Denis Rancourt's letter to president Jacques Fremont of the University of Ottawa, Canada

This is about my own case of the University of Ottawa's egregious violations of my academic-freedom, civil and Charter rights, over many years. One rarely has the evidence of how far they can go.

This post is from my main blog, here: http://activistteacher.blogspot.ca/2018/02/denis-rancourts-letter-to-president.html

Hearings into dismissal of Rancourt reveal much

There have now been fifteen days of hearings before labour arbitrator Foisy into the wrongful dismissal case at the University of Ottawa of tenured full professor of physics Denis Rancourt.

The hearing dates have been scattered over the last year and as many more hearing days are foreseen until June 2013. The last four days of hearings were May 14, 15, 16, and 17. The next hearing date is in May 2013.

The University has closed its case after only three witnesses: Two students who complained about the teaching method in an advanced solid state physics course given by Rancourt to twenty three students in the winter 2008 semester and former dean of the Faculty of Science, Andre E. Lalonde.

Most of the week was taken up by the cross examination of Lalonde by counsel for the union Sean McGee, and re-examination of Lalonde by counsel for the university Lynn Harnden. Rancourt started giving his evidence at the end of the week.

The cross examination of Lalonde has revealed what many observers had already inferred about the dismissal:

1. The November 2008 unannounced lockout of Rancourt and his graduate students and post-doctoral associate from their laboratory and offices was meant to permanently render the laboratory unusable (essential materials were permanently removed).
2. The "context" of this November 2008 permanent shut-down, as the former dean explained, was that an upper management group including President Allan Rock had already decided that Rancourt was to be fired; in advance of both the dean's December 2008 "recommendation for dismissal to the Board" and the Board's April 2009 "decision to dismiss". (Allan Rock chaired the April 2009 Board meeting that made the "decision".)

At the time of the lockout, the university had advanced the pretext of a simple change in radiation safety protocol, unannounced to radiation license holder and principle investigator Rancourt. The "new safety protocol" was not written in time for a meeting involving Rancourt's union that followed the lockout.

The cross-examination of Lalonde also revealed that science student Maureen Robinson (aka, Nathalie Page; false Facebook and Google-group identity) had been hired by the university in 2007-2008, was given access to the dean's email account to compile emails about Rancourt, and gave regular reports to both the dean and former university legal counsel Michelle Flaherty (now a co-Chair at the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal) that included:

• Surveillance of Rancourt and students.
• Gathering information from third-parties on false pretense.
• Minimizing the "paper trail" of her activities.
• Reporting on student electoral events.
• Reporting on the presence or absence of Rancourt and others at campus and off-campus events.
• Transcribing Rancourt's campus radio show recordings.
• Obtaining recordings of Rancourt's talks on other campuses.
• Attempting to obtain class notes and class communications from Rancourt's courses.
• Using her former contacts at the Fulcrum (student newspaper) to transmit the Fulcrum's information.

These activities were performed with the full knowledge of both Lalonde and Flaherty. Indeed, Robinson routinely joked about what "Nathalie" (her false identity on Facebook and in Google-groups and by email) had been up to and her coming projects.

For example:

"Hi, it's Nathalie. Haha.
(You know, posing as a smiling schoolgirl to get information makes me feel like those police officers who pose as 9-year old girls online in order to catch pedophiles...)"

Several more emails HERE.

Lalonde stated that he had the login name and password to Robinson's fake account (that she had provided only to him) on a 3M sticky note in his office for many months. Robinson wanted him to have it for the periods when she was absent from her work.

Lalonde stated under oath that he discouraged Robinson from performing her surveillance, that she only did this out of "personal interest", and that he accepted receiving the information she provided because of the "climate of fear" that prevailed on campus at the time.

Lalonde explained that science student Marc Kelly had appeared on campus in a white costume and playing "ominous" music ("The institution controls your mind") from a portable sound box, that part of the white costume had been found in Rancourt's laboratory, that he had seen a picture of Kelly in-costume on Rancourt's office door, and that a biology professor had expressed security concerns a-la-Fabrikant to him. Lalonde further explained that if some unauthorized person "anarchist activist" had access to a laboratory with radioactive materials that this had great potential to create "fear in the community". Lalonde also sought advice from a psychiatrist, to advise him regarding Dr. Rancourt's mental state and the risk that he and/or others represented to the University community, regarding these events. For these reasons Lalonde felt that he was justified in using the information gathered by Robinson.

