Appellant The-Information-Commissioner-Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
File Nos. 33300, 33296, 33297, 33299 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL) File No. 33300 BETWEEN: THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA APPELLANT (Appellant) - and - THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENCE RESPONDENT (Respondent) ---------------------------------------------------- File No. 33296 BETWEEN: THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA APPELLANT (Appellant) - and - THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORT CANADA RESPONDENT (Respondent) (Style of cause continues inside cover) APPELLANT’S FACTUM - 2 - File No. 33297 BETWEEN: THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA APPELLANT (Respondent) - and - THE COMMISSIONER OF THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE RESPONDENT (Appellant) ---------------------------------------------------- File No. 33299 AND BETWEEN: THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA APPELLANT (Appellant / Respondent on Cross-Appeal) - and - THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA RESPONDENT (Respondent / Appellant on Cross-Appeal) - 3 - Mr. Laurence Kearley Ms. Diane Therrien Information Commissioner of Canada 7th Floor – Tower B 112 Kent Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1H3 Tel.: 613 943-2577 Tel.: 613 996-3234 Fax: 613 947-5252 [email protected] [email protected] Ms. Marlys A. Edwardh Ms. Jessica R. Orkin Marlys Edwardh Barristers Professional Corporation Suite 1100 20 Dundas Street West Toronto, Ontario M5G 2G8 Tel.: 416 597-2801 Tel.: 416 597-6573 Fax: 416 597-0070 [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Christopher M. Rupar Attorney General of Canada Room 1212 – East Tower 234 Wellington Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8 Tel.: 613 941-2351 Fax: 613 954-1920 [email protected] Counsel for the Respondents i TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I – STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................................ 1 (A) Overview .......................................................................................................................... 1 (B) The access to information requests from which these appeals arise ................................ 1 (C) The Records at Issue ........................................................................................................ 2 (i) The Records at Issue in the DND case (SCC File No. 33300) ......................................... 2 (ii) The Records at Issue in the PMO/PCO case (SCC File No. 33299) ............................ 5 (iii) The Records at Issue in the DoT case (SCC File No. 33296) ...................................... 6 (iv) The Records at Issue in the RCMP case (SCC File No. 33297) .................................. 8 (D) Ministers and Ministers’ offices, including the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister’s Office .......................................................................................................................................... 9 (E) Previous practice under ATIA involving Ministers’ offices ........................................... 11 (F) The Information Commissioner’s investigative findings culminating in the applications for judicial review from which these appeals stem .................................................................... 12 (G) The Judgments Below .................................................................................................... 13 (i) The Federal Court ........................................................................................................... 13 (ii) The Federal Court of Appeal ...................................................................................... 14 PART II – STATEMENT OF THE QUESTIONS IN ISSUE ........................................................................ 16 PART III – STATEMENT OF ARGUMENT ........................................................................................... 16 The standard of appellate review ............................................................................................... 16 (A) A contextual and purposive analysis of the Access to Information Act with respect to the roles of Ministers, Ministers’ offices and departments ........................................................ 17 (i) The overarching purposes of the Access to Information Act: Democratic accountability and participation, through access to records concerning the machinery of government ....... 18 (ii) Executive/administrative government in Canada: The legal framework of responsible government maintained by constitutional conventions, framed and supplemented by legislative and common law rules .......................................................................................... 22 The constitutional framework governing the powers and practices of executive government ......................................................................................................................... 26 The organization of the executive/administrative arm of government .............................. 31 Reconciling individual ministerial responsibility with modern government: The legal doctrines relating to the devolution of executive powers and public service neutrality .... 39 The Access to Information Act as a statutory, quasi-constitutional accountability mechanism .......................................................................................................................... 46 ii (iii) Permissible use of expert evidence concerning the legal framework of executive/administrative government .................................................................................... 49 (iv) There is no evidence of the Court of Appeal’s “well understood convention” ............. 52 (B) Ministers, as “heads” presiding over departments, are part of these “government institutions” when exercising departmental functions ............................................................... 57 (i) The statutory scheme of ATIA: Named “government institutions” with designated “heads” ................................................................................................................................... 59 (ii) The Minister cannot in law exercise departmental functions or conduct departmental business within an institution that is legally distinct from the department ............................ 67 (iii) This interpretation is harmonious with the purpose and statutory scheme of ATIA and the federal statute book as a whole ......................................................................................... 73 (iv) The records at issue were generated on behalf of the Ministers in the exercise of the Ministers’ departmental functions .......................................................................................... 80 (C) In the alternative, the correct test for determining whether records are “under the control of a government institution” for the purpose of s.4 of ATIA ......................................... 82 (D) Ministers, as heads of government institutions, are also “officers” of those institutions for the purposes of the definition of “personal information” ..................................................... 87 (i) The grammatical and ordinary sense of the word “officer” or «cadre» includes Ministers and the Prime Minister ........................................................................................... 88 (ii) The objects of the Acts and of the s.3(j) carve-out ....................................................... 92 (iii) The intent of Parliament: The functions of Ministers, including the Prime Minister, make them officers ................................................................................................................. 93 PARTS IV & V – COSTS AND ORDERS REQUESTED .......................................................................... 94 TABLE 1 - VARIATION IN DEGREE OF MINISTERIAL CONTROL ACROSS INSTITUTIONS .................... 95 TABLE 2 - COMPARISON OF THE INSTITUTIONAL CATEGORIES OF THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION ACT AND THE SCOPE OF ATIA .......................................................................................................... 97 TABLE 3 - GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS LISTED IN SCHEDULE I OF ATIA BUT NOT LISTED IN THE FAA SCHEDULES ........................................................................................................................... 100 PART VI – TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................................... 101 PART VII – STATUTORY PROVISIONS ............................................................................................ 119 - 1 - PART I – STATEMENT OF FACTS (A) Overview [1] In these appeals, this Court must determine whether records located in the office of a Minister of the Crown are subject to the Access to Information Act (ATIA). In addition, this Court must decide whether Ministers of the Crown should to be treated as private citizens or as “officers” of the government institutions over which they preside, for the purposes of the access to information and privacy regimes. In a narrow sense, this Court must interpret ss.4 and 19 of ATIA. More broadly, this Court’s interpretation of those provisions will have profound and far- reaching consequences for the right of Canadians to access government information, and thus their ability to participate meaningfully in the democratic process and hold their representatives to account. [2] If the lowers courts’ conclusion that ATIA does not to apply to a Minister’s departmental office is permitted to stand, a Minister will