logo
Military asked to consider dismissing members after 1st offence of unwanted sexual touching

Military asked to consider dismissing members after 1st offence of unwanted sexual touching

Yahoo18-07-2025
Defence Minister David McGuinty wants the military to review a trend in civilian court toward judges supporting workplaces firing Canadians for any unwanted sexual touching on the job — even if it happened once.
The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) is launching new advisory panels this fall to discipline military members for sexually inappropriate behaviour.
The minister is supportive, his office said, of an external monitor's recent recommendation that if the military wants to modernize its conduct process, it could look at a clear pattern in civilian court over the past decade.
"Now, more than ever, any type of non-consensual touching of a sexual nature within the context of one's employment is likely to lead to dismissal, even for a single event and even if there are mitigating factors," external monitor Jocelyne Therrien wrote in her June report.
Victims and experts have long raised concerns that the military has moved members involved in cases like groping to other units, given them warnings or other remedial measures. Therrien wrote that gone are the days where that's a "viable solution" and it could expose the victim or other staff to risk.
The government hired Therrien to track the military's progress implementing changes to try and reform its handling of sexual misconduct.
Retired Supreme Court justice Louise Arbour's landmark 2022 report made sweeping recommendations after a series of senior military leaders were removed from prominent roles amid allegations, causing a damaging and high-profile crisis.
Therrien estimates the military is on track to meet "the intent" of Arbour's recommendations by the end of the year. But she flags one of the biggest challenges for military is that files related to misconduct are scattered across different databases which makes it difficult to get a clearer picture of the current state of the issue.
WATCH | Can the military change how it handles sexual misconduct?:
Therrien's latest report said case law has "rapidly" and "significantly" evolved over the past 10 years.
"In reviewing these judgments, I note a clear trend towards supporting dismissal for any sexual touching in the workplace," she wrote.
More civilian judges are using the logic that sexual harassment involving unwanted touching is "unequivocally" considered sexual assault which is a criminal offence in Canada, she wrote.
Changes to the Canadian Labour Code in 2021 also require federally regulated workplaces to ensure they are harassment-free. Not dismissing people in some cases can lead to liability claims, wrote Therrien.
"The fact that similar cases in the past were dealt with through administrative measures other than dismissal no longer carries any weight," Therrien said.
The minister's office says McGuinty supports Therrien's recommendation that "the significant evolution in workplace harassment case law should be considered as the CAF continues modernization."
McGuinty's office told CBC News the minister will be looking for the upcoming panels "to yield real results." They will include law and sexual misconduct experts, the office said.
Therrien's report also said the military is considering launching a "scale of severity" to help determine if members should be kicked out or otherwise reprimanded.
People moved around
Megan MacKenzie, a professor at Simon Fraser University who specializes in military culture, says the CAF should adopt a one-strike-you're-out policy for unwanted sexual touching.
"This is a really significant recommendation," said MacKenzie.
"There is just no ambiguity for anyone in any workplace at this point in time that inappropriate touching, touching of a sexual nature, is not OK."
In the past, these kinds of cases were often called "low-level harassing behaviours" and the military dealt with it internally including by shuffling people around as a temporary solution, she said.
"That doesn't solve the problem," she said. "It moves the problem to a different unit and the alleged victim and the accuser may still have interactions with each other."
The CAF has been grappling with sexual misconduct for decades while saying it has a "zero-tolerance policy," she said.
MacKenzie said kicking out people for unwanted touching would demonstrate that policy.
Supporting victims
Retired master corporal Sherry Bordage, who reported being groped by her superior, said it's time for the military to act.
"Why allow predators to continue to hide within the ranks? What possible good could that serve?" she said.
Bordage reported her platoon commander touched her breast and made inappropriate comments at a mess dinner in 2010 at CFB Borden.
In military court, a Canadian Armed Forces judge stayed proceedings for the criminal sexual assault charge against Master Warrant Officer D.J. Prosser, according to the court martial documents.
Prosser pleaded guilty to a lesser military service offence for ill treatment of a subordinate, the records show.
Military judge Lt.-Col. Louis-Vincent d'Auteuil noted he took into consideration several mitigating factors, including that it was "an isolated incident" and "unusual" for Prosser who had spent 30 years serving in the military at that time, his reason for sentencing said.
The military judge gave Prosser a reprimand and a $1,500 fine — and allowed him to continue serving.
Bordage said she left the forces in 2014 because she didn't feel safe and faced reprisals from her chain of command for reporting the incident.
She says the military should kick out members for unwanted sexual touching to keep others safe.
"This decision, had it been implemented during my time, would have been night and day," said Bordage.
The CAF has not yet responded to a CBC News request for comment.
Therrien's report contained a long list of findings and notes a new probationary period for recruits could help weed out problematic members early on.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Justice Department files complaint against judge who blocked deportations
Justice Department files complaint against judge who blocked deportations

