Jennifer Lynch's ethical standard: at least we weren't charged with a crime!
Jennifer Lynch, the chief commissar of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, put out an unintentionally hilarious press release. You can see it here. Here is the full text of it, with my thoughts interspersed:
An RCMP investigation into a complaint against three employees of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) has been concluded, and resulted in no charges being laid.
Can you imagine how bad things must be at the CHRC that this is considered good news? Perhaps they should put up a big sign in the CHRC offices, like those at construction sites that say "25 days accident-free". In this case it would be "25 days without a police investigation of our conduct". Time to celebrate! Maybe the old gal will get back on a jet and go to some exotic five-star getaway in Switzerland or Africa at taxpayers' expense, like she does every other month or so.
Commission employees had been accused of improper investigative techniques while investigating cases of hate on the Internet.
Yes, they had been accused of that. But the RCMP doesn't investigate things that are merely "improper". They investigate alleged crimes. In this case, that CHRC staff hacked into the private Internet account of a citizen, so they could go online and visit neo-Nazi websites.
“The employees of the Canadian Human Rights Commission abide by the highest standards of professionalism and ethics in all aspects of their work,” said CHRC Chief Commissioner Jennifer Lynch, Q.C. “The CHRC is pleased to have this matter resolved.”
This is the money quote in the whole press release. Every single word in it is untrue, including "the" and "and".
First, employees of the CHRC do not abide by ethical or professional standards at all, let alone "the highest". As I've disclosed before, an internal government audit, stamped confidential on every page, found that the CHRC has no written ethical policy at all. Lynch is just lying.
And "professional" standards? What exactly does that mean, when it comes to censorship? Is there a censoring profession, with standards? What a crock.
But the biggest lie is that the matter is "resolved". Oh, really? Do tell: does Nelly Hechme, the woman who, according to Alain Monfette, Bell Canada's security officer, had her Internet signal accessed by the CHRC, does she think it's resolved?
Or how about the Privacy Commissioner, who is also conducing an investigation? Does she think it's resolved? Oh but Lynch thinks it's resolved. That's the problem.
The RCMP criminal investigation was launched following an allegation made by the respondent in a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal proceeding held in March 2008.
Even that isn't true. The RCMP didn't launch its investigation based on Marc Lemire's allegation. RCMP don't do that. They launched their investigation based on Bell Canada's sworn testimony that the CHRC accessed Hechme's account, and Hechme telling reporters that was shocked to learn of it. That's why the investigation was launched -- stunning facts, sworn to under oath.
Friends, could you imagine if the entire government was run with Jennifer Lynch's moral code? Imagine if the only test was: can we get away with it? Her style of management is to cover things up, and hire expensive lobby groups and PR firms to deodorize a festering wound, instead of to actually disinfect that wound. In other words, she's part of the problem. If she were a cabinet minister, she'd be sacked -- not just for her scandalous conduct, and not just for the embarrassment to the government, but for general incompetence. Things have got worse under her tenure, not better -- but that hasn't stopped her from jaunting around the world, chumming it up with Third World dictators.
Let me close with a correction -- a correction to this very blog post I'm writing now. I have titled it "Jennifer Lynch's ethical standard: at least we weren't charged with a crime!". But I don't even think I can say that's accurate.
Regular readers will know that Lynch's right hand woman in the section 13 censorship investigations is none other than Sandy Kozak. Kozak used to be a real police officer -- the first woman on her force, in fact. But then she started hanging out with a criminal herself -- a criminal her own colleagues were pursuing. She was corrupt. She was crooked. She had no moral compass. She couldn't tell wrong from right.
She was charged with offences that apply to crooked cops. And, instead of going through with a full trial, she took a plea deal -- she left the force, never to be trusted as a police woman again.
With that in mind, look at Lynch's press release again. It's a pack of lies.
Lynch says no charges were laid against her staff. No, not in the hacking case. But charges of corruption were filed against her right hand woman on section 13, Kozak.
Lynch said CHRC staff operate at the highest standard of ethics and professionalism. But Kozak, Lynch's mini-me, had such low standards, she was thrown out of a professional police force in disgrace.
The biggest error in her press release isn't a lie. It's just plain old wishful thinking: Lynch says this matter is resolved.
Like hell it is.
Fire. Them. All.