Public trust in policing starts with openness
New top cops in Nunavut, Nunavik pledge transparency in bid to build trust
From left, Andrew Blackadar looks on as RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme presents Chief Supt. Kent Pike with an RCMP flag. The Dec. 10 handover marks the transfer of command of Nunavut RCMP from Blackadar to Pike. (Photo by Jeff Pelletier)
The North has two new police chiefs and they both have several challenges in common ahead of them — they must help their police forces earn public trust, and demonstrate transparency and accountability.
The RCMP’s Nunavut division held a change of command ceremony Dec. 10 to welcome its new commanding officer, Chief Supt. Kent Pike.
And in late November, the Nunavik Police Service got a new interim chief, Jean-François Bernier.
On their way in, they each had similar messages.
“I’m committed to the territory and I’m going to do my best for everyone,” Pike told reporters after the Dec. 10 ceremony. He vowed to lead with “transparency and accountability.”
Bernier spoke to Kativik Regional Government council for the first time publicly on Nov. 28 in Kuujjuaq.
“I appreciate the opportunity to engage with the community,” he said, vowing to be “reachable.”
Bernier arrives as Nunavik’s police force faces intense scrutiny over three shooting deaths of Inuit men during interactions with the police since November 2024.
On top of that, Bernier arrived with his own controversy. Because the internet never forgets, it wasn’t long before some Nunavimmiut were sharing a 2006 news article that reported Bernier got a four-day suspension and reprimand over a 2002 arrest he made and for making racist comments (he called the man the N-word).
To his credit, Bernier was “reachable” when a Nunatsiaq News reporter wanted to ask him about it. The comment was a mistake he made as a young constable, he said.
It’s fair for the public to be concerned about the new chief’s history, especially because his officers interact with the region’s majority-Inuit population. It’s also fair to believe that people make mistakes and that they learn from them.
As a newspaper, we welcome the pledges both police chiefs made to be transparent. One of the things that will help that transparency is prompt, full release of information to the public.
Information about someone who has been charged with a crime is generally a matter of public record. But there has been a tendency for police not to release some details about someone they have charged.
When a person is charged, the arresting officer fills out a form known as the “information.” It lists the name, age and hometown of the accused as well as the sections of the Criminal Code they are accused of violating. It also includes the date and time of the alleged crime and a brief description of the allegations, often including the victim’s name.
That document is part of the court record and is available to any member of the public after the accused person appears in court for the first time.
Because those details are going to be public eventually, it’s hard to understand why the police don’t routinely give that information to reporters — who represent the public — at the time of the arrest.
Nunavut and Nunavik should welcome the spirit both Pike and Bernier bring to be transparent and to build trust in the communities they serve.
Faster and fuller disclosure of the allegations against people who are charged with crimes is one thing the new chiefs can do to be more transparent and to help build trust with the communities they serve.
Crown to trust a criminal after making a mistake? Lol
How can a Crown serve his subjects better.? Without shooting them first…
Who is the enemy? Lol
Trust is the first thing to go…
And the last thing to gain….
Especially from a criminal…. lol
“Because those details are going to be public eventually, it’s hard to understand why the police don’t routinely give that information to reporters — who represent the public — at the time of the arrest.”
Possibly because sometimes the person initially arrested is released for any number of reasons, including further investigation showing actual innocence. By the time they appear in court, police and prosecutors tend to be confident they have the right person. Early in the investigation, they may be not as confident. If they widely spread the information for the media to blast it out, it does two things: the public may only read the first headline, and an innocent person is presumed by the public to be guilty. The second thing is that the defense when it goes to trial could use that to try and get the defendant off. “Hey, look at Nunatsiaq News: they wrote a story that someone completely different was arrested for the crime!”
It’s funny to see this sort of complaint from come out this week, of all weeks, when there’s controversy in the United States for exactly this sort of thing happening: the FBI (and press) loudly going on about arresting a suspect for the shooting at Brown University, with that person’s identity being widely broadcast, only for it to turn out to have been the wrong person entirely. The fact that this didn’t cause any introspection before this editorial came out suggests why the police aren’t keen to do it.