Federal (Canada) privacy & access decisions

The Information Commissioner reviewed an institution's application to decline acting on an access request. The institution argued the request was an abuse of the right of access. However, the Commissioner found the institution's submissions insufficient and noted they failed to assist the requester or adequately demonstrate an abuse of access rights. Consequently, the Commissioner denied the application.

• Whether the access request constitutes an abuse of the right of access.
• Sufficiency of the institution's evidence to support its application.
• The institution's duty to assist the requester.

The complainant alleged that National Defence improperly withheld information concerning the Intelligence Advisory Committee under exemptions related to international affairs/national security (subsection 15(1)) and personal information (subsection 19(1)). While the institution disclosed some information during the investigation, the Information Commissioner found that the remaining withheld information did not meet the requirements of subsection 15(1), as the potential harm from disclosure was not apparent. The Commissioner recommended full disclosure, but National Defence disagreed and chose not to implement the recommendation.

• Whether withheld information meets the criteria for exemption under subsection 15(1) of the ATIA.
• Whether the institution demonstrated a reasonable expectation of harm from disclosing the remaining information.
• Whether the institution reasonably exercised its discretion to withhold information.

The complainant alleged that Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) failed to conduct a reasonable search for "School Narratives" and supporting documents. CIRNAC officials identified that records existed but refused to process them, citing confidentiality and a lengthy processing time. The Information Commissioner found the complaint well-founded, ordering CIRNAC to retrieve and process all responsive records and provide a new response to the request.

• Reasonableness of the search conducted by the institution
• Institution's refusal to process identified records
• Complainant's right of access to records under the control of a government institution