The man in charge of rolling out Canada’s COVID-19 vaccine supply, Maj.-Gen Dany Fortin, has been forced to step down following allegations of sexual misconduct.
Specifically, as best we know, a woman has come forward to say he exposed himself to her while he was a cadet at the Royal Military College in Saint-Jean, Que. Since the alleged event took place in early 1989, Fortin would have been in his late teens or possibly 20.
We’re limited in knowing what to think about this, since details are non-existent.
However, there are several aspects that should bother us. This incident, if it occurred, happened 32 years ago. Why did this woman wait three decades to come forward?
And how does Fortin defend himself? The best defence against any such allegation is to prove an alibi. You were somewhere else, and you have witnesses to support you.
But how do you do that so long after the date in question, especially since in Fortin’s case, he has no recollection of any such event.
Again, in the normal course of an investigation, your lawyer would have the opportunity to examine physical evidence brought against you. But here, I presume, there is none.
If there were witnesses to back up the woman’s accusation, that would help. But who remembers anything with clarity that long ago?
In short, Fortin is a sitting duck.
And dare the authorities conducting the investigation absolve him of misconduct? This at a time when complaints of sexual misconduct in the Canadian military are an all-too frequent occurrence. It would look like the height of insensitivity or plain apathy to let Fortin off.
There is another way of looking at this. Fortin is a thrice-decorated military leader who commanded the UN military forces in Afghanistan. He was also the deputy commanding general for the 1 Corps of the U.S. Army, a signal compliment for a foreign officer.
Now his career lies in ruins, his reputation forever tarnished, his family certainly distraught.
And if he is indeed absolved? It matters not. Once an allegation of this sort is made, and more important made public, you’re finished.
Here, too, there is an important consideration. In such circumstances, the alleged offender is invariably named, while the accuser is granted anonymity.
Certainly there is a reason for protecting the identity of the accuser. Women may be reluctant to come forward if they have to face the glare of cameras and their names made public.
But what about the accused? Isn’t he entitled to the same consideration?
Recognizing that the allegation itself is career-ending, shouldn’t the identity of the potential wrongdoer likewise be withheld?
It’s possible that what Fortin did, if he did anything at all, was truly reprehensible, and serious consequences should follow.
Yet in truth, those consequences have already occurred, before anything has been proved, or charges even entered. The mere allegation is life-destroying.
There is the possibility here for a serious miscarriage of justice.
