... Pssst: an RCMP raid on a journalist's home, in January 2004, raises questions about the media's role as society's watchdog and guardian of the fights of others.

Here's what John Ibbitson wrote in the Globe and Mail the day after the Mounties swooped on journalist Juliet O'Neill's house and office in January 2004: "If you call a national-affairs reporter, today, we can't promise you our phones aren't being tapped. If you have confidential information that you think needs to be revealed in the public interest, we can't promise you that the police won't get your name. We'll do our best, but they're seizing our hard drives and reading our e-mail." The raid was in connection with an article Ms. O'Neill wrote in the Ottawa Citizen newspaper using information from an unidentified source. Was the raid an attempt to bully the media into silence?

Most journalists regularly rely on confidential sources. If they didn't promise to protect those sources, they would lose them. As one journalist pointed out, without confidential sources, most newspapers would function primarily as public-relations agencies, printing little but self-serving propaganda. At the time of the raid, Ontario MP John Bryden, a veteran newspaperman, said it was time for the government to review the Security of Information Act to build in some sort of protection for journalists who receive confidential information. "Journalists simply have to protect their sources and they have to be immune from this sort of search procedure."

Ottawa Citizen Editor Scott Anderson described the raids as

"a black, black day for freedom in this country ... I am absolutely outraged that we seem to be living in such a police state that journalists are targeted" for doing their job of informing the public.

It was a bad day for Prime Minister Paul Martin as well when he had to point out: "Lookit! Canada is not a police state." This is the fall-out from the hastily passed Bill C-36, a knee-jerk security response to the terrorist attacks of September 2001 in New York and Washington. It seems it didn't occur to anyone that the changes made to the Official Secrets Act by Bill C36 might be used to silence journalists.

An Ontario judge, Madam Justice Mary Lou Benotto, agreed that journalists' right to protect the confidentiality of their sources is key to the media's freedom set out in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. She presided over a case in April 2001 involving a National Post journalist who received an anonymous tip. It was a package containing a document indicating that then-prime minister Jean Chretien had lent money to a golf club in his riding, placing him in a potential conflict of interest.

Lawyers for the National Post, the Globe and Mail, and the CBC launched a major courtroom battle in defence of the principle of confidentiality. Fifteen prominent reporters and editors testified to establish that journalists sometimes need to guarantee sources that their identities will remain secret.

Judge Benotto thought so too: she said that a search warrant that would have forced the journalist to reveal a confidential source for the politically charged story should never have been granted. She argued that most people are informed through the press, and for the press to do its job, confidential sources are crucial. She even suggested that theft of governmental or corporate information may sometimes be justifiable, if it's in the public interest, and that journalist-source confidentiality is as important to society as to the press itself.

"The expectation that a source will remain confidential is often the very reason people feel free to go to the press," she said. "Often, the more explosive the story is, the greater the risk to the informant if he or she is exposed. Reputations, livelihoods, and security may be at stake.

"Sources want confidentiality for a variety of reasons. They may, themselves, be breaching a duty of confidentiality. They may have stolen the information. They may fear economic reprisals. They may lose their jobs. They may fear for their safety. They may fear for the safety of their families."

If reporters wrote only what they were encouraged to write based on supplied material, Judge Benotto reasoned, Canadians might never learn about important stories of considerable public interest: "Confidential sources are essential to the effective functioning of the media in a free and democratic society."

SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES:

1. Judge Mary Lou Benotto said that without journalist confidentiality Canadians would not have learned about the tainted tuna scandal, problems in the City of Toronto's inspections of restaurants, an illegal slaughterhouse, the payment of secret commissions in the Airbus aircraft story, wrongdoing by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and, details of former prime minister Jean Chretien's financial interests in a Quebec golf course in his home riding. Report on these stories, or find others that you think were important to society as a whole.

2. In late January 2004, CanWest, the corporate parent of the Ottawa Citizen, announced it was going to court to protect material seized from reporter Juliet O'Neill, denouncing the RCMP raid on her home and office as an unconstitutional attempt to frighten journalists. Report on the progress and outcome of the case.

Websites

Canadian Association of Journalists--http://www.caj.ca/index.html

Press Freedom Awards--http://www.cjfe.org/eng/awards/awards.html

Press Quotes--http://quotes.telemanage.ca/quotes.nsf/QuotesByCat?

