The chair of an intelligence review body that released an explosive report earlier this week alleging some Canadian parliamentarians are “wittingly” helping foreign state actors says it’s now up to RCMP to decide whether it can pursue charges.
On Monday, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP), a cross-party group of MPs and senators with top security clearances, released a long-anticipated report that looked at foreign interference in Canada.
The heavily redacted document alleged some parliamentarians are actively helping foreign governments like China and India meddle in Canadian politics.
The report has sparked a debate about how sound that intelligence is and whether Canadian voters have a right to know whether their MP is alleged to be working for another state.
Facing a barrage of questions Wednesday morning before a Liberal caucus meeting, NSICOP chair David McGuinty repeatedly told reporters he and other members of the committee have taken an oath of secrecy and can’t divulge the names or any material behind the report’s redactions.
“Look, the committee’s hands are tied. We can only release what we release,” he said.
“Members have always wanted to be more transparent, rather than less. We have gone as far as we can in this review to reveal information without being in breach of the Security Information Act.”
David McGuinty, MP and chair of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, says he and members of the committee who compiled the report could be prosecuted if they release the names of parliamentarians alleged to have conspired with foreign governments.
McGuinty said it’s on the RCMP to determine what happens next.
“The question of whether or not this issue is followed-up on is a question rightly put to the RCMP,” said McGuinty.
“It’s up to the RCMP to decide on the basis of any intelligence or evidence they may have in their possession whether they’re going to take steps or not.”
Hard to prosecute intelligence: McGuinty
NSICOP members saw intelligence suggesting MPs worked to influence their colleagues on India’s behalf and proactively provided confidential information to Indian officials, said Monday’s report.
In another case cited in the report — based on Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) information shared with NSICOP — a then-member of Parliament maintained a relationship with a foreign intelligence officer. The officer’s country of origin was not included in the public report.
NSICOP said some of the cases of foreign interference they examined might have involved illegal activity but are unlikely to end in criminal charges “owing to Canada’s failure to address the long-standing issue of protecting classified information and methods in judicial processes.”
McGuinty acknowledged securing charges based on intelligence has been difficult for police.
“It’s difficult to get intelligence in the broad daylight of a courtroom because it speaks to the protection of sources and methods,” he said.
“Look, this is a big issue for intelligence law enforcement folks who have been asking for some improvement in this area.”
The use of intelligence as evidence is a long-standing issue. The “intelligence to evidence” dilemma is the delicate dance between the need to protect sensitive information from disclosure, the need to rely on that information to support law enforcement and an accused’s right to a fair trial while also upholding an accused person’s right to a fair trial.
A 2021 report by the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA), the country’s civilian intelligence oversight body, said flaws in the way Canada’s spy agency and the national police force share information have stalled investigations.
The report says CSIS is under pressure to safeguard operational information — its tactics, methods and where its spies are located. The RCMP is also reluctant to use CSIS’s information, fearing the service’s involvement could jeopardize the chances of a successful prosecution, said the report.
As a result, NSIRA said, the RCMP’s investigations are progressing slowly while CSIS sits on a “trove of intelligence.”