USA Today

time26 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Justice Department files complaint against judge who blocked deportations

In a social media post, the attorney general accused District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg of making "improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration." The U.S. Department of Justice has intensified its scrutiny of the judiciary by filing a formal misconduct complaint against one of President Donald Trump's least-favorite federal judges. Attorney General Pam Bondi said on July 28 that she directed her agency to file the grievance because James Boasberg, the 62-year-old chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, made "improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration" in March. "These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will not stand for that," Bondi wrote on X. Boasberg is the judge who initially blocked the deportation flights of hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members the Trump administration carried out under the Alien Enemies Act. When the administration ignored his order to bring the flights back, Boasberg began contempt proceedings, which were later halted by an appeals court. The Supreme Court eventually vacated the temporary ban on the deportations. Read more: Trump shipped them to El Salvador. Their families say their only crime was a tattoo. President Donald Trump said on social media in March that Boasberg was a "Radical Left Lunatic" and called for his impeachment. John Roberts, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, intervened, issuing a rare public statement that said in part: "For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision." Read more: Chief Justice John Roberts rebukes Trump after president calls for judge's impeachment In Bondi's complaint, Chad Mizelle, her chief of staff, accused Boasberg of attempting to improperly influence Roberts and other judges during a conference on March 11. Mizelle said that Boasberg expressed concerns about the Trump administration disregarding federal court rulings, and those alleged remarks violated rules that judges have to follow about not discussing pending cases in public. Then-President George W. Bush first nominated Boasberg in 2002 to serve on the primary trial court for Washington, D.C. Boasberg advanced to the federal bench in 2011 thanks to a lifetime appointment from then-President Barack Obama. An assistant to Boasberg declined to comment. Contributing: Reuters

Advocates question fairness as federal government backs away from pharmacare program
Advocates question fairness as federal government backs away from pharmacare program

Hamilton Spectator

time3 hours ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

Advocates question fairness as federal government backs away from pharmacare program

OTTAWA - Reproductive health advocates say the federal government's failure to commit to funding pharmacare in all provinces and territories is leaving people with a lot of uncertainty, and could create inequality across the country. 'It's really disappointing, honestly,' said Liz Thompson, advocacy lead for Cover Contraception. 'It seems like they don't really know what they're going to do.' The first phase of the Pharmacare Act, which was passed last fall by the Liberals and the NDP, calls for the federal government to fund the cost of contraceptives and diabetes medications for patients. It also calls on the government to study the best way to create a universal pharmacare program to cover all medications. The Trudeau government signed deals with B.C., P.E.I., Yukon and Manitoba to cover the cost of certain medications for four years. It also set aside $1.5 billion in the last budget to fund the first phase of the program — but the new Liberal government will not commit to signing deals with the remaining jurisdictions. Health Minister Marjorie Michel was asked about the lack of new pharmacare negotiations with the provinces last week. She did not commit to getting the remaining deals done. 'It's a new government, and we are in a new context, and we have to have discussions with the provinces to see how we can support them,' she said at a press conference in Fredericton. During the spring election campaign, the Liberals pledged in their platform to 'protect dental care and pharmacare — two critical services and key parts of a strong public health care system that (Conservative Leader) Pierre Poilievre would cut.' A spokesperson for Prime Minister Mark Carney said in response to questions that the Liberal leader promised during the campaign 'that we wouldn't cut or abolish any of the existing deals.' 'That's incredibly disappointing and demonstrates a fundamental lack of leadership on this issue,' said Teale Phelps Bondaroff, the chair and co-founder of the Access B.C. campaign, which has been advocating for prescription contraceptive coverage since 2017. Phelps Bondaroff said the Liberals do not seem to be prioritizing 'people's health and well-being and equity and equality' as they focus on the threat of U.S. tariffs. 'You have a government that's hyper-focused on these macro issues and I worry that they're forgetting about everyday Canadians in that process,' he said. B.C. became the first province to offer contraceptive coverage in 2023 and was among the first to sign a federal funding agreement. Access B.C. now has sister organizations in a number of other provinces, including Cover Contraception in Ontario. Dr. Amanda Black, past president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, said if the government does not sign new agreements, it will be a step backward for women's health in Canada. 'I think we need to pressure both at the provincial level as well as at the federal level,' she said. The Canadian Press reached out to Diabetes Canada for comment but has not heard back. Julie Veinot, the executive director of South Shore Sexual Health in Nova Scotia, said people across the country should expect to have equal coverage. 'It is quite a shock to me that there is even the possibility that some provinces won't get this coverage,' she said. Veinot said she expected the Liberals would continue their own program. 'Unfortunately, we know the cost of living is super high right now, so we don't want folks to have to pick between paying rent and buying birth control,' she said. The Canadian Labour Congress celebrated the passage of the Pharmacare Act last fall, calling it a victory and a first step toward something unions have been advocating for years. Elizabeth Kwan, a senior researcher at the congress, said if the government does not reach deals with the remaining provinces and territories, it is 'breaking a promise to Canadians.' 'The government needs to understand that nation-building means also nation-building with the social programs that define us as Canadians. And I believe that that's part of what makes us a sovereign country,' she said. Kwan added that many Canadians depend on coverage for medications through their workplace insurance plans, and 'a lot of people in Canada are losing their jobs these days' — from the thousands laid off due to the closure of Hudson's Bay, to the 10,000 jobs lost at Ontario colleges due to cuts and program cancellations. Layoffs and job losses are expected to rise in tariff-exposed sectors like manufacturing and industries related to steel and aluminum, she said. 'And this is why we need a universal public system,' Kwan said. — With files from Hannah Alberga in Toronto This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 28, 2025.

