Evidence of meeting #55 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you.
Thank you, witnesses, for doing all you can to help us with this investigation. For the record, I think you do wonderful work, especially the tracking of human rights issues across the world. It's important and valuable work, and we appreciate it. Our questioning with respect to this access to information regime is in no way a reflection or a criticism of the valuable work that you do.
But let me ask you this. We had witnesses say they believe there's a chill regarding freedom of information, specifically concerning the treatment of Afghan detainees. We had one witness testify that he has been told there are special teams to deal with requests that relate to detainees, that these requests are specially treated. Is there such team work dealing with special types of requests about Afghan detainees?
11:55 a.m.
NDP
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Ms. Nixon, is there a team approach to specific types of ATIP questions regarding Afghan detainees?
11:55 a.m.
ATIP Team Leader, Access to Information and Privacy Protection Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
No.
As team leaders, when we're assigning files to an analyst, we'll try to keep requests of similar subject matter with the same analyst for consistency purposes, but there is no....
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I will go to Ms. Kutz now.
Did you ever respond that no such documents exist? At the time of the original, more global request, was it your opinion that no such document of the type this person was asking for existed?
11:55 a.m.
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Thank you, Mr. Martin. I really do appreciate this opportunity to clarify this point. I think it is important that the committee have a clear understanding of how this was processed.
When I received the request about whether there was a 2005-06 or a semi-annual or an annual report on human rights performance in countries around the world, this sounded to me like a request from someone who was very familiar with the kind of reporting that is done on human rights situations around the world. To me, it sounded like the requester was informed, that he was someone who knew about the kinds of human rights documents that exist out there, such as the ones produced by the United States and the United Kingdom. For that reason, in my response I indicated that Canada does not produce a report on the global situation of human rights around the world analogous to the kind of report that the U.K. or the U.S. produces.
My understanding that this was in fact what the requester was looking for I think you'll find is confirmed by his second request where he said that he assumed there was a document—
I am assuming that every year there is some kind of “state-of-the-world” summary or report prepared for the Minister...that describes progress and problems with human rights in various parts of the world....
—with chapters on different countries' situations.
11:55 a.m.
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
So that confirmed my original understanding.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Were you aware that he was going back and forth by e-mail with somebody at Foreign Affairs saying that he assumed there must be some type of report produced by somebody somewhere in DFAIT about issues concerning Afghanistan? He quoted a specific report, “Afghanistan 2006: Good Governance, Democratic Development and Human Rights”.
He obviously clarified what he wanted then.
Noon
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Yes, sir, he clarified what he wanted. In fact, he submitted a request on the Afghan report prior to his submission of a request for a global report.
If you look at your chronologies for the two requests put forward by Mr. Esau, the 604 request was for the specific Afghan report. The processing of that request was underway when he made the second request—the 605 request, which follows in the numbering system—for a copy of DFAIT's 2005 and 2006 annual or semi-annual reports on the human rights situation around the world.
In fact there was a response underway for his specific request on Afghanistan.
Noon
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Going to the censoring, you say that using subsection 15(1), if it was “injurious to the conduct of international affairs”, seems to be the most frequent justification for stamping out, for most of the blacking out.
How is it that all references to torture in 2002, 2003, and 2004 seem to be freely circulated information that was not injurious to the conduct of international affairs, but in the 2006 and 2007 reports, all references to torture are blacked out?
When did that policy shift occur? Why would the administration of that particular exemption have changed so dramatically with a change of government?
June 19th, 2007 / noon
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
If I could refer to the application of subsection 15(1), the reports are viewed according to the act. In the interpretation of subsection 15(1), we look to see whether the release of information could reasonably be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international relations. That review is not word specific.
Noon
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Maybe you could help us with the rationale, specifically in this context. What was the rationale this time?
Noon
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Mr. Martin, I'm not able to speak to specific redactions made in the 2006 report—
Noon
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
—or to what was taken out of the other reports.
I can speak to you about the rationale for redactions, and I would be very pleased to do so.
Noon
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Without admitting that the word “torture” was censored, let's say the word “torture” came up. What would be the rationale for blacking it out?
Noon
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
In any sentence, the reviewer would look at the information and determine whether its release would be injurious to the conduct of international affairs.
Now whatever the language is, whatever the text is in the document, the reviewer would look to see whether the release of that information could bring risk to the source or whether the release could cause a source to no longer be willing to provide information to diplomats abroad.
The reviewer would look to see whether the release of that information would negatively affect Canada's capacity to carry out its functions in the country in question.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Thank you, Mr. Martin.
Ms. Kutz, just so we're clear, are you in agreement that the 2002, 2003, and 2004 reports made reference to torture in the redacted versions?
Noon
Director, Human Rights, Gender Equality, Health and Population Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Yes, Mr. Chairman, parts of the released text use the word “torture”.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Are we agreed that the 2005 and 2006 redacted reports made no reference to torture?