WikiLeaks Sudbury
Accessing Information

WikiLeaks Sudbury Legal Defense Fund

We keep you informed

    Main About  Archives Editorials Donate    







Better scrutiny leads to reduced corruption and stronger democracies in all society’s institutions, including government, corporations and other organizations.





     November  2013        

Latest Leak
Released on November 02, 2013, 11:00 AM EDT
Tag #: 662
Authoritarianism: City in crisis

Another conspiracy by City’s bureaucrats exposed
City did not submit original of fake affidavit to the court

Bureaucrats behind the conspiracy
From left: Benkovich: Controversial practices, Fowke: Incompetent and negligent, Canapini: Bad legal advice

City’s bureaucrats failed in their attempt to prevent public access to the secret contract documents. “Gravy-obsessed” bureaucrats maliciously attempted to prosecute a Sudbury resident who requested City’s contract documents under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The City alleged that the fake affidavit was utilized to collect after-hours water operation monitoring service contract documents. The case was heard on October 10, 2013 in the Sudbury Ontario Court of Justice and the prosecutor had to drop all of the criminal charges (fraud under $ 5,000, false affidavit, uttering document) due to lack of sufficient and convincing evidence. The fraud under $ 5,000 charge, had to be dropped even before the start of the hearing.

City denied access to the records
The City denied access to the contract documents and to the amount of tax dollars paid to the contractor for after-hours monitoring services for the water and wastewater division. The matter was appealed to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. We successfully defended our actions and won the appeal. The matter was mediated and the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner ordered the City to disclose the records. WikiLeaks Sudbury uncovered details concerning a large amount of tax dollars scammed and misspent by divisional director Nick Benkovich. The invoice was directly e-mailed to Benkovich and was paid in full with tax dollars. WikiLeaks Sudbury expects to release more information to the public about the Water and Wastewater division after-hour monitoring contract.

City hired "Google" detective, Cynthia White: Andrew Williams
Kristen Newman, Assistant City Solicitor, complained to the Greater Sudbury Police Services about an alleged fake affidavit that was submitted to the City’s clerk office. The complaint also concerned the collection, by a third person, of the contract documents belonging to the after-hour monitoring service of the water and wastewater division. Newman "nominated" the suspect and coordinated with detective Andrew Williams of the Greater Sudbury Police Services resulting in the arrest that has now been made. WikiLeaks Sudbury uncovered a series of e-mails of communication between Newman and Williams. In them, Williams wrote to Newman stating that “as far as documents are concerned, all is in order. Now, we need will-statement to fabricate charges.”

Furthermore Williams intruded into various Sudbury residents’ Facebook and Twitter accounts through Cynthia White, who maliciously attempted to collect evidence to plot against the Sudbury resident that requested the records. In this way, Williams invaded their privacy. Newman attempted to mislead the court, suggesting that the original requester of the records was posing as other freedom of information requesters, and thus attempted to prevent the release of information to public. Their attempt has been defeated and over 100 individuals voluntarily agreed to testify before the court against the City’s bureaucrats. This includes City staff, officers and employees

Crown attempted to settle the issue outside of the court
Prosecutors exercised many offers expecting an out-of-court settlement. Since the matter has an important public interest, we decided to continue the proceedings to defeat the conspiracy.

No original of fake affidavit was submitted to the court
The dramatic change in the City’s position occurred at the hearing. The City did not submit the so-called fake affidavit for defence examination. Now it is clearly evident that the creation of the fake affidavit is an “inside job”. Canapini, leading City’s legal service department and Fowke, leading the Human Resource division, well-coordinated all of their actions. Now it can be concluded that the stamp used on the fake affidavit was in circulation between both departments.

Complainant, Assistant City Solicitor Kristen Newman, did not appear before the court to testify
City solicitor Jamie Canapini’s close ally, Newman, who lodged the complaint to the Greater Sudbury Police Service regarding the fake affidavit, never appeared before the court to testify. This unusual move is clear evidence behind the conspiracy of the City’s bureaucrats. The City’s bureaucrats were unable to stand against stiff resistance from the defence team and ran away from justice.

Fowke’s final and last attempt to keep the public in the dark failed
Kevin Fowke, director of Human Resources and Organizational Development, sent his close ally, Relief director of Human Resources, Karen Matthies, to the court to testify. Karen Matthies attempted to connect an envelope in her possession with the fake affidavit. However Matthies was not able to take a stand since the conspiracy had been exposed immediately during cross examination of deputy City clerk, Lisa Miller. Miller told the court she cannot recall any documents that were collected in relation to a fake affidavit and also cannot recall any fees paid to collect the records.  

Crown attempted to adjoin the proceedings
The prosecutor attempted to adjoin the proceedings stating that new evidence had emerged. The defence team then objected to the prosecutor’s witnesses’ and their evidence’s credibility and reliability. Due to the strong objection from the defence team, the inclusion of new evidence was not permitted and the proceedings continued.

Finally the conspiracy exposed
Later, the prosecutor had to drop all criminal charges and engaged in damage control on behalf of the City’s corrupted bureaucrats. The prosecutor said there is no public interest to continue the trial. The prosecutor also told the court he knew what evidence will be presented to the court.

According to sources available to WikiLeaks Sudbury, City’s top bureaucrats may face moral corruption and breach of trust charges for the misspending of tax dollars.



Related articles:

An outrageous spending practice found for Labour and Employment matters  
City’s Labour and Employment Legal Expenses Continually Soar  
Double Crisis in City’s Water and Wastewater Division  
City Spent $ 86,142.00 tax dollars to defend the misconduct of bureaucrats’ in Human Rights legal proceedings from 2009 to 2012


Released on November 02, 2013 at 11:00 AM EDT

The original article initially published on PhD thesis, Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.. Excerpts from the article as follows.

