Decisions

The complainant alleged that Library and Archives Canada (LAC) had improperly withheld information under subsection 13(1) (confidential information from government bodies) and subsection 15(1) (national security, defence) of the Access to Information Act in response to an access request regarding submarine operations in the Arctic region. The complaint falls within paragraph 30(1)(a) of the Act. LAC could not show that it met all the requirements of subsection 13(1) and subsection 15(1), in particular, how the information in the record was obtain in confidence and how further disclosure of the withheld information could reasonably be expected to harm national security and/or the defence of Canada. The Information Commissioner recommended that LAC disclose the records in their entirety. LAC gave notice to the Information Commissioner that it would not be implementing the recommendation.

The complaint is well founded.

The complainant alleged that Canada Post failed to conduct a reasonable search in response to an access request made under the Access to Information Act for records containing the complainant’s name. The complaint falls within paragraph 30(1)(a) of the Act.

The investigation determined that Canada Post had not demonstrated that all relevant Offices of Primary Interest (OPI) had been tasked with retrieving records and that the OPIs tasked with retrieving records produced all relevant records under the OPI’s control. Canada Post did not provide sufficient explanation for the lack of certain records identified by the complainant that were not retrieved but would have been responsive to the access request.

The Information Commissioner ordered that Canada Post determine whether additional responsive records exist, and if so, process those relevant records and provide a final response to the complainant.

Canada Post gave notice that it would implement the order.

The complaint is well founded.

The complainant alleged that Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) had improperly withheld information under subsection 19(1) (personal information) and paragraph 20(1)(b) (confidential third‐party financial, commercial, scientific or technical information) of the Access to Information Act. This was in response to an access request for medical certificates provided by Marineland for the export of five beluga whales. The complaint falls within paragraph 30(1)(a) of the Act.

The application of subsection 19(1) to withhold the records at issue was removed from the scope of the complaint.

DFO and the third party did not show that the information met all the requirements of paragraph 20(1)(b), in particular, that the information was confidential or that the third party consistently treated the information as confidential.

The Information Commissioner ordered DFO to disclose the record in its entirety, other than information withheld pursuant to subsection 19(1). DFO gave notice to the Commissioner that it would implement the order.

The complaint is well founded.