Sure. There are no allegations in the Osgoode Hall Law School report of direct allegations involving a Canadian mining company being specifically responsible for the violence. The argument is a proximity of Mining Association of Canada activity with the various aspects of that report: criminalization, peasant displacement, and so on.
Then they also argue about what is called possible complicity using a definition of “complicity” involving the International Commission of Jurists, which suggests that complicity involves not just an action that led to violence, but the failure to act when you could be contributing to a situation of increased violence.
If you read that report closely, I think you'd find that quotation you were giving was a selective reading of that report, and I would have a different reading of the report. But I'm submitting the report so you can have a look at the details yourself.