Many of the emails involving Robinson that were disclosed by the university under the requirements of the arbitration had never been disclosed as required by law following an access to information request made by Rancourt in 2008, even under a subsequent appeal with the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, not even their existence in the required table of non-disclosed records. It is difficult to understand how this could have occurred. As a result, the access to information request gave essentially no results.


Background articles and links:

• Targeting dissident professor Denis Rancourt, HERE.
• Tribunal hearings page on academicfreedom.ca, HERE.
• All UofOWatch posts about the dismissal hearings, HERE.
• Reports on University's covert surveillance practices, HERE.
• Recent Student's-Eye View reports about the hearings, HERE1, HERE2, HERE3.
• Globe & Mail letter from concerned parent Julia Debono observing Rancourt's 2006 class, HERE.

[2012-06-22: Correction/clarification: "Lalonde also consulted a psychiatrist regarding these events." was changed to "Lalonde also sought advice from a psychiatrist, to advise him regarding Dr. Rancourt's mental state and the risk that he and/or others represented to the University community, regarding these events."]

U of O admin spies on prof and students using hired student journalist; false Facebook identity; covert voice recordings; extensive cover up

Two union grievances (teacher assistants and professors) have been filed against the University of Ottawa for extensive covert surveillance practiced between 2006 and 2008.

The violations of civil and academic workplace rights were exposed through several access to information law requests and appeals to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario.

A detailed report and supporting evidence were made public HERE by former physics professor Denis Rancourt who was fired in March 2009.

The covert surveillance campaign is unprecedented on a Canadian campus. Undergraduate student and student journalist Maureen Robinson was hired as an “agent of University Legal Counsel” and took on a false Facebook identity to infiltrate student groups, especially ones supportive of Rancourt’s activism course.

Former University Legal Counsel Michelle Flaherty abruptly left the University at approximately the time when a covert voice recording went missing from the access to information record. Flaherty is now a Vice Chair (judge) with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. Several high executive officers of the university were also involved; in recruiting the student spy and in receiving and using the covertly collected information.

Rancourt’s talks about anarchism in pedagogical development were covertly recorded at conferences on other campuses (Kingston and Quebec City) and the recordings were exchanged among university high officials.

The University’s actions were violations of legally-defined academic freedom, the labour law collective agreements with two unions, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Law Society of Upper Canada, and accepted professional norms for journalists.

The University also enacted an extensive cover up and has steadfastly ignored requests to investigate, including several requests which predated Rancourt’s dismissal.

These findings are in stark contrast to President Allan Rock’s repeated statements that all due procedures were followed in Rancourt’s dismissal. Rancourt has consistently stated that his dismissal was politically motivated.

[Photos: Who's who?]

U of O's Policy 92 ensures the highest standards of honesty, integrity and transparency for all its executives and officers

