Nine months ago, as he introduced Mark Saunders as the unanimous choice for the next Toronto police chief, Alok Mukherjee praised the longtime cop as someone who will lead with a “spirit of co-operation.”

Then the chair of the Toronto Police Services Board, Mukherjee favourably described Saunders as someone who “likes a good argument.”

On Wednesday, one such argument erupted between the former chair and the chief, as Mukherjee filed a complaint about Saunders to the province’s police watchdog, alleging the new chief had “violated his oath of office.”

It is the latest sign of turmoil within the Toronto police force, now in the midst of a heated dispute between reformers and those accused of being resistant to change.

In a complaint filed Wednesday to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD), Mukherjee is alleging Saunders “deliberately” engaged in misrepresentation “with the malicious intent of damaging my reputation” in comments the chief made to the Star earlier this month, stating an op-ed piece by the ex-chair contained “inaccurate” information.

In a separate complaint to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission, Mukherjee alleges the board did not do enough to investigate when Mukherjee brought forward his complaints about Saunders’ comment earlier this month.

None of the members of the Toronto police board could be reached for comment Wednesday. Mark Pugash, spokesperson for the Toronto police, said it would be inappropriate to comment on an ongoing complaint.

The OIPRD will now determine whether Mukherjee’s complaints merit an investigation. Before the watchdog assigns investigators to a case, it must determine that a complaint meets certain requirements under the Police Services Act.

Mukherjee’s complaints stem from a pull-no-punches article he penned for NOW magazine, in which he questioned whether Saunders and Toronto police were misrepresenting what was being done to reduce fatal encounters between police and people in mental or emotional crisis.

Following the July 2013 shooting death of teenager Sammy Yatim by Const. James Forcillo, Toronto police commissioned retired judge Frank Iacobucci to perform a review on police use of force. The retired judge made 84 recommendations to the Toronto police; last fall, the force claimed it had implemented or partially implemented 79 of them.

But in his article, Mukherjee questioned whether the behaviour of the average officer had been affected. “As far as the rank and file is concerned, little has changed,” Mukherjee wrote that an unnamed frontline supervisor told him.

Asked to respond to Mukherjee’s column during an interview last month, Saunders told the Star: “I don’t want to respond to comments that aren’t accurate.”

In early January, Mukherjee wrote a letter to the Toronto Police Services Board, Saunders’ employer, saying he was “seriously concerned about this aspersion on the integrity of my piece.” Mukherjee requested that Saunders provide, within seven days, an explanation of what specifically was inaccurate in his column.

One week later, board member and city Councillor Chin Lee wrote Mukherjee to say the board reviewed the letter from Mukherjee and it “will take it into consideration in the context of the board’s performance monitoring function.”

Dissatisfied, Mukherjee doubled down on this request for an explanation last week, but said was fruitless and decided to elevate the complaint.

In a letter filed to the OIPRD, Mukherjee claims Saunders violated “his oath as a police officer, his oath of office as Chief of Police, the Police Services Act Code of Conduct and the (Toronto police board)’s expectations related to honesty, integrity and ethical conduct on the part of a police officer and, especially, a Chief of Police.”

Saunders’ failure to provide an explanation for his comments “has led me to the conclusion that Chief Saunders was deliberately engaging in misrepresentation with the malicious intent of damaging my reputation,” Mukherjee wrote.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

“From the generality of Chief Saunders’ comment, I infer that he was impugning the integrity of the entire article, thus undermining my ability and credibility to make public comments on policing matters. This ability and credibility are central to my current professional activities.”

Mukherjee has also complained about the conduct of Toronto police board members to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission, an independent, quasi-judicial agency that investigates complaints about police services boards.

“I believe the Board had a statutory responsibility to satisfy itself and me as the concerned party that Chief Saunders had acted in accordance with his oath as a police officer, his oath of office as Chief of Police, the Police Services Act Code of Conduct and the Board’s expectations related to honesty, integrity and ethical conduct on the part of a police officer and, especially, a Chief of Police.”

“I am concerned that the Board has failed to discharge that responsibility satisfactorily,” Mukherjee wrote to the OCPC.

Mukherjee’s complaints are the second set of concerns raised about leadership within the Toronto police this week.

On Monday, Toronto Deputy Chief Peter Sloly ruffled feathers at police headquarters and drew the ire of the Toronto police union when he spoke frankly about the need for reform within the force, saying Toronto police could deliver more effective front-line service.

Sloly — who made the final crop of candidates for police chief last year, but was passed over — told a public forum last week that by changing to a proactive, not reactive policing model, the force could reduce the number of officers by the hundreds and save tens of millions of dollars.

Wendy Gillis can be reached at wgillis@thestar.ca

Read more about: