Foreign Affairs Committee on Oct. 17th, 2016

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

If we did have an investigation on that, I would not be able to confirm or deny its existence or speak to it.

I would say that there is a great deal of intelligence in these financial areas, but as I said to you earlier, in my opening remarks, converting that into evidence that is useable for a criminal court is always the key, and this is not an easy task. We call it the intelligence-to-evidence conundrum. Without getting into the specifics further, I think I'll leave it at that.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Would you agree with the previous witnesses that there are gaps in the interruption of known criminals bringing ill-gotten gains of substantial amounts into Canada?

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

I've been warned about making opinions. Therefore, I won't make one. Thank you, sir.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

All right.

The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions?

[Christine Ring]

I cannot comment on this, as this particular matter is beyond the scope of OSFI's mandate.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I would like to move on to the Freezing Assets of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act. As we have discussed here today, it applies to politically exposed foreign persons, and there is quite a long list of individuals. It doesn't apply to the owners of foreign banks. It doesn't apply to state security officials. There is abundant evidence from Russia of prison officials and security officials accumulating great wealth, far beyond even their lifetime anticipated payroll as civil servants, and these individuals do move money around the world to other countries, safe havens, if you will.

I'm just wondering how the Freezing Assets of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act would apply to someone who isn't listed as a politically exposed foreign person but who is exceptionally corrupt. Again, from credible evidence from Russia, for example, we know that there are a good number of these individuals, who wouldn't fit these definitions and who could potentially, as Mr. Malkin did, move tens of millions of dollars into Canada.

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

I could take the first piece of that. You are talking about something outside of FACFOA.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Has either of you read Red Notice, by Bill Browder?

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

No.

[Christine Ring]

No.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I would suggest that maybe it would be good bedside reading in the weeks and months ahead, as we come to advocate for the Magnitsky Act to fill in some of the gaps that exist between these two current pieces of legislation.

I'm sorry for interrupting.

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

It's not a problem at all, sir. Thank you.

If you are talking about prosecutions or investigations outside of FACFOA, that's an entirely different sort of arena from what we are talking about here. There are some areas—and I listened to the discussion before—but I am not entirely sure about an answer as to what could be done.

If you are talking about the seizure of foreign assets or the assets of a person such as that who has come to Canada—

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

And the denial of their entry into Canada....

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

I would think—and this is me going out on a limb and speculating—that there is something in there that could be done pursuant to the Customs Act. I was looking briefly at the Proceeds of Crime and Terrorist Financing Act on my BlackBerry while I was listening before, and I saw that there are powers to seize currency that is moved into Canada by a variety of means. I don't want to get nailed down into the specifics and give you a yes or no, but just from my perspective, maybe there are some things that can be done outside of FACFOA.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to Mr. Sidhu, please.

[Jati Sidhu, Liberal, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you for coming out today.

In your opening remarks, you touched on the mechanism of working with international and internal agencies. When it comes to resources, does the RCMP set aside or dedicate enough resources, human and financial, to enforce these orders?

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

As I spoke to in my opening remarks, the prioritization process is involved. The RCMP has limited resources, and these processes have been developed to ensure that we focus them on the right files at the right time, and to leverage the help of our partners to ensure that justice is done for the highest priority files. I believe that we do have the resources required across the law enforcement community to address the high-priority files.

[Jati Sidhu, Liberal, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Just to follow up, what's the success rate when you start investigating a certain number of people? What do you think the success rate is, in your experience?

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

On that, I've always said we're Canadian and we measure success by putting a prosecution to the crown counsel, and then we wash our hands of it. If we've done our job pursuant to the justice system, we're quite happy.

[Jati Sidhu, Liberal, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Okay, thank you.

Just so I can be clear, in your comments you said, relating to a couple of the cases, that on April 14, 2014, Lee Specialties Ltd. pleaded guilty to charges under SEMA and was fined $90,000. This was the first successful charge and conviction in Canada pursuant to SEMA.

So am I led to believe and understand that this is the first one since the legislation came into effect in 2010?

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

That is correct, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Okay.

[Supt Steve Nordstrum]

1992.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Sorry, 1992. So this will be the first since 1992.