The RCMP denied it was investigating SNC Lavalin just hours after the publication of an Access to Information request where the police force said the opposite..The claim was made in an RCMP tweet at 4:12 p.m. MST Monday..“In response to numerous media reports, the RCMP can confirm it is not investigating allegations of political interference in the trial of SNC Lavalin,” the tweet read.."The RCMP is not investigating allegations of political interference in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion to secure a remediation agreement for SNC-Lavalin. The statement, in a May 2023 Access to Information Release, was sent using information available at the time.".“The RCMP’s Sensitive and International Investigations unit conducted an assessment pertaining to these allegations. As part of that review, the RCMP spoke with and collected information from a variety of sources, and examined the matter in the most thorough, objective and professional manner.".“After a comprehensive and impartial assessment of all available information, the RCMP determined there was insufficient evidence to substantiate a criminal offence and the file was concluded.".“The conclusion of that file was communicated to the original complainant in a letter in January 2023 and was also to be released via several Access to Information Requests received.”.The tweet runs contrary to a May 25 letter from the RCMP sent to Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, which was published in conjunction with a media release Monday morning..The response was almost 10 months in the waiting, as Conacher filed the information request July 22, 2022. .“A review of the records revealed that this matter is currently under investigation. The records are subject to an exemption pursuant to subparagraph 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act, a description of which can be found at http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-1. Please note we have exercised our discretion and released some material to you. Once the investigation and any related court proceedings are concluded, you may re-submit the request.”.As the Western Standard reported Monday, the RCMP attached a 96-page document with 86 pages redacted. Only Democracy Watch’s five-page February 2021 letter to the RCMP was unredacted. Another four pages were fully redacted because they are “not relevant” and one page because it was “redundant.”.The section in question reads:.“16 (1) The head of a government institution may refuse to disclose any record requested under this Part that contains.“(a) information obtained or prepared by any government institution, or part of any government institution, that is an investigative body specified in the regulations in the course of lawful investigations pertaining to.“(i) the detection, prevention or suppression of crime…”.Democracy Watch responded to the RCMP’s statement in an email to Western Standard..“The RCMP’s story doesn’t add up because they are contradicting themselves about when the allegations were being investigated, and when decisions were made to end the investigation. If the investigation is actually over, then why did the RCMP refuse to disclose 86 pages of their investigation documents just a few weeks ago because they said the allegations were under investigation?”.Conacher told the Western Standard by email he never received a letter in January and so the alleged “original complainant” in the RCMP statement must be someone else..“That is a weirdly vague statement to issue. So on May 25, 2023 they were investigating (as the letter says) and redacted 86 pages because they were investigating, but 3.5 weeks later that investigation has concluded with a decision not to prosecute? .“But wait, actually that decision to end the investigation was made in January 2023 and communicated to an unknown original complainant but not to anyone else? But it was supposed to have been communicated to everyone who filed an access-to-information request? This raises even more questions than the letter sent to Democracy Watch on May 25th.”
The RCMP denied it was investigating SNC Lavalin just hours after the publication of an Access to Information request where the police force said the opposite..The claim was made in an RCMP tweet at 4:12 p.m. MST Monday..“In response to numerous media reports, the RCMP can confirm it is not investigating allegations of political interference in the trial of SNC Lavalin,” the tweet read.."The RCMP is not investigating allegations of political interference in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion to secure a remediation agreement for SNC-Lavalin. The statement, in a May 2023 Access to Information Release, was sent using information available at the time.".“The RCMP’s Sensitive and International Investigations unit conducted an assessment pertaining to these allegations. As part of that review, the RCMP spoke with and collected information from a variety of sources, and examined the matter in the most thorough, objective and professional manner.".“After a comprehensive and impartial assessment of all available information, the RCMP determined there was insufficient evidence to substantiate a criminal offence and the file was concluded.".“The conclusion of that file was communicated to the original complainant in a letter in January 2023 and was also to be released via several Access to Information Requests received.”.The tweet runs contrary to a May 25 letter from the RCMP sent to Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, which was published in conjunction with a media release Monday morning..The response was almost 10 months in the waiting, as Conacher filed the information request July 22, 2022. .“A review of the records revealed that this matter is currently under investigation. The records are subject to an exemption pursuant to subparagraph 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act, a description of which can be found at http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-1. Please note we have exercised our discretion and released some material to you. Once the investigation and any related court proceedings are concluded, you may re-submit the request.”.As the Western Standard reported Monday, the RCMP attached a 96-page document with 86 pages redacted. Only Democracy Watch’s five-page February 2021 letter to the RCMP was unredacted. Another four pages were fully redacted because they are “not relevant” and one page because it was “redundant.”.The section in question reads:.“16 (1) The head of a government institution may refuse to disclose any record requested under this Part that contains.“(a) information obtained or prepared by any government institution, or part of any government institution, that is an investigative body specified in the regulations in the course of lawful investigations pertaining to.“(i) the detection, prevention or suppression of crime…”.Democracy Watch responded to the RCMP’s statement in an email to Western Standard..“The RCMP’s story doesn’t add up because they are contradicting themselves about when the allegations were being investigated, and when decisions were made to end the investigation. If the investigation is actually over, then why did the RCMP refuse to disclose 86 pages of their investigation documents just a few weeks ago because they said the allegations were under investigation?”.Conacher told the Western Standard by email he never received a letter in January and so the alleged “original complainant” in the RCMP statement must be someone else..“That is a weirdly vague statement to issue. So on May 25, 2023 they were investigating (as the letter says) and redacted 86 pages because they were investigating, but 3.5 weeks later that investigation has concluded with a decision not to prosecute? .“But wait, actually that decision to end the investigation was made in January 2023 and communicated to an unknown original complainant but not to anyone else? But it was supposed to have been communicated to everyone who filed an access-to-information request? This raises even more questions than the letter sent to Democracy Watch on May 25th.”
