Frank Iacobucci's appointment Afghanistan papers.

Walkom: Frank Iacobucci's appointment diminishes Parliament - thestar.comRelated
Commandos investigated
General denies torture
More Afghanistan coverage
Read Afghan files (April 1);Read Afghan files (March 25);Trusted ally sparked torture fears
Tories flood Ottawa with black-out documents;Travers: Did we turn blind eye?
Read Colvin letter (pdf);Letter: Ambassadors protest Colvin affair
Censored Colvin emails (pdf, 8MB) Amnesty International 2007 report
Politically, Ottawa's decision to hand off the Afghan prisoner scandal to retired Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci serves both Stephen Harper's Conservatives and Michael Ignatieff's Liberals.

Constitutionally, however, it is a disaster. It flies in the face of the bedrock Canadian principle that cabinet is responsible to Parliament and that a government – any government – must accede to the wishes of a majority of elected MPs.

Instead, it brings to the mix a peculiarly American notion, one that sees the executive and legislature as co-equals which, when they are deadlocked, must appeal to a judicial referee.

In this case, the referee is a former judge who – in the end – will merely make recommendations to government in a bitter dispute over Harper's refusal to give MPs documents that they have demanded.

But first, the politics.

For Harper, the advantages of the Iacobucci gambit are obvious. Politically, the imbroglio over Afghan prisoners has turned into a disaster for his Conservatives.

Ottawa's insistence that nothing untoward happened to Canadian-captured prisoners after they were handed over to Afghan authorities has been countered by its own diplomats and by the Red Cross.

Even Canada's top military brass is now trying to distance itself from the government's blanket denials.