Pubdate: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 Source: Edmonton Sun (CN AB) Copyright: 2000, Canoe Limited Partnership. Contact: #250, 4990-92 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6B 3A1 Canada Fax: (780) 468-0139 Website: http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonSun/ Forum: http://www.canoe.ca/Chat/home.html Author: Doug Beazley LAWYERS WARY OF PROPOSAL Suggestion Cops Be Allowed To Break Laws Met With Reservations A federal proposal to give cops leeway to break the law - and even commit violent acts - to bolster investigations is getting nervous looks from the legal community. A Justice Canada white paper being shopped around provincial governments and police forces suggests cops be empowered to commit crimes ranging from drug trafficking to violent assaults, if they believe they need to in order to pursue an investigation. "The question we want to ask here is, why?" said lawyer Stephen Jenuth, head of the Alberta Civil Liberties Association. "There are provisions in the law now to allow officers to do things like sell drugs. Why is the government pursuing such sweeping powers all of a sudden?" The white paper deals mostly with undercover police operations and drug stings. The paper says "intentional use of force" outside of the law wouldn't be permitted except in special circumstances - such as a situation where an undercover cop uses violence to prevent another undercover cop from being exposed or to protect evidence. "Say a cop wants to infiltrate a biker group and they ask him to, for instance, go beat up Stephen Jenuth," said Jenuth. "He could make a mistake and end up killing me, I guess." Actually, the white paper says the liability shield would not cover the commission of sexual offences or assaults leading to "grievous bodily harm" or death. And a senior lawyer with Justice Canada said the shield probably wouldn't cover undercover cops committing assaults simply to prove they're not cops. "The officer would be expected to find another way," said Michael Zigayer. The special liability protection proposed by the paper would kick in when the officer got clearance from a "senior law enforcement official" designated by the Crown. But in cases where communication with that senior officer isn't possible, the cop could make a field decision to go ahead and do the crime. "It's a slippery slope, and one never knows what's at the bottom of it," said local criminal lawyer Robbie Davidson. "I can't see how this is justified." Const. Grant Obst can. The head of the Canadian Police Association said police need to be able to bend the rules occasionally in order to fight organized crime. "There are situations where we're better equipped to infiltrate criminal organizations if we're able to ... compromise the law in certain situations," he said. And Zigayer said the white paper policy wouldn't protect a cop if a subsequent criminal trial found he went too far. "The officer would face prosecution for the crime, and the evidence he gathered would be thrown out," he said. An Alberta Justice spokesman, meanwhile, said the department has "reservations" about the use-of-force provision. He wouldn't elaborate. The lawyers, justice ministers and police will get their chance to critique the paper Oct. 5 when the feds hold a special round table on their proposals. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake