Department of Justice

Report to the Deputy Minister of Justice concerning
certain allegations of anti-Semitism

Author: Prof. John D. McCamus
Osgoode Hall Law School
York University
Toronto, Ont.

Commissioned: April 1997

Mandate: "to review whether any statements made or feelings expressed in conjunction with any relevant actions or inactions, by management within or outside the war crimes section about Mr. Arnold Fradkin, in relation to his work in the war crimes section, lead you to conclude there was anti-Jewish bias against Mr. Fradkin."

Allegations: The allegations fell into five categories.

- That Mr. Kremer, Director of the War Crimes Section, was alleged to have made statements that allegedly offered evidence of the existence of anti-Semitic bias on his part.

- That Mr. Kremer’s treatment of a counsel who worked for him manifested anti-Semitic bias.

- That the handling of one particular case by Mr. Kremer and his superiors was "bizarre" and offered evidence of anti-Semitism.

- That actions and inactions of other managers were similarly said to be evidence of anti-Semitic attitudes.

- That an environment existed which was acquiescent in or tolerant of anti-Semitic attitudes.

Conclusions: "In broad general terms, the conclusion set forth in the report is that there is no basis in fact for the allegations made and the concerns raised with respect to anti-Semitism either on the part of Mr. Kremer, or on the part of others involved in the management of the War Crimes Section during the material period of time." (August - mid December 1990)

Professor McCamus said that the impression gained from the interviews was that it was widely believed that the allegations being made against Mr. Kremer were profoundly unfair.

The report concludes that Mr. Kremer never did say that Mr. Fradkin lacked objectivity "because he is Jewish" but rather said that he believed that Mr. Fradkin’s work on a case known as the R file lacked objectivity in the sense that he was too close to the case and did not give detached and objective advice with respect to the difficulties presented. The report also concludes that Mr. Kremer does not hold the view that Jewish lawyers are more prone than others to lack objectivity either generally or in the context of war crimes work.

The investigator also concluded that there was no factual foundation that any of the other managers subject to allegations were motivated by anti-Semitic attitudes or beliefs.

Professor McCamus concludes he was unable to discover any evidence of anti-Semitism in the work of the War Crimes Section during the term in question, nor any such evidence with respect to senior members of the department responsible for its work.

-30-

March 1998