The governance insider — Georjann Morriseau
Anishinaabe; former Chief of Fort William First Nation; appointed to the post-Sinclair board and made chair to implement the reports. Reported suspected misconduct; was investigated by the service she oversaw, a production order sought against her personal phone; replaced as chair in an early election; cleared by the OPP. Five tribunal applications; discrimination claims dismissed for jurisdiction — applying the Supreme Court's control-and-dependency test, a chair is neither employee nor service recipient — but two reprisal claims survived with a genuinely significant ruling: s. 8 protects those who institute proceedings even where the underlying claims fail. Then, June 2, 2026, the applications were deemed abandoned: the day before the hearing she asked opposing counsel for consent to adjourn but did not copy the Tribunal; counsel refused, copying the Tribunal; when the Zoom hearing convened she was not there. The highest-placed Indigenous voice in the institution's oversight, out of the system without a merits finding. No reconsideration or judicial review appears in any reporting since; both 30-day windows have passed, leaving only discretionary extension.
The Indigenous officer — Ogima
Inside the service itself: employment application on race, ancestry, ethnic origin, family status — and reprisal. Part of the represented 2025 cohort; personal respondents removed; continuing per the record we hold, while the same officer's bravery is publicly commended by the service. The insider's path is slower, not different: within the same cohort, Nordal's reprisal claims were dismissed in June 2025 for lacking factual basis, Hanchuck's in July 2026, and the underlying grievance the cluster grew from — a sergeant's warrantless entry that fellow officers reported up the chain and saw cleared internally — ended in May 2026 with that sergeant criminally convicted and sentenced to three years for obstruction and breach of trust. The officers who reported him are still litigating what reporting him cost them.
The bereaved father — Ron Chookomolin
His son Marlan died in June 2017; his application alleged the death investigation was deficient through systemic racism — filed the month before Broken Trust confirmed that pattern service-wide. Seven years pending; dismissed on standing; the civil clock expired in the queue; the public-interest power that could carry his claim has never been used. His case is the s. 35 gap made flesh.
The civilian — DeBungie
Self-represented; deemed to have abandoned his application for not filing the right pre-hearing documents; reconsideration denied February 2026, citing the Divisional Court. Five and a half years, filing to dismissal. The ordinary applicant's ending: not disbelieved — unheard.
The federal control case — Woodgate v. RCMP
What would these four paths have met in the federal system? In March 2026 Canada's human rights tribunal answered, deciding on its merits almost exactly the claim the father brought and Ontario refused to hear: Woodgate et al. v. RCMP, 2026 CHRT 15 — six Lake Babine Nation members alleging discriminatory police investigation of the abuse they suffered as Indigenous children. Nine years; three complainants died waiting, and their estates were allowed to continue. The road ended in a full merits hearing where the Tribunal told survivors it believes them, rejected the argument that investigations aren't a "service," rejected police discretion as justification, found discrimination in the investigative texture — the polygraph demanded of a woman disclosing childhood sexual assault, the witnesses never told how to report, the outcomes never communicated — and ordered compensation plus a trauma-informed overhaul of policy and training.
Set beside this page: the father's claim died on standing with the civil clock expired; the chair's died by deemed abandonment; the civilian's died on paperwork; the officer's cohort dies at summary gates. The difference is not the strength of the claims. It is that the federal door opens for individuals and Ontario's does not — the architectural finding of One claim, two systems, and the reason the s. 35 request exists.
Tracking forward: any Morriseau reconsideration or judicial review · the continuing cluster files · the Commission's answer to the s. 35 request · Inspector General activity at TBPS. Marlan Chookomolin's story as a standalone feature awaits family-respecting sourcing from published reporting before publication.