The Canadian embassy in Beijing on January 15, 2019.GREG BAKER/AFP/Getty Images
The head of the public inquiry into foreign interference is granting opposition parties the right to cross-examine witnesses at hearings that will investigate meddling in Canadian politics by countries such as China.
According to a March 11 letter from lead commission counsel Shantona Chaudhury, obtained by The Globe and Mail, Justice Marie-Josée Hogue is making major changes – adjustments that could significantly affect the conduct of the hearings by giving more powers to those critical of Ottawa’s record on the matter.
The move from Justice Hogue follows months of criticism, particularly from the Conservative Party, which was denied full party standing at the inquiry despite being a target of meddling by China.
The letter from Ms. Chaudhury outlines rights, including cross-examination, that will be extended to the Conservative Party, the New Democrats, the Bloc Québécois, as well as former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole.
All four were granted intervenor status late last year for the fact-finding phase of the probe – standing that comes with fewer rights than party standing. Those granted party standing, or full standing, already have the right to cross-examine witnesses.
In her letter, which was sent to parties and Mr. O’Toole, Ms. Chaudhury did not explain why Justice Hogue had decided to grant parties the additional rights, only that “as the commission’s investigation has progressed, the commissioner now considers it appropriate.”
Commission spokesperson Michael Tansey said in a statement Tuesday night that the commissioner has the discretion to allow an intervenor to exercise additional rights.
“Based on the progress of the Commission’s investigation to date and the interests of each of these Interveners, the Commissioner has decided to exercise this discretion and to grant them, for the duration of the Stage 1 public hearings (March 27 – April 10), the right to cross-examine witnesses and, to assist them preparing these cross-examinations, the right to access the Party database of documents,” he said.
The commission noted, however, that no party or intervenor will have access to classified documents or information, either before or during hearings. “The commission has no authority to disclose classified information to participants,” Ms. Chaudhury wrote.
These changes would significantly narrow the gap between intervenor and party status for the three opposition parties and Mr. O’Toole.
Ms. Chaudhury said that Justice Hogue “intends to render a judgment to formalize this decision by the end of this week so that you can gain access to documents at the same time as parties.”
The letter asks the parties to indicate by March 15 whether they wish to be granted additional rights. If no response is received, Ms. Chaudhury said, “the commissioner will assume that you wish to avail yourself of these enhanced rights.”
The Conservative Party said it was heartened by the proposal.
“This decision by the Commissioner validates the concerns we have expressed from the outset about the Commissioner’s decision to deny full party standing to the Conservative Party,” Sebastian Skamski, director of media relations for the Opposition Leader’s office, said in a statement.
“While we are pleased with the Commissioner’s change of heart, we will continue to demand that the inquiry provides the full truth to Canadians about foreign interference in our elections and listens to the voices of the many Canadians who have been intimidated or harassed by hostile foreign regimes.”
The party’s former leader, Mr. O’Toole, said Tuesday that he has “appreciated the professional approach of the inquiry and welcome this development.”
The New Democrats also applauded Justice Hogue’s plan. “This is a welcome development. New Democrats have always been clear we want transparency for Canadians. People have to be able to have full confidence that their voice and their vote matters in the electoral process.”
Stephanie Carvin, a national-security expert and associate professor at Carleton University, said Justice Hogue’s proposal would help counter earlier criticism of the inquiry and make the process more open and accountable.
“Having more parties who are better prepared to scrutinize and ask tough questions is good and you want that happening in the actual inquiry and not on social media,” Prof. Carvin said. “If the questioning gets overly partisan or political, the judge has remedies for this.”
Prof. Carvin said Justice Hogue still has the challenge of satisfying the legitimate concerns of some diaspora groups, such as the Uyghur Human Rights Advocacy Project and Canadian Friends of Hong Kong, who say they won’t participate because she granted party standing during the first phase to former Ontario Liberal cabinet minister Michael Chan, now deputy mayor of Markham, Ont., and independent MP Han Dong.
These organizations said they would not want to present documents or testify before the inquiry because Mr. Dong and Mr. Chan could have access to documentary evidence and cross-examine witnesses. Both men are seen by many diaspora groups as too close to the Chinese consulate in Toronto.
”What you have is a group of individuals who have been victimized for decades and they are faced with the prospect of having their life experiences cross-examined in some cases by people who have been very critical of the idea that Canada has a foreign interference problem and that has always been a limitation of this particular format,” Prof. Carvin said.
The hearings will examine and assess interference by China, Russia and other foreign states and actors in the 2019 and 2021 elections, as well as the period leading up to these votes.
It follows months of reporting in 2023 on Chinese foreign interference, including revelations reported in The Globe and Mail that Beijing targeted Conservative foreign affairs critic Michael Chong and his relatives in Hong Kong – attempted intimidation that the MP was never told about. The disclosure of this meddling prompted the Canadian government to expel Chinese diplomat Zhao Wei in May, 2023.
The Globe and Mail produced more than 15 stories in 2023 based on national-security sources and secret Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) documents, including a February story relying on CSIS intelligence reports that described a concerted strategy by Beijing to disrupt the democratic process in the 2021 election.