What to do when public figures get into legal trouble?
Jeremy Tunraluk’s NTI resignation tests higher standard for public figures, presumption of innocence
Jeremy Tunraluk, who resigned earlier this month from his position as president of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., says the organization’s board doesn’t understand the presumption of innocence. The board says Tunraluk didn’t live up to the higher standard of conduct expected of Inuit leaders. (File photo by Jeff Pelletier)
Everyone knows the legal system is based on the “innocent until proven guilty” principle, yet people often have a tendency to believe “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”
Jeremy Tunraluk’s resignation as Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.’s president shows how difficult it is for public figures to carry on when they get into legal trouble.
Police charged Tunraluk with assault on Dec. 3, but six weeks later the Crown stayed the charge, bringing the case against him to a halt on Jan. 15.
He was on an unpaid leave following the charge. But on Jan. 21, NTI’s board of directors passed a resolution recommending Tunraluk be removed from the elected position he won a year earlier.
NTI’s spokesperson told a reporter the board felt Tunraluk “failed to meet the high standards of conduct expected of Inuit leaders.”
For his part, Tunraluk said, “They don’t seem to understand ‘innocent unless proven guilty’” and cautioned about trying to “get rid of an innocent person who was elected.”
The episode plunged NTI, the organization responsible for ensuring terms of the Nunavut Agreement are kept, into an unexpected 11-month presidential election campaign.
It’s understandable to expect a high standard of conduct from public figures, including politicians, police, executives and other community leaders.
But it’s hard to say what the right way is to balance that higher standard with the presumption of innocence. When leaders are charged, should they be expected to resign right away? Or should they be permitted to stay on until they have their day in court?
In Nunavut, other careers have been derailed by criminal charges that were later dropped or where the accused was acquitted at trial.
In 2021, Merlin Recinos stepped down as mayor of Igloolik when he was charged with sexual assault. He insisted he would defend himself in court and he was found not guilty when the case went to trial two and a half years later.
In Iqaluit, Joanasie Akumalik resigned his city council seat in 2022 after he was charged with aggravated assault. He pleaded not guilty, and a year later, the charge was dropped.
The judge told him, “The Crown has provided no evidence of that, so you are found not guilty.”
But the damage was done. Held to a higher standard, he gave up his seat and Iqaluit residents were denied the experience he brought to council.
But in 2024, Hudson Bay MLA Daniel Qavvik kept his job after he was charged with assault. He did, however, resign his cabinet post. Court records show that a Daniel Qavvik pleaded guilty six months later, was put on probation, and returned to the legislature in May 2025.
So NTI’s president is forced to resign after a criminal charge, even though the charge was stayed. But an MLA kept his job following a similar charge, even though he pleaded guilty. (He was re-elected in last year’s territorial election.)
There’s no handbook that governs how to deal with these situations. Every one is handled differently. It’s unfortunate, because that results in an inconsistency in what the public can expect from its leaders.
I am glad he put his name forward, time to dance in the wind.
Good morning, I am glad Jeremy Tunraluk has put his name forward as NTI candidate, I am as we speak, dancing in the wind.
Kind regards,
JOHN ELL
Nunavut is part of Canada, and as such, inherits English common law, conventions, customs and concepts.
It might be worth reviewing these ideas with our new generation of leaders, so that they understand that these things underpin our democracy and way of doing things just as much as the laws that we have written down.
These conventions include the idea of maintaining the public trust. Leaders and States-people can only govern as far as they respect the honor of their position. It is their elected position that is important, it’s ability to decide for us collectively, not the person who happens to occupy that position at any given time.
When a Leader fails to maintain the public trust, it is their responsibility to resign. It does not strictly matter whether or not they provably broke a law, or were objectively wrong or incompetent in their decision-making.
It is whether or not the public remains confident that the position can be held with continued honor, trust and confidence.
Judging on voter turnout for NTI elected positions, public trust and confidence in these roles is low enough already without these incidents happening.
Clearly, we Inuit do not want people deciding things for us who happen to have brushes with the law. Having someone remain in this position, with a criminal matter hanging over their heads, erodes the authority and respect of the office of the President of NTI. As such, the outgoing President had to go.
Further, there should not have been any forcing of the matter. If public trust were understood better, our leaders should resign in such cases immediately and without being told it might be a good idea to do so.