Limited scope

A letter to the editor published in today's edition of The Chronicle Herald:

The current investigation into the death of Howard Hyde is being conducted under the Fatality Investigations Act of Nova Scotia and is not a public inquiry under the Public [Inquiries] Act of Nova Scotia.

The difference is not merely a play on words because the outcomes can be completely different. Under the Fatalities Act, the findings of Judge Anne Derrick shall not contain any findings of legal responsibility. The judge may make recommendations to the Attorney General to help prevent whatever caused the death of Mr. Hyde from happening to someone else, but the scope of the inquiry is not as in-depth as a public inquiry would be.

In a public inquiry such as the Nunn Commission and the Westray Mine disaster, the scope of the inquiry was much more in-depth and a public inquiry is usually requested by the government.

The public should be better informed as to the difference between a fatality inquiry and a public inquiry. The main issues in this fatality inquiry are centered around the use of a Taser and how Mr. Hyde was treated while suffering from a mental illness.

A public inquiry should have been called by government because of the current controversy surrounding Taser use and mental illness awareness. This incident may have been the opportunity to equal the Nunn Commission in its recommendations, which went to government for implementation. This fatality inquiry is not a public inquiry and therefore will be limited in its findings, which is unfortunate.

Jim Hoskins, Halifax