5822-04510 — Public Safety Canada and Royal Canadian Mounted Police
The complainant alleged that Public Safety Canada's 240-day extension to respond to an access request was unreasonable. The request was for correspondence between Public Safety and the RCMP in May 2022. Public Safety could not justify the lengthy extension, as the volume of records was not large and the RCMP's consultation timeline was based on service standards rather than record complexity. The Information Commissioner found the extension invalid, deeming the delay a refusal of access.
- Reasonableness of time extension under subsection 9(1) of the ATIA
- Definition of 'large number of records' under paragraph 9(1)(a)
- Justification for consultation delays under paragraph 9(1)(b)
- Timeliness of institution's response
Complaint well founded — order issued to provide response by a specific date
Public Safety Canada failed to demonstrate that the volume of records requested was large enough to justify paragraph 9(1)(a) and that the consultation period with the RCMP, which was based on service standards rather than record complexity, was reasonable under paragraph 9(1)(b). Consequently, the 240-day extension was invalid.
AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
The Minister of Public Safety was ordered to provide a complete response to the access request on the 36th business day following the date of the final report.
- s.9(1) ATIA
- s.30(1)(c) ATIA
- s.10(3) ATIA
- s.36.1(1) ATIA
This decision is informational only and does not constitute legal advice.