RCMP Watch

Kim Bolan, CanWest News Service

A former RCMP inspector told the Air India inquiry Monday he was never approached by Ontario Lt.-Gov. James Bartleman about a specific threat against Flight 182 in the days before it was blown out of the sky.

Lloyd Hickman was the ranking RCMP officer at a June 18, 1985 meeting to discuss Sikh extremism. Earlier this month, Bartleman testified  he had interrupted the meeting to bring forward new intelligence about a threat to Air India for the weekend of June 22-23, but had been brushed off by the senior RCMP officer.

Bartleman, then in charge of intelligence for the External Affairs Department, said he could not remember the officer’s name, but the moment was seared in his mind because of the rudeness with which he recalls the incident unfolding.

Hickman, however, said he would have remembered an encounter like the one described by Bartleman and it just did not happen.

“I had only seen or met Mr. Bartleman once,” he told inquiry commissioner John Major. “Certainly if he had called me out of a meeting to talk to me, I would have remembered that.”

Bartleman’s testimony contradicted the official government position that for years has held that there was no specific warning against Air India Flight 182 on the weekend it was bombed, killing all 329 people aboard.

Hickman, who worked in VIP security at the time, said he was never made aware of a specific warning against Air India.

He also said that if any young RCMP inspector had treated Bartleman the way the lieutenant governor described, he would have been talked to and possibly had a reprimand placed on his file.

“I can tell you, from my perspective, if I would have acted in an unrespectful manner in any way, shape or form - that could have been a career-ending move for me,” Hickman said.  “I knew Mr. Bartleman. We had a good meeting the week before, of which he was, I think, very pleased with.”

Hickman further testified that if he had received the information as Bartleman said, he would have ensured it was passed on to all senior people in the RCMP and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service for review and response.

“I would have run it up the line and down the line and I would have made sure that it went to our director. I would have made sure it went to airport policing. I would have put it in a telex,” Hickman testified. “I would have sent it to CSIS for an evaluation.”

Bartleman, by contrast, testified that the information was raw, unevaluated intelligence from the Communications Security Establishment and that the RCMP officer had claimed to already know about it. He also said the RCMP officer had “hissed” at him and told him he should not tell him how to do his job.

Hickman argued that, to his knowledge, RCMP officers never saw raw intercept data from the CSE. Instead, it would have been passed to CSIS for analysis and threat assessment.

Major asked Hickman what the RCMP would have done differently at Pearson International if it had known about a threat against Air India on the weekend it was targeted.

Hickman said he could not answer as his expertise was in providing security to Indian missions and he had never worked in airport security specifically.

Earlier Monday, Major criticized a lawyer for Air India for an interview she gave a Toronto newspaper, in which she said the inquiry was unnecessary.

“I think Air India is being unfairly scapegoated,” Soma Ray-Ellis was quoted as saying. “For almost 22 years, Air India has been the face of public blame and responsibility. We don’t need an inquiry to further exploit that.”

Major said Ray-Ellis should save her comments for the inquiry.

The inquiry was called in 2006 after a renewed campaign by victims’ families who were devastated when two B.C. Sikh separatists were acquitted of charges in connection with the Air India bombing and a second blast the same day at Tokyo’s Narita Airport that killed two baggage handlers.