June 26, 2009
..
Nathalie Des Rosiers
VP-Governance
University of Ottawa
..
..
Re: Policy 92 disclosure of wrongdoing, university’s surveillance of professor
..
..
Dear Nathalie Des Rosiers,
..
University Policy 92 states that the VP-Governance, your office, will thoroughly investigate all allegations of wrongdoing. In this policy, “wrongdoing” means any act that is “dishonest, inappropriate or illegal.”
..
I hereby report wrongdoing by VP-Academic Robert Major. Other University officers and staff are also involved. Paragraph-16 of Policy 92 foresees that the written report of your investigation will be provided to the Board of Governors.
..
..
WRONGDOING
..
VP-Academic Robert Major and other University officers and staff practiced surveillance of two of my invited talks at other academic institutions in 2007 and 2008, while I was a full and tenured professor at the University of Ottawa. A description of evidence is given below.
..
As the officer responsible for Policy 92 investigations, you will recognise that such covert surveillance by the university is contrary to the “the highest standards of honesty, integrity and transparency in all of [the university’s] activities.”
..
As the designated General Counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), you will recognize that such surveillance by a corporation of one of its employees is contrary to responsible behaviour in a free and democratic society.
..
As an academic, you will recognize that such behaviour by a university is a violation of the legally established principle of academic freedom.
..
As a lawyer, you will recognize that this type of personal information gathering and use is against the law. Specifically, it is against the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) of Ontario to which universities in Ontario are bound and against the Employment Standards Act of Ontario.
..
..
ADDITIONAL WRONGDOING
..
In addition to the surveillance itself, there has been an attempt by VP-Academic Major and other officers of the University to avoid the issue. The VP-Academic and the University have not acknowledged my direct enquiries of October 16, 2008 (with the President, Secretary, and APUO in cc), and December 9, 2008 (with the President, Dean of the Faculty of Science, the APUO, the Head of Human Resources, and yourself in cc) in this matter.
..
..
EVIDENCE
..
Using Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) requests, such as my request dated August 7, 2008, I have established that the University, via Mr. Major and other offices, has used the services of a private reporter to monitor an invited academic talk I gave at the Studies in National and International Development (SNID) group at Queen’s University, some 200 km from Ottawa, on October 18, 2007.
..
The respondent FIPPA records are unambiguous regarding the act of surveillance of me.
..
The University used a private reporter a second time to monitor my invited contribution at the Association Canadienne Française pour L’Avancement des Sciences (ACFAS) conference in Quebec City, some 450 km from Ottawa, on May 7, 2008. See my FIPPA request dated May 8, 2009 (addressed to you) and the related Appeal to the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) dated June 10, 2009.
..
You have my permission to use the relevant FIPPA records respondent to my FIPPA requests and my requests in your investigation. These records are available in the office of the University’s FIPPA Coordinator.
..
..
NEED TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE
..
According to my FIPPA inquiries, in the past, the email records of leaving university officials (e.g. VP David Mitchell) have not been preserved. Since VP-Academic Major is leaving the University at the end of the month and since your investigation may take some time, I ask that all of Dr. Major’s records relevant to this matter be preserved.
..

Please acknowledge receipt of the present disclosure of wrongdoing. Please confirm that your office will investigate.
..
..
Sincerely,
Denis Rancourt
..
Cc: Marc Jolicoeur, Allan Rock, Robert Major, Andre E. Lalonde, Louise Page-Valin, APUO, CAUT, CUPE 2626, SFUO, GSAED, CCLA, made public.
..
RELATED POST: 1984 coming to a campus near you
..
[photo credit: University of Ottawa; VP-Academic Robert Major]

1984 is Coming to a Campus Near You

The University of Ottawa’s Allan Rock administration has sent out this (below) remarkable memo to all U of O staff, conveniently at a time when students are off working.
..
In the face of decades of legal precedent-setting decisions that have established the collegial governance principles that apply to North American universities, it has done this without any of the required department-faculty-and-senate consultations and evaluations.
..
The memo (below) describes the immediate implementation of a new surveillance and reporting managerial system in which all university members are required to participate.
..
The system is akin to the reporting protocols systematically implemented at community levels in totalitarian states. History shows that such systems have a chilling effect on dissidence and reinforce a culture of deference to authority that is antithetical to academic freedom.
..
Barely a year after the university’s failed attempt to install a “student code of conduct,” “Canada’s university” becomes possibly the first academic institution in North America to implement such a policy.
..
The memo (below) has a distinct 1984 feel and substance and is signed by the Rock administration’s VP-Governance Nathalie Des Rosiers who, in what can only be interpreted as exceptional circumstances of irony, is the designated General Counsel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
..
In the new system, anonymous “disclosures” of “any incidents of wrongdoing” are sent “directly to the Office of the VP-Governance” and “it is the duty of each employee to immediately report any incidents.” The note (below) states “we are all responsible for promoting ethical behaviour…”
..
Strange, when, on this blog, I reported with documentary evidence various university executives lying, fabricating student complaints, falsifying documents, supporting state war crimes, and protecting those who committed these wrongdoings, I was threatened with a lawsuit by the university, disciplined for using the university images of the executives (see VIDEO), and ultimately fired.
..
It seems to me, that if the University of Ottawa were serious about “provid[ing] the tools” to “encouge[] ethical behaviour in all [its] spheres of activity,” it would, for example:
..

