
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (Re), 2022 OIC 01
The complainant alleged that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) improperly withheld information under paragraph 16(2)(c) of the Access to Information Act in response to 64 separate access requests. The withheld information was located in the "History" field of IRCC's GCMS Information Request: Application, which IRCC initially claimed would facilitate the commission of an offence if disclosed. IRCC argued that releasing this audit trail could allow individuals to manipulate immigration programs. The OIC investigated, finding that IRCC had not established a reasonable expectation of harm beyond a mere possibility, and the causal link between disclosure and facilitating an offence was too remote. After extensive discussions, IRCC ultimately agreed to release the information in its entirety. Although the information was released, the Commissioner found the complaints to be well founded because IRCC was not justified in its initial withholding.
- 1Whether s.16(2)(c) ATIA (facilitating the commission of an offence) was properly applied to information in the "History" field of GCMS records
- 2Whether there was a reasonable expectation of harm beyond a mere possibility if the information was disclosed
- 3Whether a causal link existed between the disclosure of information and the facilitation of an offence
- Application of s.16(2)(c): Exemption not justified
- Disclosure of records: Records ordered disclosed
- Justification for withholding: Initial withholding not justified
- Complaint finding: Complaint well-founded
Complaint well founded — information released
The Commissioner found that IRCC failed to demonstrate a reasonable expectation of harm or a sufficiently direct causal link between the disclosure of the "History" field information and the facilitation of an offence, as required by paragraph 16(2)(c) of the Act. Although IRCC eventually released the information, its initial withholding was deemed unjustified.
- s.16(2)(c) ATIA
This summary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Related by meaning
Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.
Coverage — 13 of 14 jurisdictions searchable
Fully searchable: Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, New Brunswick, Manitoba.
Partial (recent decisions only): Federal (Canada) (651 of 1,631), Nova Scotia (49 of 472), Quebec (6 of 7,090), Prince Edward Island (2 of 279), Yukon (1 of 75).
Coming soon: Nunavut — being re-processed for AI search.
Find decisions like this one — by meaning, not keywords.
Related by meaning is a Pro feature. Upgrade to surface conceptually similar decisions across the corpus, powered by AI.
Upgrade to Pro