Read-Form&Start=1&Count=1000&ExpandView&RestrictToCategory=Press

World Press Freedom Committee--http://www.wpfc.org

CANADIANS TAKE NOTE

Canada isn't the first country that comes to mind when you think of World Press Freedom Day, which was established by the General Assembly of the United Nations in December 1993. Every year on 3rd UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) coordinates activities that focus on freedom of the press around the world. Police raiding publishers' offices and journalists homes would certainly be seen as a concern.

UNESCO sees the event as a day to encourage and develop freedom of the press, and assess the state of press freedom worldwide, It's also a day to increase public awareness of the importance of freedom of the press, and one of remembrance for journalists who nave lost their lives in the exercise of their profession. And, it is "a day of support for media which fall victim to any measures which restrain, or seek to abolish freedom of the press."

As the UN sees it: "Press freedom is considered to be a cornerstone of human rights ant a guarantee of other freedoms. It encourages transparency and good governance and it ensures that society enjoys the rule of true justice. Freedom of the press is a bridge of understanding and knowledge. It is essential for the exchange of ideas between nations and cultures which s a condition for true understanding and lasting cooperation"

FACT FILE

No Canadian journalist has ever been successfully prosecuted for publishing official secrets.

THE PRICE OF HONOUR

Whistleblowers are the folks who disclose information about something they believe to be harmful to the public's interest, occurring in business or in government. It includes disclosure to authorities within the organization, to outside agencies, or to the media. While many of us would see reporting wrongdoing as an honourable activity, it's a risky business.

One study in the U.S. found that most whistleblowers were fired: 69 percent were fired when they reported wrongdoing to higher ups within their own employer's organization; 80 percent of those who reported misconduct to outside authorities lost their jobs. Of the 300 whistleblowers interviewed, 84 percent said they became depressed and could no longer trust the managers of organizations, and 53 percent suffered deterioration even in their family relationships. The study found that the larger and more widespread the observed misconduct reported by the whistlebtower, the more swift and severe were the reprisals. Neither gender, nor race, nor age, nor level of education, nor years on the job could insulate such a whistleblower from retaliation.

Larry Brown, secretary treasurer of the National Union of Public and General Employees says whistleblowers in Canada are not well protected. At a conference in November 2003 he said the federal government has a whistleblowers policy for the public service--"but even the official in charge of the policy says it's not working, and needs to be reinforced. The protection of whistleblowers in Canada is pretty thin gruel." He points to the British Columbia Government and General Employees Union website which devotes a section to encouraging its members "to blow the whistle when appropriate." It rightly warns that the information has to be of significant public interest. But, even when something qualifies as serious enough to expose, the union also warns that, "Whistleblowers are often targeted for retaliatory investigations, harassment, intimidation, demotion or dismissal, and blacklisting by employers. While a union member may be afforded certain protections and recourse under a collective agreement, are you prepared to risk such repercussions?"

In March 2004, the federal government introduced its long-awaited whistle-blower legislation to protect civil servants who disclose wrongdoing. This followed the excessive spending of taxpayers' funds by former Privacy Commissioner George Radwanski, which bureaucrats in his office were afraid to report. A House of Commons committee's report noted that some employees tried to express concern over Mr. Radwanski's management internally, but got nowhere. According to the report, civil servants felt their jobs would not be safe if they complained to the public service's integrity commissioner.

The new legislation, which covers most federal public-sector employees, requires bureaucracy bosses to set up avenues for internal disclosure. It also calls for the creation of a public-service integrity commissioner to investigate complaints. But critics say the legislation doesn't go far enough because it doesn't include cabinet ministers' aides or those who are involved in national security, including the RCMP, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Communications Security Establishment, and National Defence. They also say the legislation doesn't provide whistle blowers with direct access to an independent third party: the integrity commissioner is to be appointed by and to report to a cabinet minister, not directly to Parliament. Also, Larry Brown says whistle-blowing is a private sector issue too. "There are hundreds of examples of public safety issues arising from private corporations," he says. "... The reality is that whistle-blowing challenges those with power in either the public or private sector. It allows people to confront the virtually unbridled power that would otherwise be enjoyed ... It is time for the laws to allow us all to speak the truth."

FACT FILE

The ruling by Ontario Superior Court Judge Mary Lou Benotto that journalist-source confidentiality should be upheld came out on the same day police raided the offices of the Ottawa Citizen and a journalist's residence in search of documents.