspector Greg Bowen, Officer in Charge, National Headquarters, Human Source and Witness Protection, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

We have approximately 800 people currently in the federal program. The $7 million breakdown is, as you suggested, not just for the 15 who came in. It's also for the maintenance of the existing people in the program.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Right.

In how many cases do they assume a new identity? And when they assume a new identity, do they lose their old identity and entitlement to such things as CPP, eventually? Some people are in this program a long time. They might have problems walking up to the Service New Brunswick desk and saying, “Hey, I'm not Joe Blow, I'm Joe Green, and I really want my CPP.”

[Joe Comartin, Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP]

Hey!

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Joe is a bad name to use because it's so ordinary.

How about, “My name is Dominic Blow”?

[An hon. member]

Or “Joe Crow”?

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

So...identity.

[Insp Greg Bowen]

When protectees come into the program and a determination is made to change their identity, sir, that is a legal name change. The role of the RCMP is to work with our federal partners and provincial partners to ensure that those name changes are done in a secure fashion.

That would be the difference between, let's say, if I went to change my name today to something else, which is my right to do, or if I went through the processes we have in place, where the idea is to limit any joining between the old identity and the new identity.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

So a person wouldn't get their CPP, in other words, from the old name.

[Insp Greg Bowen]

No, but through the processes that we use when the new name is identified as a legal name, they're entitled to all the benefits they would have had if they'd stayed in their previous identity.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Okay, so it does accrue.

[Insp Greg Bowen]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

We'll move on to Monsieur Lemay for sept minutes.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

As a criminal lawyer, I am very interested in this issue. Several years ago, the House of Commons here in Ottawa made amendments to proceeds of crime legislation.

My question is most specifically for Mr. Froese and Mr. Perron.

Mr. Perron, did you in fact say that the evidence allowing for the forfeiture of goods that you have deemed to be criminally obtained is difficult to establish?

[Insp Don Perron]

What I said, Honourable Lemay, was that there are three legislative processes we access when we conduct an investigation. In the Criminal Code and the CDSA, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, one is the proceeds of crime. We have to demonstrate that the properties we're trying to seize, restrain, and forfeit were acquired with profits from criminal activity.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I have before me section 462.33 of the Criminal Code, which deals with seizure and restraint orders. I wonder if it is used appropriately. Restraint orders are discussed in subsection 462.32(4). It even says that this can be done in ways other than sending a notice to the accused. If the situation is becoming dangerous, the assets can be seized and detained even in the absence of the accused or of the person who is the subject of presumptions. It seems to me that it was designed to be sufficiently broad, so that it would have enough oomph, if I can put it that way, to be able to seize the money but particularly to seize the goods.

In Quebec, for example, when there is a significant search warrant issued, they seize motorcycles, cars, houses, cottages, in a nutshell everything. Afterwards, the accused may argue before the courts that these goods were not obtained through proceeds of crime. I am wondering if in fact, things work backwards in Quebec. In Ontario, things work differently. As we say—and I apologize to the gentlemen from the police—we shoot first and ask questions later. It is up to the accused to demonstrate that these goods were not obtained with money from criminal activity.

I do not know if sections 462.33 and the following are misunderstood.

[Insp Don Perron]

We utilize those provisions. We have obtained several restraint orders, special search warrants, without giving notice to the accused. We often do that when we take down large projects. The application, supported by the affidavit provided by the investigator, is made by the prosecutors. We have to demonstrate in our affidavit beyond a certain level of probability that the assets were either derived as proceeds of crime or they are facilitating a crime.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I do not want to tell you what to do, but you might look at these provisions. It states that if the judge is of the opinion that giving the accused notice would result in the disappearance of the goods being targeted, he or she could even choose not to order the notice. I speak as a defence lawyer, but the fact remains that this is very broad.

I would like to know how you go about following the money. Mr. Froese said some interesting things. We are aware that the Hells Angels and other organized crime groups very frequently pay cash. You referred to restaurants and to meals, but personally, I am interested in the fact that the Hells Angels are becoming owners of the hotel, if not the hotel chain where the parties take place. I would even go so far as to say that in Quebec, the Hells Angels have taken control of several construction companies or of companies that almost have that status.

How does one proceed to follow the money trail? Is there a way of going about that? Can we do anything to help you follow it more efficiently?

[Ken Froese]

I do not speak French very well.

You're looking mainly at how to improve the tracing, and I agree with you that the issue is moving into businesses and properties being acquired and expanding into construction companies and empires, as opposed to just dealing on the street or supplying dealers. It's becoming a criminal enterprise at a much higher level.

It wasn't meant to be just a minor comment. The ability to identify who owns assets is important. Quite often the same lawyers will incorporate companies and be the main lawyers for an organized crime group, as an example. Being able to track the address used... If they're setting up nominee companies initially, a common lawyer will be used for a number of these companies, so it's having the ability to do better corporate traces as well as property searches to look at ownership, rather than just having to pick an address and find out who owns it. Then we'd be able to do broader searches. For example, if you know an organized crime group is involved in a certain company, we'd be able to track what that company owns beyond that.

I'll let you go ahead and ask a follow-up question.