Canadian Privacy Decisions

The complainant alleged that the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) contravened the Privacy Act by disclosing her medical information to external parties involved in a Public Service Staffing Tribunal (PSST) hearing. The PBC acknowledged that a human resources employee inadvertently emailed documents containing the complainant's medical information, which was outside the scope of the PSST's order. The PBC apologized to the complainant, ensured the recipients disposed of the information, and reported the breach internally.

• Was the complainant's medical information disclosed without consent or lawful authority?
• Did the disclosure contravene the Privacy Act's provisions on disclosure of personal information?
• Were the corrective actions taken by the PBC satisfactory?

The complainant alleged that the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) improperly disclosed his personal information to his country of origin without consent. The CBSA disclosed a court judgment related to the complainant's criminal history to the High Commission of Canada to Ghana, which then forwarded it to Interpol for verification. The OPC found that while the disclosure was for a consistent purpose under the Privacy Act (enforcing immigration law), the CBSA's procedures for such disclosures were insufficient at the time, and the electronic transmission of information raised concerns.

• Disclosure of personal information to a foreign entity for verification purposes.
• Whether the disclosure constituted a consistent use of information under the Privacy Act.
• Adequacy of CBSA procedures for international disclosure and verification requests.
• Concerns regarding the electronic transmission of personal information.

The complainant alleged that Public Services and Procurement Canada (PWGSC) contravened the Privacy Act when a Director disclosed that the complainant had filed a harassment complaint against her during a management meeting. The investigation confirmed the disclosure, and found that the Director had not obtained the complainant's consent and that the attendees did not need to know the information. As a result, the complaint was found to be well-founded.

• Definition of personal information under section 3 of the Privacy Act
• Rules regarding the disclosure of personal information under section 8 of the Privacy Act
• Application of Treasury Board and departmental policies on confidentiality of harassment complaints

This investigation concerned a complaint against Health Canada (HC) regarding the mailing of 41,514 letters using windowed envelopes that revealed the name of the "Marihuana Medical Access Program" (MMAP). The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) found that HC contravened the Privacy Act by disclosing sensitive personal information without consent or legitimate purpose. Although HC cited administrative error and argued implicit consent or consistent use, the OPC determined that the sensitive nature of the program name required greater protection. HC has since implemented stricter mail-out procedures and created a new working group.

• Whether the visible program name in the return address constituted a disclosure of personal information.
• Whether implied consent was obtained from recipients.
• Whether the disclosure was a 'consistent use' of information under section 8(2)(a) of the Privacy Act.
• Whether Health Canada took reasonable steps to protect sensitive personal information.

The complainant, a former Canadian Forces member, alleged that the Department of National Defence (DND) contravened the Privacy Act by prematurely destroying an audio recording of his Progress Review Board (PRB) hearing. The OPC found that the recording contained personal information used for an administrative purpose and should have been retained for at least two years, as required by the Act, unless the complainant consented to its destruction. DND's destruction of the recording shortly after the hearing was deemed premature. The OPC recommended that DND develop a policy for retention and disposal of PRB hearing records and, in the interim, retain such recordings or transcriptions for at least two years.

• Whether the audio recording of the PRB hearing contained personal information used for an administrative purpose.
• Whether the complainant consented to the destruction of the audio recording.
• Whether DND's destruction of the audio recording violated the retention provisions of the Privacy Act.
• Whether DND provided access to accurate records following the hearing.

This investigation concerned complaints against the CBC for disclosing details of a privacy breach at the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), where taxpayer information was inadvertently sent to a CBC journalist. The CBC subsequently published an article containing some of this information, including names and photos of affected individuals. However, the OPC found that the Privacy Act does not apply to personal information collected, used, or disclosed by the CBC for journalistic purposes. Therefore, the complaints were deemed not well-founded as the information was excluded from the Act's application.

• Whether the CBC contravened the Privacy Act by disclosing personal information obtained from a privacy breach at the CRA.
• Whether section 69.1 of the Privacy Act, which excludes journalistic purposes from the Act's application, applied to the CBC's actions.
• Whether the CBC's use and disclosure of the personal information was for purely journalistic purposes.

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada investigated complaints following a privacy breach by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), where personal information of approximately 1,000 individuals was inadvertently sent to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). The investigation confirmed that a CRA employee switched cover letters for two different packages, resulting in a consultation package being sent to a CBC journalist instead of the intended recipient. Despite the CRA's efforts to retrieve the information and implement corrective measures, the information was not returned by the CBC, leading to a published article by the CBC.

• Unauthorized disclosure of personal information
• Adequacy of CRA's internal procedures and employee training
• Compliance with section 8 of the Privacy Act regarding disclosure

The complainant alleged that Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) inappropriately disclosed her health and financial information to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). The investigation found that VAC disclosed the complainant's medical diagnosis and financial information to the RCMP's National Compensation Policy Centre via its pension award letter. This disclosure was found to contravene the Privacy Act because it was not a 'consistent use' of the information, as neither consent nor a clear need-to-know was established for the RCMP's National Compensation Policy Centre to receive this sensitive personal information. The issue was also found to be systemic, affecting numerous RCMP employees.

