NSICOP chair says it’s up to the RCMP to probe allegations of foreign interference

The chair of an intelligence review body that released an explosive report earlier this week alleging some Canadian parliamentarians “wittingly” helped 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 committee of MPs and senators with top security clearances, released a long-anticipated report that looked at foreign political interference in Canada.

The heavily redacted document alleges some parliamentarians have actively helped foreign governments like China and India meddle in Canadian politics.

The report has sparked a fierce debate about the soundness of that intelligence and whether voters have a right to know whether their MP has been accused of working for another state.

Facing a barrage of questions Wednesday morning before a Liberal caucus meeting, NSICOP chair David McGuinty repeatedly told reporters that 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.

“The 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 of Information Act.”

McGuinty said it’s up to the RCMP to decide what happens next.

“The question of whether or not this issue is followed up on is a question rightly put to the RCMP,” he said. 

“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 on intelligence: McGuinty 

Monday’s report said NSICOP members viewed intelligence suggesting MPs worked to influence their colleagues on India’s behalf and proactively provided confidential information to Indian officials.

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 police have struggled to secure charges based on intelligence.

“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 has been a long-standing point of contention between Canada’s security agencies, the police and the courts.

The “intelligence to evidence” dilemma involves striking a balance between the need to protect sensitive intelligence and law enforcement’s use of that information, while protecting an accused’s right to a fair trial.

Waning RCMP resources 

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 said CSIS is under pressure to safeguard operational information — its tactics, methods, where its spies are located. The RCMP is also reluctant to use CSIS’s information because it fears 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.”  

While NSICOP has access to reams of classified intelligence and can interview senior players, it is prevented from seeing information relating directly to an ongoing investigation by a law enforcement agency.

“For this reason, the committee was unable to discern a clear picture of the investigations that may have been underway in the time period under review,” said their report.

Members did hear from the RCMP that it set up a a foreign actor interference team in 2020 to coordinate and oversee its foreign interference investigations. But the report said the RCMP was unable to tell NSICOP exactly how many foreign interference investigations it had undertaken over the review period.

“The unit was established using resources from other national security priorities and the RCMP advised the committee that it will be unsustainable without new resources,” said the NSICOP report.

“No charges have been laid in respect of foreign interference in democratic processes and institutions.”