• encourage informed and signed whistleblowing, supported with strong whistleblower protection for all its staff and students,

• post its CURIE insurance policy on the web and make the additionally insured fully informed of their coverage, e.g. regarding SLAPP suits,

• make representations to have Ontario universities fall under the jurisdiction of the Ontario Ombudsman and voluntarily submit itself to this jurisdiction,

• follow the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, rather than regularly have requests appealed, Orders emitted against it, and Complaints filed and retained,

• disclose all of the financial and administrative reports of the University of Ottawa Foundation and host a public forum on the Foundation’s mandate,

• make all of its corporate and private contracts public, including those with donors involving building names and other exchanges,

• not name buildings after CEO’s who have participated in any questionable corporate behaviours at home or in other jurisdictions, and publicly review building name attributions in the light of any public disclosures of such questionable activities,

• make all research grants and contracts public

• install a strict policy disallowing all non-token gifts to executives, such as “cultural” trips to explore potential exchange programs with states involved in on-going violations of the Geneva Conventions and persistent disregard for UN resolutions,

• install a Board of Governors membership policy that disallows media bosses and all private sector leaders that could be perceived to represent potentials for conflicts of interest in a democratic society with a free press,

• have all its appointments of top officers and full professors be subjected to public scrutiny and approval by referendum of the entire university community,

• have all its faculty deans be assigned by elections, with 50% student voices, as is done in many countries,

• pay all student representatives on all committees and councils the same average wage value as the professors for their work on these governance bodies,

• immediately disclose its contracts and agreements with the developers and owners of the surveillance software ClearView Connects™ (see below).

..
MEMO:

From: UOStaff-l en francais on behalf of Communications uOttawa
To: UOPERS-L@LISTSERV.UOTTAWA.CA
Sent: Tue 6/9/2009 10:49 AM
Subject: Règlement 92 sur la fraude et la divulgation d'actes fautifs / Policy 92 on Fraud and Safe Disclosure
..

Honesty, integrity and transparency are the values that inspire confidence and the constituents of good governance.

In keeping with best practices in place at public sector organizations, an institution of the scope of the University of Ottawa must provide the tools the University and its employees need to respect these values, maintain the quality of the work environment and protect the University’s resources.

As employees of the University, we are all responsible for promoting ethical behaviour and for respecting for the laws, regulations, polices and procedures necessary for the proper functioning of our institution.

With this in mind, the Board of Governors has approved Policy 92, Policy on Fraud and Safe Disclosure. This policy is to be administered by the Office of the Vice-President, Governance and applies to all University employees, including members of the Board of Governors and persons acting on behalf of the University.

Under Policy 92, it is the duty of each employee to immediately report any incidents of wrongdoing related to University activities. To assist with reporting, we have introduced ClearView ConnectsTM, a tool that allows employees to report quickly, anonymously and in complete confidence any incidents of theft, misappropriation of funds, falsification of documents, vandalism, unethical behaviour, etc.

ClearView ConnectsTM is available 24/7 online or by phone. The system forwards the disclosure directly to the Office of the Vice-President, Governance, which will deal with it as soon as possible and in accordance with Policy 92.

To obtain more information on the reasons behind Policy 92, its scope, the responsibilities of members of the University community, reporting procedures, investigation procedures, ClearView ConnectsTM or any other related matter, please visit www.uOttawa.ca/disclosure.

Your cooperation is essential in order to maintain an organizational climate that encourages ethical behaviour in all our spheres of activity. We are fortunate to work in an exceptional environment, and, with your help, the University of Ottawa can continue to experience the highest standards of honesty and integrity.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Nathalie Des Rosiers
Acting Vice-President, Governance
..
..
LINK TO FIRST MEDIA REPORT:
..
Ottawa Citizen - Academics blast university snitch line