Major General Fortin has challenged the law, claiming political interference in the launch of his fired vaccine
Major General Dany Fortin is challenging the federal government’s decision to publicly terminate his secondment to lead the promotion of vaccines in Canada, believing that this process is unfair and tainted by politics.
Last month, the Department of Defense issued a short three-line statement on Friday night stating that Fortin will leave the position of the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) and that his future will be determined by the acting director of the Department of Defense.
Fortin’s legal team argued that the decision to publicly announce that Fortin will withdraw from the deployment of vaccines during the military and police investigation was for political purposes.
“The decision is arbitrary and not in the public interest. It is solely for the personal and political interests of the Minister of Health and Defense and the Prime Minister,” Fortin’s legal team said in a court document today.
The legal document calls on the federal government to allow Fortin to resume his old job or find another suitable position for him.
Fortin’s lawyers submitted an application today for judicial review of his removal from the PHAC position.
According to a court application, Fortin learned from an investigator of the Canadian Forces National Investigation Agency (CFNIS) on April 19 that CFNIS was investigating an allegation of sexual misconduct against him-about a month later, the acting Secretary of Defense Tell him that he is under investigation. According to court documents, the incident allegedly occurred more than 30 years ago.
According to the document, the complainant did not want to make these allegations public.
The document stated that PHAC Chairman Iain Stewart assured Fortin in March that “the investigation will proceed smoothly and things will pass”, that he “has the right to undergo due process” and is “presumed innocent”.
He also warned Fortin that the Office of the Minister of Health and the Office of the Prime Minister may suddenly decide that he must resign and tell him to “keep [his] The bag is packed. “
Documents show that on May 12, Fortin received another call from Stewart, telling him that the situation had changed and that the Minister of Health and the Minister of Defense wanted to remove him.
According to the documents, according to Fortin’s knowledge, the decision to terminate his secondment was made by the two ministers with the “cooperation” of the Prime Minister’s Office and the Privy Council Office.
This statement contradicts what Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said at a press conference last month.
“This is not an investigation conducted outside my office or the Privy Council office.” Trudeau said on May 18. “This is handled by the military leadership and relevant authorities.”
At that time, Trudeau stated that he emphasized his hope that the investigation would be “fair, complete and rigorous.”
CBC News has asked the PMO and the offices of Secretary of Defense Harjit Sajjan and Secretary of Health Patty Hajdu to comment. One month before Fortin was removed, Sajjan was questioned more than once about sexual misconduct in the military at a parliamentary committee hearing.
“Since this is an ongoing legal issue, it is not appropriate for us to comment at this time,” Sajjan’s press secretary Daniel Minden said in a statement to CBC News. DND issued a similar statement and declined to comment.
The document stated that Fortin met with the deputy chief of the defense staff. Wayne Eyre was held on May 13th. The document stated that at that meeting, Al told Fortin that “political considerations” had changed and the prime minister’s office had stated that he would have to be removed from office.
“[Eyre] Said it would release a statement to the public about his resignation; there is no room for negotiation,” the document said, adding that the statement indicated that Fortin had decided to step down on his own.
The judicial review application argued that “Fortin was deprived of procedural fairness before making a decision, and the interviewee knew or should have known that this would have serious consequences for his life, reputation, and career.
“The decision maker did not give him the opportunity to let him know why he should not be removed from the PHAC position and should not be reassigned.
Fortin’s legal team argued that “due to the unreasonable decision” and “serious violation” of Fortin’s procedural fairness and privacy rights, the military should revoke the decision to remove him from the PHAC position.
“Since his secondment was terminated, MGen Fortin has not worked at CAF, and, In fact, Dismissed from military duties,” wrote in the notice of application filed in court today.
Fortin first learned of the investigation in March
Court documents show that on March 17, 2021, Fortin met with Al and was told that the Canadian Army Investigation Bureau was investigating him for sexual misconduct, but did not provide any information about the allegations at the time.
The document details concerns about how the information was leaked.
The document stated that on April 9, Fortin received “a call from his deputy, who said he received a call from a subordinate”.
“The subordinate learned from a military police sergeant that MGen Fortin is under investigation,” the document said. “The sheriff learned of the investigation from a friend who was an investigator at CFNIS.”
Court documents stated that Fortin subsequently called Al’s chief of staff to “express his dissatisfaction with CFNIS’s failure to ensure the confidentiality of the investigation.”
The document stated that the chief of staff promised to investigate the leak, but it is unclear whether the leak occurred or whether the source of the information has been identified.
Fortin’s legal team argued that the government’s public statement on the matter “clearly stated” that he was “under investigation for misconduct, and it is easy to speculate that misconduct is sexual in nature.”
A branch of the military police Submit this Last month, an official official was asked to decide whether criminal charges should be filed.