Government trying to 'bully' public servants, accused leaker says
- Thread starter CBC News
- Start date
I was a civil servant of sorts a long time ago. Every civil servant signs a form that says they will not disclose any information of any sort to anyone who is unentitled to that information. There are no exceptions. Mr. Monaghan intentionally, and stupidly, broke the rules for his own reasons. He is an idiot, and should be out on his ear.
As far as I am aware, the presumption of his innoccence still stands, prejudicial judgement towards his background and music choices aside. Trial by media is hardly a trial at all.
To get back to what action is justified, the "no exceptions" is unenforceable. Since it is quite easy to recall a very recent event where it is easily justified. There were allegations of torture in Afghanistan. The government denied knowing about any credible allegations. An access of information application turned up a heavily edited document. A public servant leaked the unedited document which showed that the government did in fact know about the allegations of torture. Showing that the previous prisoner exchange agreement was breaching the geneva convention by not monitoring the situation faithfully. Very few people stood up and asked for that public servant to be found and lambasted.
With the environment, the ethical situation is murky. People who believe it is a non-issue are frequent. However, it is a public interest issue and should be discussed openly with the public, or at the very least with the public's representatives. If there was a plot afoot to dump toxins in a town water supply, people would want those documents leaked. Yet, this is a convoluted plan which seeks to circumvent global standards, continue dumping toxins into the world water supply (and air supply), continue amplifying the green-house effect and simultaneously seeks to pull the wool over the eyes of citizens. This is not the sort of issue that needs to be confidential for any reason whatsoever. This is the sort of issue that effects far more people than the citizens of Canada and the government seeks to hide it to create a populist spin.
Then there is the witch-hunt. Having lost the opportunity to create spin, the government moved to damage control. There is a narrow area between an issue that is so trivial that firing is the only option and an issue that is so serious that the leak would be covered under the conservatives's new accountability act. They believed that fell in there, found a suspect that could easily be pinned and called the police. The police found there wasn't enough evidence to charge the individual, but because of his background the media quickly did what the police couldn't: convicted him in the eyes of the public. What did they use? The prejudice of people towards a group synomous with the Kamikaze's and a cartoon of a plane, not flying into parliament, but over it. Using simple attacks against Mr. Monaghan's character and weasel words, soon everyone was convinced about this man's guilt. Everyone except the police.
We have justified leaks on one hand (Afghanistan), their justification forever enshrined in new laws. A leak which is justifiable to those who believe in the severity of climate change on the other hand. Then we have a presumably innocent man where the only real evidence is his angry denouncement of how he was treated, continually misconstrued by the media, to use their weasel-words "stopping short of confession." From which we see the success of the witch-hunt: don't let anybody notice that this should not have been confidential in the first place.