Submission received by email on April 11, 2021
Subject: Ken Kolynchuk Submission to Review of Access to Information Act Dear sir or madam:
Thank you for letting me submit something that I feel is very important with regard to the Access to
Information Act review. My submission particularly revolves around the ‘Twenty Year Rule’ of the Access
to Information Act Exemptions.
The purpose of this letter is to give some background as to how Section 16 Exemptions affect the surviving family members after losing one of their family and the RCMP investigation into that loss. This is why I have been trying very hard to find out why this Section exists, and to argue how unfair it is to the surviving family members.
I have been trying to find out the reasoning and rationale behind two sections of the Act, as it affects not only my family, but the families of anyone who has lost a loved family member whose death was investigated by the RCMP. In short, this Section and subsections of the Act make it a terrible thing to deal with for the families of the deceased. The law, or the Act is one thing, but the reality to family members is a terrible case of never finding answers, due to this Section of the Act.
The Office of the Information Commissioner for Canada has given me about all of the information that they could provide me regarding the Act. It would take me hundreds of hours to research the Hansard for the various arguments during the creation of the Act.
Summary:
THE 'TWENTY YEAR' RULE:
ACCESS TO INFORMATION ACT: EXEMPTIONS
"Section 16(1) 'The head of a government institution may refuse to disclose any record requested under this Act that contains
(a) information obtained or prepared by any government institution, that is an investigative body specified in the regulations in the course of lawful investigations pertaining to
(ii) the enforcement of any law of Canada or a province
If the record came into existence less than twenty years prior to the request". This is the Section that prevents any information to be shared with the family!
However, there is also a subsection which can be used to prevent any of the information being released, even after twenty years!
Time limitation
Paragraph 16(1)(a) applies only to records that came into existence less than twenty years ago. This does not mean that records covered by this exemption must automatically be disclosed pursuant to an access to information request once they are twenty years old. Although records that are more than

twenty years old automatically fall outside the protection of paragraph 16(1)(a), paragraph 16(1)(c) can be applied if there is still a need to protect them.
16(1)(c):
(c) information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to be injurious to the enforcement of any law of Canada or a province or the conduct of lawful investigations, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, any such information
relating to the existence or nature of a particular investigation,
that would reveal the identity of a confidential source of information, or
that was obtained or prepared in the course of an investigation.
They may never release the information requested, even after twenty years!
I would like to know what the purpose of these subsections are. It is my feeling that these were put into the Act to protect the privacy of any individuals involved with the investigation. However, in my opinion, this has an even worse consequence, whether intended or unintended. That consequence prevents the families from finding out detailed information, receiving the Investigation file, and the ability to question whether a full and proper investigation was carried out by the RCMP. I wonder if the MPs that voted this section of the Act into law were aware of what it would do to surviving family members?
Families have already suffered through the loss of a family member. When they try to get a copy of the Investigation file, they are totally stymied by the above-mentioned Section and subsections. They are
left with absolutely no information regarding the investigation of their family member’s death!
In my own, personal example, if I had to wait for twenty years to apply for chance to get the file of the investigation, I would be 79 to 80 years old. My chances of dying before I received that information are greater than they are of me to receive the information. What makes this worse, is that even after waiting 20 years, there is the possibility that the information would still be withheld!
Even, after twenty years, I do receive the full report, if I find errors or potential omissions, what can be done about it at that time? It will be far too late to have any kind of recourse.
What this does is to add to the cruelty of not only losing a loved, and very much missed, family member by adding the additional hurt of not knowing what actually transpired to cause the death. The family will always be wondering, without an answer, to what took place, and whether the investigation was a full and thorough one. They are left totally in the dark and have to live not knowing anything other than a very basic, watered-down presentation by the RCMP. This also leads to thought of what the last minutes of that family member were like and the suffering they went though.
During the initial notification of a death to the family, a very minimal amount of information is given to the family of the deceased. The information given them at that time may not be totally accurate since it is relayed by the RCMP to the local police to break the news. The family is in shock, and doesn’t have the mental ability at that time to ask specific questions. These questions often arise in greater number as time passes. If the family was given a thorough, and accurate review of the death, they may have more probing questions. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

I would expect this type of treatment if I lived in Russia or China, but certainly not in Canada!
In my past attempts to find out information on a deceased family member’s investigation, I had stated a
few times that I was not interested in trying to find out the names of the other individuals involved in
the death. I didn’t need to know that information. Yet, what I received was a heavily redacted document that didn’t give me any answers to the investigation and how thorough it was. I also found this to make the hurt even worse because I had thought I may receive the information I had requested. It ends up being another cruel slap to the whole experience of losing that family member.
Losing a family member to a death is a terrible experience, especially when there is no allowance to learn, in detail, about the death and its investigation.
If someone is diagnosed with cancer, or some other disease, their death is to be expected due to the fact that it is known what caused the death of that person. When someone dies in an accident, that is investigated by the RCMP, the family isn’t fully made aware, or can’t find out exactly what happened.
For the past nearly eight years, not a day goes by when I don’t have questions about what actually happened. This causes a lot of on-going anxiety, and depression. It is totally unfair to the surviving family members.
Now, to expand that and realize that anyone who has been trying to deal with their own RCMP investigation is in the same boat, it adds up to a terrible amount of hurt for families across Canada. This is why I have been trying for some time to find out why this series of Exemptions exist, and to describe what they do to the pain of the surviving family members.
It also brings those darker questions to mind, such as, what if the investigation was not conducted as thoroughly as it could have been? Is there a chance that someone involved in the situation could be to blame, or was that even followed up on? With no information to the family, how could they possibly present a justification to have the Investigation re-opened for supplementary questioning of the individuals involved?
These are the kind of things that I live with each day. This is because I will probably not get the
opportunity of finding out any ‘in-depth’ information from the RCMP.
It is very sad when the family members resort to finding out information on the Internet, or through hearsay. Often this information is erroneous, or completely wrong. Media coverage is the same. It is a terrible way to try to resolve these issues. It is also very doubtful that anyone else involved will make contact with the family members to even offer a condolence or to say what happened. Where does this leave the family?
In closing, these subsections of the Act are cruel and unusual punishment to those left behind to try and resolve what transpired to cause the death of their family member. Totally unfair, very cold, and treats the family that should have complete information unfairly, while the people that were involved, or witnessed the event end up knowing more than the family does!
Being human, the RCMP is not infallible, and, unfortunately, this has been shown a number of times over the years. There is always a chance that they have missed something, a detail, or a chance to follow up that was not taken. This part of the Act prevents these questions from ever being answered because

there is no other oversight; no one gets the opportunity of asking the relevant questions to the RCMP because they are the sole owners of that information.
Sadly, I know of other people who have since passed away, always wondering what happened to their loved one due to this Act. They passed away without having any answers. I feel this is a very sad and tragic thing.
The term ‘closure’, while overused, is something that does not exist for the people affected by this
Section.
Thank you for responding to my letter, I don’t know what else can be done, but I really would like to find out more detailed answers. This is something I will carry for the rest of my life.
I would be happy to hear from you if you have any questions, or need any additional information. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ken Kolynchuk