Letters to the Editor: Readers offer their own grades for Trump's first six months
Letters to the Editor: Readers offer their own grades for Trump's first six months

Los Angeles Times

time3 hours ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Letters to the Editor: Readers offer their own grades for Trump's first six months

To the editor: Going along with contributing writer Josh Hammer's A-average assessment ('Report card on Trump's first six months shows a lot of wins, a little room for growth,' July 25), I offer these additions: Ensuring the increase of economic inequality in this country: A+. With President Trump's manipulation of tariffs and taxes, American billionaires will get even richer and average citizens will struggle to buy groceries and pay for medical care, never mind homes. Keeping our international allies guessing: A+. Will we have any allies left in three years? Creating havoc and instability in cities with a large immigrant population: A+. So what if around 70% of those swept up in Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids have no criminal convictions? At least we got the other 30%. Denigrating as many opposition voices as possible: A+. Attack universities, defund public broadcasting, prohibit diversity, equity and inclusion, restrict voting rights, ban books, sue journalists and disable support for education at all levels. Disregard for future generations and the effects of climate change: A+. Roll back restrictions on fossil fuel and disable support for renewable energy resources. Decrease staff protecting our national parks. Ruling with intimidation and threats: A+. Exhibit A: Jan. 6, 2021. Exhibit B: Some Republican lawmakers are OK with Exhibit A. Breaking with American traditions and founding principles: A+. Who needs three branches of government anyway when you have a genius at the reins? Constitution? Oh, that old thing? Normalizing unethical behavior, name-calling and blatant lying coming from the president of the United States: A+++. Gotta give it to him: He really is a genius at this. Laura Owen, Santa Monica .. To the editor: Economy: The stock market's up, but more than 60,000 tech workers have been laid off, tourism's down $29 billion and tariffs are crushing small businesses. 'Historic' trade deals are repairs covered in flattery for Trump's own mess. Grade: D. Domestic policy: His talking points don't make America safer, healthier or smarter. Grade: C-. Immigration: Deportations are down, but cruelty is up — snatching citizens, legal residents and people already in the system. Nothing about this makes us safer. Grade: F. Law: Those 'ludicrous' injunctions from lower courts are more reasoned than the Supreme Court's shadow docket rulings. Grade: C. Foreign policy: Aiding ethnic cleansing in Gaza isn't 'rewarding friends.' Delaying Iran's program (maybe only by months) isn't safety. Grade: C. Charla Myers, Santa Monica .. To the editor: On my grading scale, Trump gets an F for empathy, an F for honesty and an F for just plain human decency. And clearly, he does not play well with others. Joyce Altschule-Pisarev, Long Beach

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store