(Ottawa) The government argued, in a letter sent to the commission of inquiry into foreign interference, that it would be untenable to ask it to carry out “in the longer term” work such as that which was done for the disclosure of 13 redacted documents.
“To meet the planned deadline, the government diverted experts on the subject of the specific information contained in the documents from their role of intelligence collection and analysis to participate in this review,” we can read in the missive written by lawyers from the Department of Justice.
The review exercise took 200 hours of work, it is claimed, and “this level of review is not sustainable if replicated in the long term”, it continued.
The letter accompanies 13 documents which were tabled on Thursday as part of the work of the public and independent inquiry.
“It is clear that large-scale redaction of documents will not be an effective solution given the time constraints,” the lawyers argue.
According to them, other approaches must be considered, such as “redaction of a limited number of documents which is sustainable and proportional”. The production of “summaries of a limited quantity of documents or subjects” is also mentioned as an avenue.
Questioned about this passage in the missive, the big boss of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), David Vigneault, wanted to demonstrate his “personal commitment” to ensuring that his organization does “everything possible to support the commission “.
During discussions with the lawyer representing a coalition of media, the director of CSIS affirmed in hearings that requesting the disclosure of information is part of the mandate of the person who heads the public and independent investigation, Commissioner Marie-Josée Hogue.
The deputy national security adviser for the Privy Council Office, Daniel Rogers, argued that he “could imagine such a possibility” where it would be untenable in the long term to reproduce the review made on the 13 documents filed Thursday.
“This is why, on the government side, we also mention in this letter the ability to use other processes to achieve the same goal,” he responded to a question asked by the lawyer representing the Council of Ukrainian Canadians.
Around 80% of the documents received so far by the M teamme Hogue are classified. Of these, 80% have the highest protection ratings, meaning they are considered “top secret” or higher.
The commissioner and her entourage have access to the unredacted version of the documents, but she has insisted since her appointment on her desire to maximize the amount of information that can be disclosed to the public.
Mr. Vigneault maintained that it is possible to disclose, over time, certain information that was previously considered “confidential,” “secret” or “top secret.”
“I think it’s important for the rest of the commission’s work to see that temporality has an impact,” he said.
He gave as an example a document produced in 2021 in which certain passages were revealed as part of the work of the public and independent inquiry.
“The harm is different in 2024 or 2023,” he summarized, referring to the national security risks associated with disclosure.
On Wednesday, a former high-ranking CSIS officer, Alan Jones, spoke of “temporality” for partially or entirely declassifying documents.
Furthermore, Mr. Vigneault disagreed with Mr. Jones and the former number one of CSIS, Richard Fadden, wanting that the organization tends to excessively protect information under the seal of confidentiality.
“I have a different experience,” he said. He argued that an “evolution over time” has taken place and that CSIS is releasing more information to the public than before.
Mr. Vigneault notably mentioned documents made public, such as one of them entitled “Foreign interference and you”.
He emphasized the intended audience for classified documents on foreign interference: hand-picked people inside the government.
“These documents were designed with the aim of […] to include classified information, to be read by people with security clearance and a need to know. So these documents, their entire essence was to contain lots of secrets,” he said.
The week of hearings must end Friday with the appearance of the Minister of Public Safety, Dominic LeBlanc.
Discussions on national security and information privacy are expected to set the stage for the upcoming public hearings, which are expected to take place at the end of March.
Mme Hogue must submit a first report no later than May 3. The final report is expected by December 2024.