Zanganeh v. Canadian Security Intelligence Service, (1988) 20 F.T.R. 100 (TD)

• Judge: Muldoon, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: April 13, 1988
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1988), 20 F.T.R. 100 (TD)

Zanganeh v. Cdn. Security Intelligence (1988), 20 F.T.R. 100 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Jamshid Zanganeh (applicant) v. Canadian Security Intelligence Service (respondent)

(T-2162-87)

Indexed As: Zanganeh v. Canadian Security Intelligence Service

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Muldoon, J.

April 21, 1988.

Summary:

Zanganeh believed that the Canadian Security Intelligence Service held personal information about him. He applied for access to all such information. The Director General of Information Management at C.S.I.S. allowed his application in part. Zanganeh, being dissatisfied, applied to the Privacy Commissioner under ss. 29(1)(b), 29(1)(h)(i) and 29(1)(h)(iii) of the Privacy Act.

The Commissioner dismissed his complaint and confirmed that any personal information about Zanganeh contained in C.S.I.S. records, if it existed at all, could reasonably be expected to be exempted from disclosure, in whole or in part, under ss. 19, 21, 22 and 26 of the Privacy Act. Zanganeh applied to the court for judicial review under s. 41 of the Act.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 8551

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Interpretation - Demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society - The Canadian Security Intelligence Service, by virtue of s. 46(1)(b) of the Privacy Act, was not obliged to reveal whether or not it had any personal information on record respecting any applicant for such information - C.S.I.S. was only required to provide the specific provision of the Privacy Act on which a refusal to provide access to information was based or the provision on which a refusal could reasonably be expected to be based if the information existed - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that this procedure was demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, because the very acknowledgment of the existence of any information, whether or not such information existed, certainly would compromise the security of Canada.

Crown - Topic 7170

Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Legislation - Disclosure - Personal information - [See Civil Rights - Topic 8551 above].

Crown - Topic 7285

Examination of public documents - Freedom of information - Practice - Costs - Zanganeh applied for judicial review under s. 41 of the Privacy Act of the Privacy Commissioner's refusal to disclose personal information which Zanganeh believed was kept on record about him by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service - Zanganeh alleged that the refusal to disclose the information, or even advise him if such information existed, was contrary to the Charter or the Bill of Rights - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed his application, but ordered C.S.I.S. to pay all of his disbursements and expenses incidental to the application, after taxation, noting that "this is an important and apparently newly articulated principle in relation to the interpretation of the Privacy Act" - See paragraph 13.

Statutes Noticed:

Privacy Act, S.C. 1980-81-82-83, c. 111, sect. 12(1) [para. 2]; sect. 16 [para. 2]; sect. 19 [para. 2]; sect. 20 [para. 2]; sect. 21 [para. 2]; sect. 22, sect. 45 [para. 10]; sect. 26 [para. 2]; sect. 29(1)(b) [para. 2]; sect. 29(1)(h)(i) [para. 2]; sect. 29(1)(h)(iii) [para. 2]; sect. 41 [paras. 2, 10, 15]; sect. 46(1) [para. 4]; sect. 46(1)(b) [paras. 10-11, 14]; sect. 47 [para. 5]; sect. 51 [para. 2]; sect. 51(2) [para. 4]; sect. 51(2)(a) [para. 3]; sect. 51(3) [para. 3]; sect. 52(2) [paras. 13, 15].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 1 [paras. 9, 13]; sect. 7 [para. 9]; sect. 15 [para. 9].

Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, App. III, sect. 2(e) [para. 8].

Counsel:

Jamshid Zanganeh, on his own behalf;

B. McIsaac, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

F. Iacobucci, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application was heard before Muldoon, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, at Ottawa, Ontario, on April 13, 1988. The decision of Muldoon, J., was delivered on April 21, 1988.