National Defence (Re), 2024 OIC 06
The complainant alleged that National Defence (DND) improperly withheld information under subsections 15(1) and 19(1) of the Access to Information Act, concerning historical records of the Intelligence Advisory Committee. During the investigation, DND issued two supplementary responses, disclosing additional information, and the complainant narrowed the complaint to specific pages withheld under subsection 15(1). DND proposed a third supplementary response, agreeing to disclose more information but maintaining some redactions under subsection 15(1). The Information Commissioner concluded that the remaining withheld information did not meet the requirements of subsection 15(1), particularly regarding the absence of apparent harm from disclosure. The Commissioner recommended DND disclose all remaining information withheld under subsection 15(1). However, DND notified the Commissioner that it would not implement this recommendation. Consequently, the complaint was found to be well-founded.
- 1Whether information was properly withheld under s.15(1) ATIA (international affairs and national security)
- 2Whether information was properly withheld under s.19(1) ATIA (personal information)
- 3Whether disclosure of the remaining information could reasonably be expected to harm international affairs, defence, or national security
- 4Whether DND provided sufficient evidence of harm to justify the s.15(1) exemption
- 5Whether DND reasonably exercised its discretion to withhold the information
- Application of s.15(1): Exemption not justified
- Disclosure of records: Disclosure recommended
- Compliance with recommendation: Institution refused to comply
- Complaint outcome: Well-founded
Complaint well founded — disclosure recommended, but institution refused to comply
The Commissioner found that National Defence failed to demonstrate that the disclosure of the remaining information, consisting of titles and dates from an index, could reasonably be expected to cause harm as described in subsection 15(1). DND did not provide sufficient evidence of ongoing operational relevance, potential for revealing covert operations, or specific injury to bilateral relations or intelligence gathering capabilities. The Commissioner noted that similar information had been previously disclosed and that the index itself was widely shared.
The Commissioner recommended that the Minister of National Defence disclose pages 4, 6-20 in their entirety within 10 business days.
- s.15(1) ATIA
- s.19(1) ATIA
- s.30(1) ATIA
- s.37(4) ATIA
- s.43 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