CKNW Editorial
for February 29, 2000

The Prime Minister is chicken ... and he's hiding something. And his excuses for not testifying at the Hughes Inquiry into the Apec conference are woefully weak and clearly lead to the conclusion that he doesn't want to talk.

Part of his refusal seems almost to be raising some sort of executive privilege ... he talks of the rarity of Prime Ministers giving evidence at hearings as if that gives him some sort of immunity.

It is true that some constitutionalists give the Head of State immunity if the case might incriminate them but that goes back to the now much discredited notion that the King can do no wrong. Both Presidents Nixon and Clinton tried that one on for size and got second prize. But the answer with Mr Chretien is that he is not the head of state but merely the head of government and no one has ever suggested that heads of governments have immunity - except, of course, when the head of government is a dictator.

Which of course Jean Chretien is.

What is this inquiry really all about? The question of over reaction by the police and incidents of brutality are, of course there. But the major thrust of the investigation ought to be whether or not the government interfered with the RCMP and of that there may not be direct evidence but there sure is plenty of smoke coming under the door of the Prime Minister's Office that smells a lot like gun powder.

RCMP in testimony have alluded to directions coming from high places. One witness says she heard the Prime Minister expressing thoughts that sounded a lot like orders to the police. We have the extraordinary spectacle of the police clearly going beyond the mere protection of "dignitaries" like Suharto of Indonesia and instead ensuring their visual comfort ... how else do you explain the brutal treatment of Craig Jones who was displaying cloth signs saying "Free Speech" and "democracy"? You may remember that Jones, then a law student, was thrown to the ground and while one policeman handcuffed him another jumped up and down on his legs ... he was thrown, bound, into a cop car and tossed in jail. And what about Jaggi Singh who was jailed a couple of days before the parade?

The issues of police over reaction and brutality are very important to be sure. But what Canadians must be even more concerned about is the politicization of the national police force. The moving of the Commissioner into the role of Deputy Minister in the Solicitor-general's office is but one piece of evidence leading to the conclusion that the national police force is now under the thumb of the Prime Minister since the Prime Minister appoints the Solicitor-general.

What's Mr Chretien concerned about that he would refuse an invitation to testify that he could have done while having breakfast in bed had he wanted to? Well, I'll tell you what the Prime Minister has to hide ... he did direct the RCMP to ensure not only the safety but the comfort and convenience dictators in China and Indonesia, both then repressive regimes.

He did it through his Foreign Minister, Lloyd Axworthy and he did it through his Solicitor-General Andy Scott. And I believe that the only reasonable inference you can draw from his refusal to testify is that Jean Chretien personally made it clear that he wanted Suharto's stay to be free of embarrassment. Whether he did it as Henry II did when wanting to be rid of that troublesome priest Thomas a-Becket, just a few well chosen words in well chosen places, or directly is only a matter of form, not substance. By way of aside, can you imagine the fuss that Canadians would be making if it was Brian Mulroney that was involved?

This Prime Minister, in so many ways, has set himself up as a dictator for whom there are no constraints. And according to the polls, the people love it. If those polls are accurate, Canadians have no right to complain as their rights are eroded and we endure one man rule.

Jean Chretien, like all dictators is a bully and a coward. His letter to Ted Hughes confirms that in spades - as if any proof were really needed.