rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Powerful report on sexual abuse in military calls for outside-chain-of-command solution

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca today for as little as $1 per month!

Photo: flickr/ ResoluteSupportMedia

The report from former Supreme Court Justice Marie Deschamps on sexual misconduct and harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces is blistering and powerful.

It describes "a sexualized environment in the armed forces … characterized by the frequent use of swear words and highly degrading expressions that reference women's bodies, sexual jokes, innuendos, discriminatory comments with respect to the abilities of women, and unwelcome sexual touching..."

That would be bad enough.

But Deschamps goes on to say that this sexualized environment leads to the widespread "use of sex to enforce power relationships and to punish and ostracize a member of a unit."

Military 'accepts all 10 recommendations': Really?

Shortly after the report was made public, on Thursday, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Defence, James Bezan, told the House of Commons that the government was deeply concerned.

He applauded the fact that the Canadian Armed Forces "had accepted" all 10 of Justice Deschamps' recommendations.

That, however, is not necessarily the case.

The armed forces brass has fully accepted only two of the recommendations.

They agreed to the other eight "on principle" -- whatever that is supposed to mean.

In particular, the armed forces leadership has not fully and unconditionally accepted Deschamps' key recommendation that armed forces members who are victims of sexual assault or harassment should have an institutionalized means of seeking redress and assistance outside the military chain of command.

To understand how central and crucial that recommendation is one only need read how Dechamps describes the current system for dealing with complaints of sexual misconduct.

First, Deschamps says it is clear that victims of sexual misbehaviour are very reluctant to report what has happened to them.

They fear, Deschamps tells us, being labeled as troublemakers, being ostracized, suffering negative career consequences, and don't expect their complaints to be taken seriously.

A redress process that makes matters worse

As for the minority of victims who do report their abuse, Deschamps argues that they face a process that might seem ridiculous, were it not so tragic for many armed forces members.

"Before a complaint of sexual harassment is finally resolved," Deschamps explains, "the parties may have to pursue three separate stages of attempted resolution: a process of alternate dispute resolution (in which the complainant is encouraged to confront the alleged harasser informally), an administrative investigation by the Responsible Officer, and a grievance. This process is overly long and burdensome."

Deschamps goes on to say that "pressure to settle complaints at the lowest level functions to stifle complaints and intimidate complainants; it has the very opposite effect of a zero tolerance policy [italics added]."

In other words, the military not only has a culture that fosters sexual victimization; its supposed means of redress only make matters worse.

The former Supreme Court judge has proposed a clear, concrete solution.

The military, she recommends, should "create an independent centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment outside of the Canadian Armed Forces, with the responsibility for receiving reports of inappropriate sexual conduct, as well as prevention ... victim support ... and to act as a central authority for the collection of data."

The key words here are "outside of the armed forces." That would also mean outside of the established military chain of command.

Government has a history of ignoring expert recommendations

No wonder the military leadership is only willing to accept that recommendation "on principle."

There is a good chance that, when push comes to shove, the military command and the Conservative government will look for an alternative to Deschamps' "independent centre," one that does not in any way diminish the power and authority of the military brass.

They may try to make it look like they're acting on the Deschamps report.

But if there is no mechanism for those with complaints of sexual misconduct to go outside the military chain of command, it will be a sham.

This government has brazenly and almost gleefully ignored recommendations from its own experts on numerous occasions.

There were, for instance, the Chief Electoral Officer's recommendations to prevent fraud and abuse in the electoral system.

The government's response was the so-called Fair Elections Act, which not only paid little heed to most of what Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand had proposed, in a number of instances it did the exact opposite.

Less well-known was the government's response to the recommendations of its own National Panel on First Nations Education. That response came in the form of the now-dormant First Nations Control of Education Act.

As with the Fair Elections Act, the title here is entirely an oxymoron.

We will have more on that in this space very soon. Stay tuned.

And stay tuned and pay close attention to what the government actually does in response to Justice Deschamps' thorough and very frightening report.

If the government and Armed Forces command do not implement Deschamps' key recommendation of an independent centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment -- entirely outside the military -- they will be betraying all of those victims of sexual misconduct who came forward to share their fears and concerns with the former Supreme Court judge.  

 

Photo: flickr/ ResoluteSupportMedia

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.

Comments

We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:

Do

  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.

Don't

  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.