Janet McFarland (Globe and Mail) – A senior RCMP official says the force needs the power to compel testimony from witnesses in white-collar crime cases, arguing the unwillingness of third parties to give evidence is the main obstacle major corporate crime investigations.
Chief Superintendent Stephen White, who is in charge of all the RCMP’s financial crime operations, said investigators are routinely told that a company’s lawyers have forbidden employees from talking to police investigating a case of alleged wrongdoing at a firm.
He called for a new legal power to question third-party witnesses – but not people who are the targets of investigations – saying it would put Canada on the same footing as the U.S., which has a grand jury system where witnesses can be compelled to give evidence under oath, or as Britain, where the director of the Serious Fraud Office can compel witness testimony in financial fraud cases.
“These rules are out there, and they’re having an impact,” Chief Supt. White said.
He made his pitch for greater powers during an Ontario Securities Commission conference yesterday to explore ways to improve Canada’s track record at investigating and prosecuting securities crimes.
Murray Segal, Ontario’s deputy attorney-general, said one of the greatest challenges is the slow speed of cases winding through the court system.
“I think the big issue we have to wrestle with is the issue of delay and how we can become more effective,” he said.
Many of Ontario’s highest-profile white-collar crime cases in recent years have taken a decade or more to investigate and prosecute, including those of executives from Livent Inc. and Bre-X Minerals Ltd.
Patrick LeSage, former chief justice of the Ontario Superior Court and now an OSC commissioner, said judges could play a role in speeding cases by becoming more aggressive about insisting on fewer delays.
OSC enforcement director Tom Atkinson said one significant cause of delay is the slow response of financial institutions when asked to provide banking information about clients under investigation.
If you examine the situation I believe you will find that the issue is in the lack of the ability to force compliance with respect to the financial institutions and their employees.
I believe you can determine the gist of the concern the following paragraph: “He called for a new legal power to question third-party witnesses – but not people who are the targets of investigations – saying it would put Canada on the same footing as the U.S., which has a grand jury system where witnesses can be compelled to give evidence under oath, or as Britain, where the director of the Serious Fraud Office can compel witness testimony in financial fraud cases.”
This does not necessarily increase the “powers” of the police, as it does effect cooperation in serious criminal matters being investigated by judicial bodies. Clear enough?
Secondly the time it takes for any case to proceed through the judicial system appears to be a matter of years. The reticence with respect to the financial institution coupled with the legal delays appears to be identified as the main issues. Also quite clear no?
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
0 
0
More Powers?
They can’t even stop the brown cash bags going around from the top down in Ottawa, why would they care about the rest of Canada or putting a stop to the bribes coming in from other countries.
Haven’t we seen this with Schriber and Mulroney and how police handled that one.
All they seem care about in Ottawa is their image not the work that has to be done.
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
0 
0
Canada has one the worst records of prosecuting white collar crime in the developed world. Prof. Amir Attaran (U of Ottawa) :
“accuses Canada of deliberately maintaining the loosest corruption laws of any developed country. Bribery of foreign public officials is only criminal if the transaction occurs entirely in this country. Canadian executives can pass out cash stuffed envelopes around the world but they enjoy exemption from prosecution here. None of the other 29 OECD countries has this loophole and, despite mighty complaints from abroad, Canada cravenly refuses to close it.”
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
0 
0