Info Source
www.infosource.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
Info Source Bulletin Number 31A - Court Case Summaries
Information Commissioner of Canada v. Commissioner of the RCMP
2003 SCC 8
Supreme Court of Canada
Date of Decision: March 6, 2003
Sections(s): ATIA: s. 2(1), 19(1), 41, 42, 49
PA: s. 3(b), (j)
Origin
Appeal from the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal which confirmed the lower court decision that that only information related to a public servant's current position or a former public servant's last position needed to be released.
Issues
- Did the records sought contain "personal information"?
- If so, is the information excluded from the definition under paragraph 3(j) PA?
Facts
An individual requested certain information from the RCMP pertaining to four of its officers. The RCMP refused to disclose the information on the grounds that the records contained "personal information", as defined by s. 3 PA, and therefore were exempt from disclosure under s. 19(1) ATIA.
A complaint was made to the Information Commissioner (IC), who investigated. During the investigation, the RCMP informed the IC that it would release the current postings and positions of the four serving RCMP members and the last posting and position of the one retired RCMP member. However, the RCMP maintained its position that the remaining information was "personal information" and exempt from disclosure.
The IC found that the information relating to the previous RCMP postings of the four officers,, and other job-related information in the relevant records, did not constitute "personal information". The IC recommended that the RCMP disclose the list of the officers' historical postings, their status and date; the list of ranks and the dates they achieved those ranks; their years of service; and their anniversary date of service. The RCMP indicated that it would not follow the IC's recommendation. The IC applied to the Federal Court (Trial Division) (FCTD), for an order directing the RCMP to disclose the records or portions thereof which do not qualify for exemption from disclosure under s. 19(1) ATIA.
The FCTD held that only information related to a public servant's current position or a former public servant's last position needed to be released.
The Federal Court of Appeal upheld that decision.
Decision
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal. In other words, it disagreed with the lower court rulings.
Reasons
- Did the requested records contain "personal information" under section 19(1) ATIA?
The information sought regarding the four RCMP members is "information about an identifiable individual", and therefore "personal information" within the meaning of s. 3 PA. There is also no doubt that the requested information relates to employment history and falls within the scope of s. 3 (b) of the definition of "personal information" . The information requested is exactly the type of information that a reasonable person in a working environment would likely characterize as employment history. - If so, is the information excluded from the definition under paragraph 3(j) PA?
- This information falls under the exemption provided in paragraph. 3(j) exception for "personal information". Paragraph 3(j) PA is retroactive in nature and there is no reason to impose a time restriction on its scope. The list of examples provided in para. 3(j) is not exhaustive and certainly does not limit the application of the introductory paragraph to the current position held by an employee or to the last position occupied by an employee now retired.
- Nevertheless, paragraph 3(j) PA does have a specified scope, as the information must be related to the position or functions held by a federal employee. This will exclude information relating, for example, to the competence and characteristics of the employee. This paragraph should apply only when the information requested is sufficiently related to the general characteristics associated with the positions or functions held by an officer or employee of a federal institution. It is both artificial and unhelpful to attempt to distinguish between "information about the person" and "information about the position or functions".
- Para. 3(j) PA applies when the information – which is always linked to the individual – is directly related to the general characteristics associated with the position or functions held by an employee, without the objective or subjective nature of that information being determinative.
