Islander calling for stricter oversight after privacy breach by conservation officer

An Islander who had his privacy breached by one of P.E.I.'s conservation officers says the case highlights the need for more accountability and stricter oversight of the officers.

The manlives along P.E.I.'s North Shore.CBC has agreed not to identify him out of concerns for his safety, so we'll refer to him as Paul.

"I just want them to be held accountable for their actions, like any other law enforcement officer, just to have some justice. Everybody has rules in life, and you have to follow the rules."

'I was shocked'

In recent years, Paul says he'sreported a couple of environmental infractions he's witnessed to the conservation office one of which led to his neighbourreceiving a "hefty fine" in the thousands of dollars.

After that,in November 2017, a group of hunters in his area told him they were aware he had called in complaints, as conservationofficer Trevor MacKinnon had disclosed that to them.

We have no official standing. Police CommissionerThomas Jarmyn

"I was shocked.I was taken aback. I was really upset," Paul said. "I made an anonymous complaint, and I feel that there's been wrongdoing here.They're neighbours, and I just don't feel comfortable with them knowing."

The man reported the privacy breach to the conservation office and P.E.I.'s Department of Justice,which employs the seven officers working on the Island to enforce environmental regulations.

The department then passed the complaint along to the Island's independent Office of the Police Commissioner, which investigated.

Review identifies breach

In a writtenreview of the case, the office's investigator, Phil Pitts, determined that MacKinnon had indeed "violated rules of confidentiality."

But that ruling didn't lead to any formal discipline or actions by the police commissioner's office.

That's because conservation officers don't fall under P.E.I.'s Police Act,unlike the Island's municipal police forces, the Atlantic Police Academy, andUPEIcampus security.

That means the police commissioner's office has no power to compel conservation officers or the Department of Justice that employs them to take any action if a rule is violated.

"We have no real official role.We may carry out informal reviews, but unlike with respect to police officers, we have no official standing," Police Commissioner Thomas Jarmyn told CBC.

In this case,after ruling Trevor MacKinnon had breached Paul's privacy,the police commissioner's office arranged ameeting between himand the province's Chief Conservation Officer Wade MacKinnon, who is not related to Trevor MacKinnon. The office hoped to comeup with what itcalled an "informal resolution."

They may as well have just crumbled that piece of paper up and thrown it in the garbage the day we signed it. Paul

All parties signed an agreement, which stipulated Trevor MacKinnon would be given a "verbal caution" and under "the discretion of the chief conservation officer ... be placed on operational restrictions" to stay away fromthe area along the North Shore where Paul lives.The agreementcovered all of 2018.

"When this suggestion was made to me, I thought 'OK this sounds fair,' said Paul. "I thought they'd be honourable and uphold the agreement for a one-year period."

Another investigation

But months later, in October, Paullearned from a friend that Trevor MacKinnon had been in his area, responding to a complaint.

"I was really disappointed.It's like anything. You sign an agreement, you have somebody's word, and it didn't mean nothing to them," said Paul. "They may as well have just crumbled that piece of paper up and thrown it in the garbage the day we signed it."

It is a conflict of interest to have the same entity who employs the conservation officers deciding whether or not their conduct is satisfactory. Police CommissionerThomasJarmyn

Paul called the police commissioner's office, which conducted another investigation.

In his written review, completed in December, investigator Pittsruled thatthe chief conservation officer had broken theagreement by directing Trevor MacKinnonto handle a call in that area.

"There was no operational requirement for [Trevor MacKinnon] to attend this complaint," Pittswrote in the review. "It was already a week old and the complainant had not made any additional requests that it be dealt with. It could and should have been dealt with [by another officer.]"

Pitts also pointed to his office's "present limitations to deal with conservation officers under the Police Act" and wrote that his findings would be sent to the Department of Justice.

In the months since, Paulhasreceived a letterfrom Chief Conservation Officer WadeMacKinnon, explaining that he and TrevorMacKinnon'sactions "could have been handled in a different fashion" and that "this experience has contributed to a discussion with the team of conservation officers regarding professional presentation."

Wade MacKinnon also apologized to Paul in that letter "for the distress this has caused you directly."

Paul feels that doesn't go far enough.

He contacted the Department of Justiceand has been informed thedeputy ministeris looking into the matter.

He says that doesn't give him much confidence.

"I just feel there's a conflict there that they're all under the same employer."

The police commissioner agrees.

"It is a conflict of interest to have the same entity who employs the conservation officers deciding whether or not their conduct is satisfactory," said Jarmyn.

No one from the Department of Justice or the conservation office would agree to an interview.

There is a robust complaints investigation process. P.E.I. Department of Justice

In an emailto CBC, a spokesperson for the department defended the "informal" arrangement with the police commissioner's office to investigate conservation officers.

"While we can't get into the specifics of cases or complaints, there is a robust complaints investigation process and third-party oversight," the emailsaid. "Government takes any recommendation from the Office of the Police Commissioner very seriously."

That said, in April, conservation officers will be brought under the the Police Act, giving the police commissioner's office investigative and disciplinary authority over them.

In its email to CBC, the department didn't explainwhy it's making thechange.

'A good step forward'

The police commissionermaintains it's the right move.

"This is a good step forward, bringing the conservation officers under the act," said Jarmyn. "I mean, they've got all the similar powers rights of entry into property, rights of investigation, and the rights to lay charges.Those are important rights and activities that have significant interference in the average citizen's life."

"These conservation officers carry guns, and want to act like police officers.But they don't play by the same rules," Paul said.

Paul says he's glad to see officers will be brought under the act. But 15 months after his first complaint, he wonders why it's taken so long.

"I think it should've happened years ago. I don't understandit."

More P.E.I. news