Presumption of innocence is a legal right.
And, yes, Canadian courts’ mandate to uphold law and administer justice must indeed be at arm’s length from political influence.
However, BC Liberal MLA Gordon Hogg’s reluctance to intervene in the provincial Independent Investigations Office review of a police-shooting death outside the South Surrey RCMP detachment last summer is misguided.
The Surrey-White Rock MLA was critical of such intervention when asked last month about comments by Opposition MLAs that the investigation into the death of 20-year-old Hudson Brooks is taking far too long.
Hogg explained politicians shouldn’t influence the legal process and that “in court cases – and this well may end up in court – (investigators) don’t reveal information beforehand because it could prejudice the outcome…”
Not only does this explanation all but ignore the fact that the IIO is a civilian body and can only make referrals to the Crown, and that the New Democrats’ push was for timely justice, the key word here is ‘may’. A number of outcomes may be possible, but unless Hogg has access to information unavailable to the public, his inaction based on what might happen is troublesome.
In fact, when, on the day of the shooting, the only official statement ever released indicates officers responded to “reports of a suicidal male,” it seems evident conclusions were being drawn long before any investigation began. That the same news release states “a physical struggle ensued and… one of the police officers involved was injured as a result of the confrontation” – without noting that only RCMP-issued weapons were present – presumptions other than of innocence, again, were encouraged.
The solution is to not assume any legal outcome and to release the basic facts as they are known.
How many officers were involved, and were any official duties altered as a result? Was there an allegation of an officer’s life being threatened? What weapons were used, and who fired them? Did Brooks ever handle a weapon? How many times was he shot?
The answers shouldn’t take much time, nor will they undermine the integrity of the investigation, and none will negate “due process,” as Hogg suggests. They will only inform the public and allow Brooks’ loved ones to better understand what happened more than eight months ago.
Instead, we hear only excuses for the silence.
Imagine if this tragedy had occurred in the U.S. or in the U.K. Politicians there would demand that the public be informed without delay. Here in Canada, the public is encouraged to wait patiently – certainly a case, as defined by the legal maxim, of justice denied.