Security Intelligence Review Committee

www.sirc-csars.gc.ca

Common menu bar

• Français
• Home
• Contact Us
• Help
• Search
• canada.gc.ca

Breadcrumb

1. Home >
2. Annual Reports >
3. Annual Report 2008-2009 >
4. Section 2 B. Complaints

Annual Report 2008-2009 - Accountability in a New Era of Security Intelligence

Section 2: Summaries of SIRC Reviews and Complaints

B. Complaints

In addition to its review function, SIRC is responsible for investigating complaints about CSIS. Almost all complaint cases begin as inquiries to SIRC—either in writing, in person or by phone. In turn, SIRC staff respond promptly, usually instructing the prospective complainant about what the CSIS Act requires for a concern to become a formal complaint.

Once a written complaint is received, SIRC conducts a preliminary review. Where a complaint does not meet certain statutory requirements, SIRC declines jurisdiction and the complaint is not investigated. If jurisdiction is established, complaints are investigated through a quasi-judicial hearing presided over by one or more Committee Members, assisted by staff. A complainant has the right to be represented by counsel and to make representations at the hearing. Pre-hearings may be conducted to establish and agree on procedures with the complainant and/or the complainant’s counsel.

SIRC’s legal team provides advice on procedural and substantive matters, and will also crossexamine Service witnesses when, for national security reasons, evidence must be heard without the complainant being present.

Types of Complaints

The types of complaints that SIRC investigates are described in the CSIS Act and take several forms. Under Section 41 of the CSIS Act, SIRC can investigate “any act or thing done by the Service.” Under Section 42, it can hear complaints about denials of security clearances to federal government employees and contractors. Section 42 does not permit SIRC to accept jurisdiction to hear complaints concerning less intrusive background screening or reliability checks, which are conducted simply to determine the trustworthiness or suitability of a potential federal employee. These complaints are addressed through an organization’s designated grievance procedure or potentially under Section 41 of the CSIS Act.

When SIRC’s investigation of a complaint made under Section 41 is concluded, it provides a report to the Director of CSIS, the Minister of Public Safety and the complainant.¹ Summaries of these reports, edited to protect national security and the privacy of complainants, are also included in SIRC’s annual report to Parliament.

Pursuant to Section 42 of the CSIS Act, individuals who have been denied a security clearance must be informed of this action by the Deputy Head of the organization. These individuals have the right to make a complaint to SIRC and, where appropriate, SIRC will investigate and report its findings and any recommendations to the Minister, the Director of CSIS, the Deputy Head concerned and the complainant.

Should the Canadian Human Rights Commission receive a written notice from a Minister of the Crown about a complaint that relates to the security of Canada, the Commission may refer the matter to SIRC. Upon receipt of such a referral, SIRC carries out an investigation and reports its findings to the Commission, the Director of CSIS, the Minister of Public Safety, the Minister of the department concerned and the complainant. SIRC also has the authority to conduct investigations into matters referred to SIRC pursuant to the Citizenship Act.

Table 1 provides the status of all complaints directed to SIRC over the past three fiscal years, including complaints that were misdirected to SIRC, deemed to be outside SIRC’s jurisdiction, or investigated and resolved without a hearing (i.e., via an administrative review).

Table 1: Resolution of complaints

	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09
Carried over	24	20	15
New	37	32	30
Total	61	52	45
Closed†	41	37	23
Carried forward to subsequent year	20	15	22
Reports issued	5	6	1

^† Closed files include those where reports were issued, the Committee did not have jurisdiction, the preliminary conditions of the complaint were not met, or the complaints were withdrawn. In the past year, the Committee dealt with an increased number of files raising complex jurisdictional issues.

SIRC Complaint: Investigation of Alleged Profiling

SIRC investigated a complaint in which the complainant was required to obtain an airport restricted-access security clearance for the purposes of employment. In this case, Transport Canada requested that CSIS undertake a security assessment to appraise this individual’s loyalty to Canada and reliability as it relates to such loyalty. The complainant was subsequently contacted by CSIS and a security-screening interview was conducted.

In the complaint to SIRC, filed pursuant to Section 41 of the CSIS Act, the complainant alleged profiling by CSIS. In addition, the complainant objected to the use of questions during the interview, which the complainant alleged solicited political opinions and were believed prohibited under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The complainant sought an apology and written assurances that CSIS would stop asking these questions at future security-screening interviews.

For its part, CSIS argued that it is not unusual to conduct interviews as part of the security screening process. Interviews may be conducted for cause when it is determined that there is insufficient information regarding an individual to complete a security assessment. In conducting its security assessment, CSIS is required, as per the CSIS Act, to appraise a person’s “loyalty to Canada and reliability as it relates to such loyalty.” In doing so, it will consider a range of factors when completing these assessments, including personal beliefs and associations—matters the Service considers to be consistent with the Treasury Board Secretariat’s Government Security Policy.

SIRC’s investigation included a detailed review of CSIS’s documentation, as well as testimony from the complainant and representatives from CSIS plus a Treasury Board Secretariat representative who spoke about the purpose of the Government Security Policy. As a result of this information, SIRC was satisfied that CSIS acted in accordance with the Government Security Policy, the Government Security Policy Standard, as well as CSIS’s applicable operational policies in requesting that the complainant attend a securityscreening assessment interview. In addition, SIRC found that the complainant was not profiled on grounds prohibited by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and found that questions in the securityscreening interview relating to the complainant’s opinions and beliefs did not infringe on the complainant’s rights under the Charter.

Primary navigation (left column)

Date Modified:

2010-10-14