RCMP contravened the Act by using certain types of non-conviction information for vulnerable sector checks without consent
Three individuals complained about the Royal Canadian Mounted Police's (RCMP) use of non-conviction information in vulnerable sector (VS) checks, which they required for employment or volunteer positions. The complainants alleged that the RCMP inappropriately used non-criminal information, including mental health incidents, without proper consent. The OPC found that for two of the complaints, the RCMP contravened section 7 of the Privacy Act because the consent forms did not clearly inform applicants about the types of non-conviction information that would be used. While the RCMP argued consent was obtained, the OPC determined it was not informed consent in these cases. The OPC also concluded that the RCMP's broad policy of reporting non-conviction information, including mental health incidents, was not proportional or minimally intrusive compared to more restrictive provincial models. However, the complaint regarding the RCMP's retention period for personal information was found not well-founded, as it complied with the minimum requirements of the Privacy Regulations. The RCMP agreed to revise its consent forms and policy to address the OPC's concerns, leading to a well-founded and conditionally resolved outcome for the two complaints.
- 1Whether the use of non-conviction information by the RCMP for VS checks was done with informed consent consistent with section 7 of the Privacy Act.
- 2Whether the RCMP's policy of reporting non-conviction information broadly, including mental health incidents, in VS checks was proportional or minimally intrusive.
- 3Whether the RCMP should amend its policies with respect to the use of non-conviction information in VS checks.
- 4Whether the RCMP contravened the Act by retaining Complainant 2’s personal information for too long.
- Use of non-conviction info: Contravention of s.7 Privacy Act for two complaints
- Informed consent: Consent not informed for two complaints
- Policy proportionality: Broad policy not proportional or minimally intrusive
- Retention period: Retention period compliant with Privacy Regulations
- Remedial action: RCMP agreed to revise forms and policy
Complaints well-founded and conditionally resolved; one complaint not well-founded
The RCMP's consent forms for two complainants did not clearly specify the types of non-conviction information that would be used, rendering consent uninformed. The RCMP's broad policy for including non-conviction information, particularly mental health incidents, was deemed disproportionate and not minimally intrusive, but they committed to revisions.
The RCMP agreed to revise its consent forms to clearly specify the types of non-conviction information used in VS checks and to inform applicants of their right to request an independent review. Additionally, the RCMP committed to implementing a policy that only considers non-conviction information relevant if it meets specific criteria for 'exceptional disclosure,' similar to Alberta's procedures and Ontario's legislation, and will specify that mental health-related occurrences should not be considered relevant unless they meet these criteria.
- section 7 of the Privacy Act
- subsection 6(1) of the Privacy Act
- subsection 4(1) of the Privacy Regulations
This summary is informational only and not 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