• Was the disclosure of the complainant's medical and financial information by VAC to the RCMP a contravention of the Privacy Act?
• Did the complainant provide informed consent for the disclosure of her personal information?
• Was the disclosure of information considered a 'consistent use' under paragraph 8(2)(a) of the Privacy Act?
• Was the disclosure of personal information systemic in nature?

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada investigated a complaint concerning the RCMP's collection of a member's medical diagnosis and financial information from Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC). The OPC found that the RCMP's National Compensation Policy Centre collected sensitive personal information that was not necessary for the administration of pension benefits or health care, contravening the Privacy Act. The investigation revealed this practice was systemic and occurred over several years, despite the transfer of responsibility for pension adjudication to VAC.

• Necessity of collecting medical and financial information by the RCMP from VAC.
• Consistency of collection with the purposes for which information was originally collected by VAC.
• Systemic nature of the inappropriate collection of sensitive personal information.
• Adequacy of information sharing agreements between federal institutions.

A complaint was filed against the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) alleging that its use of video surveillance to monitor employees at a border crossing contravened the Privacy Act. The complainant argued that the CBSA was using video technology to collect personal information for monitoring employee conduct and performance, beyond the initial safety and security purposes, and that signage was insufficient. While the CBSA's signage issue was resolved, the investigation focused on the collection of employee information for monitoring. The OPC found that the CBSA's updated policies and rationale for collecting personal information for integrity and quality assurance, including investigating serious misconduct, met the Act's requirements, but awaited confirmation of updated guidelines.

• Use of video surveillance for monitoring employee conduct and performance
• Necessity and proportionality of collecting personal information via video surveillance
• Sufficiency of signage informing employees of video monitoring
• Compliance with the Privacy Act's requirement that personal information collection relates directly to an operating program or activity

This report details an investigation into the loss of a USB key containing the personal information of 5,045 Canada Pension Plan Disability appellants. The investigation found that both Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and Justice Canada failed to adequately translate their privacy and security policies into practice, leading to weaknesses in physical, technological, administrative, and personnel controls. Both departments accepted nine recommendations to improve data protection, many of which were similar to those made in a previous investigation involving ESDC.

• Adequacy of physical, technological, administrative, and personnel security controls
• Failure to translate privacy and security policies into meaningful business practices
• Protection of sensitive personal information including SIN and medical details
• Custody and storage of portable electronic devices containing personal information

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) investigated a complaint from an employee of the Canada School of Public Service (the School) who alleged his personal information was improperly disclosed. The School had received a letter from the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner (PSIC) identifying seven employees and allegations against them. The School hand-delivered this letter to the named employees, including the complainant. The OPC found that the School's actions contravened the Privacy Act by disclosing the complainant's personal information without authority. Following the OPC's recommendations, the School developed new procedures to protect confidentiality.

• Disclosure of personal information contrary to the Privacy Act
• Adequacy of procedures to protect personal information
• Cooperation with other federal oversight bodies

A staff relations representative complained that the RCMP's disclosure of informal disciplinary records to the Crown was inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s McNeil decision. The complainant argued that only records from formal disciplinary hearings should be disclosed. The OPC agreed with the RCMP that all disciplinary records, informal or formal, may need to be disclosed if relevant to court proceedings. While the complaint was found not well-founded, the OPC recommended the RCMP reconsider its policy of retaining disciplinary records until members reach 100 years of age, which is significantly longer than other police services.

• Disclosure of informal disciplinary records to the Crown in light of the McNeil decision
• Relevance determination for disclosure of disciplinary records
• Retention period for RCMP disciplinary records

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) investigated a complaint alleging the improper disclosure of personal information on the Canada Border Service Agency's (CBSA) "Wanted by the CBSA" website. While the disclosure itself was found to be permissible under the Privacy Act for immigration law enforcement, the CBSA failed to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information. The investigation also found the CBSA failed to conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment before launching the program. The CBSA accepted all five OPC recommendations for improvement.

• Whether the CBSA improperly disclosed personal information on its "Wanted by the CBSA" website.
• Whether the CBSA conducted a Privacy Impact Assessment prior to launching the program.
• Whether the CBSA took reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the disclosed personal information.
• Whether the purpose of disclosure was consistent with the Privacy Act.

A woman received the personal information of five strangers along with her daughter's tax documents from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). She attempted to return the information to the CRA through various channels but faced difficulties. The OPC launched a Commissioner-initiated investigation, which concluded that the CRA had breached the privacy rights of the individuals whose information was improperly disclosed. The CRA has since implemented remedial measures to improve its procedures for handling misdirected mail and facilitating breach reporting.

• Adequacy of CRA's procedures for handling misdirected personal information.
• Effectiveness of CRA's channels for the public to report privacy breaches.
• Timeliness and appropriateness of CRA's response to the breach.