Moral Disengagement in Processes of Organizational Corruption

Corruption is a particularly muddy concept, in large part because it is very broad and inclusive of a wide variety of actions and/or behaviours, which makes establishing a clear definition difficult. There are many forms of corruption as well, which span multiple levels of analysis, ranging from corruption narrowly tied to an individual (such as someone who, contravening organizational norms, misuses their position for self-serving reasons), to organizational corruption (such as when the goals and/or norms of the organization are dependent on illegal or unethical actions, and have some form of official sanction). While there is by no means a consensus view of organizational corruption, the following definition of organizational corruption in mind: unethical actions undertaken in accordance with organizational goals, which are likely tobut do not necessarilydirectly or indirectly advance individual interests as well.

Why focus on a definition of organizational corruption that highlights actions taken to advance organizational interests? Clearly, much of the behaviour that can be considered corrupt works against organizational interests: for example, theft and embezzlement, inappropriate use of funds or benefits, or misuse of one's personal position for individual gain. Advancing one's own interests is clearly a motivating factor in certain types of organizational corruption, and moral disengagement may well play a role in explaining such behaviour. However, this type of behaviour cannot accurately be called "sanctioned organizational corruption," as Brief and his colleagues describe; it is more accurately identified as individual organizational corruption, since it directly undermines organizational goals. "Sanctioned organizational corruption" has to be comprised of actions which advance, at least in the short term, corporate goals. Finally, it is important to specify why individual self interest is a probable, but not necessary, part of the definition of organizational corruption which drove the theorizing behind this work. It is possible to understand "organizational interests" in many ways, some of which dovetail quite nicely at the individual level with self interest. Self interest is therefore a key component of corporate or organizational corruption.

Unethical behaviours which advance organizational interests are often clearly in an individual's self interest as well. However, as I hope to make clear in this chapter, moral disengagement facilitates unethical behaviour both within one's interests, as well as outside one's interests. In both cases, moral disengagement helps dampen moral awareness, and therefore makes individuals less cognizant of ethical issues when they arise. This will facilitate both blatant self interest, as well as a general indifference towards the ethical implications of one's actions. Moral disengagement is therefore going to facilitate unethical decision making both in cases where it does not directly serve the individual's interest, as well as in cases where it does. The measure of moral disengagement was then related to other constructs of interest, and behaved in expected ways, correlating positively with Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and social dominance orientation, and negatively with moral identity, empathy, pro-social value orientation, and cognitive moral development. None of the correlations were of sufficient magnitude to suggest that the measure of moral disengagement was redundant with other constructs. 

Albert Bandura's theory of moral disengagement was developed to explain why certain people are able to engage in inhumane conduct without apparent distress. In his theory, individuals with high levels of moral disengagement become habituated to using cognitive mechanisms which work to suspend the self-regulatory processes that socio-cognitive theory suggests govern individual moral behaviour. To date, the work on moral disengagement has remained primarily theoretical, used in explanations of political and military violence. The empirical work on moral disengagement has taken place predominantly in the context of predicting aggression and anti-social behaviour in children and adolescents.

How does moral disengagement work? Bandura's theory suggests that disengagement operates through eight different cognitive mechanisms, which can be grouped into three basic types. Three of these mechanisms (moral justification, euphemistic labelling, and advantageous comparison) facilitate the cognitive restructuring of inhumane acts so that they appear less harmful to the individual engaged in them; the cognitions work by making the inhumane act seem beneficial in some way. For example, moral justification might involve telling oneself that selectively disclosing product information to customers is critical to protecting the company's public image. Similarly, euphemistic labelling renames harmful actions so as to appear benign.

Two cognitive mechanisms (displacement of responsibility and diffusion of responsibility) minimize the role of the individual in the harm that is caused by their actions. Cognitions which displace responsibility tend to attribute responsibility for one's actions to authority figures who may have tacitly condoned or explicitly directed one's behaviour. Cognitions which diffuse responsibility tend to disperse blame across members of a group, rather than attributing it to any one individual. For example, research on the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster reveals that diffusion of responsibility was an important factor in the decision to launch.

The final three cognitive mechanisms (distortion of consequences, dehumanization and attribution of blame) refrarne the effects of one's actions, either by minimizing the outcomes of those actions or by minimizing the perception of distress those actions cause others. Unlike the first three mechanisms, these are not intended to refrarne the activity in a positive light; rather, they work on minimizing the true consequences that one's actions have on others. In the context of organizational corruption, the distortion of consequences is abetted by calling such criminal activity "victimless" or by downplaying the ultimate effects of the activity. Together, these eight mechanisms restructure the way that individuals make decisions and experience the choices they make. Although each mechanism describes a cognitive process which facilitates disengagement of the self-sanctions that socio-cognitive theory claims drive individual moral behaviour, moral disengagement can also manifest within individuals as a generalized cognitive orientation to the world, which differentiates one individual from another. In Bandura's theory, moral disengagement describes both a set of processes that individuals employ to disengage moral self sanctions, and a way of differentiating individuals by the degree to which they have made habitual their dependence on these mechanisms (in a way that influences their behaviour).

The influence of context on moral disengagement is also an open question. Research on business ethics has been quite consistent in finding that individuals segment their moral lives, applying different set of ethical standards in different contexts.

WikiLeaks Sudbury
November 02, 2013

WikiLeaks Sudbury
November 02, 2013

Reference and excerpts

Moore, C. (2008). Moral Disengagement in Processes of Organizational Corruption: The Effect of Moral Disengagement on Unethical Decision Making, Moral Awareness, and Organizational Advancement. Toronto: Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.


Contact and Media Inquiries