FC: Canada's privacy commissioner's farewell statement vanishes

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Wed Jul 02 2003 - 08:30:25 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: EFF files amicus brief in Lexmark v. Static Control lawsuit"

    Politech archive:
    http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=Radwanski
    
    ---
    
    To: declanat_private, marcat_private, Simon Davies <s.g.daviesat_private>,
        gnuat_private
    Subject: Censored - The Privacy Commissioner of Canada today issued the 
    following
      statement - Jun 23, 2003 - Privacy Commissioner of Canada
    Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 15:09:23 -0700
    From: John Gilmore <gnuat_private>
    
    The statement enclosed in this message has disappeared from the web
    site of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, where I obtained it
    several days ago.  It was apparently censored by the outgoing
    Commissioner's replacement.
    
    I have no knowledge of the truth or falsehood of former Commissioner
    Radwanski's statement.  I just find it interesting that the most
    politically active national privacy commissioner in the world has been
    forced out of office -- and that his resignation statement has been
    removed mere days after its publication.
    
    The statement attempts to refute the charges against him, and claims
    that he has been the target of a witch-hunt because he successfully
    opposed numerous totalitarian Canadian government proposals.  Several
    of these, notably the proposal to track the movements of every
    Canadian citizen, were inspired by US pressure.  They were the
    Northern equivalents of the CAPPS 2 and TIA programs.  Further
    privacy-related initiatives, such as for biometric national ID cards,
    are still pending, and will be handled by the new Commissioner.
    
    I called the media-relations person listed in the statement itself,
    Anne-Marie Hayden, and asked why it was removed and who ordered its
    removal.  She said she would have to get back to me on that, and also
    that Tuesday is Canada Day, so the earliest she could respond would be
    Wednesday.  She did say that the statment is available on Canada
    Newswire.  While the search interface there found it by title, there
    was no obvious way to bring up the statement itself.  Some URL hacking
    enabled me to display it at:
    
      http://www.newswire.ca/releases/June2003/23/c6543.html
    
    	John Gilmore
    	Electronic Frontier Foundation
    
    
    http://www.privcom.gc.ca/media/nr-c/2003/02_05_b_030623_e.asp
    
        Statement
    
    * Ottawa, June 23, 2003 ? The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, George 
    Radwanski, today issued the following statement:*
    
    I have today resigned as Privacy Commissioner of Canada, effective immediately.
    
    I have been left with no other choice as a result of the actions of the 
    Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, and the 
    statements about me that have been made by members of the Committee to the 
    public and others through the media and in other ways. Indeed I have been 
    forced out.
    
    I assure every Canadian that I have at all times conducted myself with 
    honour and integrity in the exercise of my duties. I have never 
    intentionally misled Parliament or any of its Committees, nor have I 
    committed any other improprieties. The distorted image conveyed through the 
    media in these past weeks bears absolutely no true resemblance to me, my 
    values or my activities. But I have been, and remain, unable to properly 
    defend myself and set the record straight, because the process chosen to 
    attack me deliberately and most unfairly prevents me from doing so.
    
     From the outset when I was first appointed, I instructed the relevant 
    public service professionals in my Office, particularly the Executive 
    Director, to monitor all my activities for compliance with all applicable 
    rules, policies and regulations and to advise me immediately of any 
    concern. At no time had they expressed any such concerns with regard to any 
    of the matters recently in the news. I also wish to emphasize that contrary 
    to reports that the Auditor-General's just-announced review of my Office 
    constitutes some indication of financial impropriety, it was my own 
    suggestion to the Committee, in a letter of June 11^th , before they ever 
    embarked on their close-door proceedings with witnesses, that any concerns 
    the Committee might have regarding expenditures be referred to the 
    Auditor-General for impartial review.
    
    For the past nearly three years, I have worked tirelessly to oversee and 
    defend the privacy rights of all Canadians.
    
    I am deeply proud of the successes I have been able to achieve for 
    Canadians with the aid and support of the superb, dedicated professionals 
    who comprise my Office.
    
    These successes include protecting Canadians from grave governmental 
    threats to privacy such as provisions in Bill C-36 that would have made the 
    entire /Privacy Act /vulnerable to suspension at the will of a single 
    Minister of the Government, the opening of international letter mail by 
    customs agents on behalf of Citizenship and Immigration, and the CCRA's 
    initially unfettered data base on the travel activities of all law-abiding 
    Canadians. In addition to my public statements, in these and other matters 
    my behind-the-scenes advice and intervention in less formal meetings and 
    discussions also prevented or resolved many, many privacy intrusions.
    
    The successes of which I am particularly proud also include persuading 
    powerful corporations such as Canada Post Corporation, Air Canada and the 
    chartered banks, as well as many thousands of other businesses across the 
    country, to modify or abandon practices that were insufficiently respectful 
    of the privacy rights of Canadians; overseeing the smooth implementation of 
    the /Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents (PIPED) Act 
    /that extends privacy protection law to the private sector; transforming 
    the Office of the Privacy Commissioner into a much more vigorous and 
    dynamic instrument for protecting and promoting privacy rights at a time of 
    new challenges and an expanded mandate; and greatly raising the profile of 
    privacy as a fundamental human right, so that Canadians may understand the 
    issues, know the stakes and be better prepared to defend their rights.
    
    Regrettably the aggressiveness, independence, and perhaps effectiveness of 
    my approach has provoked a powerful political backlash from some who would 
    prefer a less forceful Privacy Commissioner. For the past two weeks, I have 
    been the target of an extraordinary and unprecedented assault on my 
    character, reputation and credibility.
    
    A Committee of Parliament, the Government Operations and Estimates 
    Committee, has produced a scathing condemnation of me through closed-door 
    proceedings that have denied me every right to fairness and due process. I 
    insisted on testifying in public when I was summoned, because I have 
    nothing to hide; I was refused. I am forbidden to disclose what did or did 
    not take place behind closed doors, but I can say that to this day I have 
    not seen any evidence and have not had access to any transcripts of 
    testimony. Ten hours before my appearance before the Committee, one of its 
    members was reported by Canadian Press to have said that the Committee 
    already knew what it intended to do.
    
    What is most unfair is that the Committee's sweeping gag order has 
    prevented me from defending myself while the news media have been 
    systematically provided with, and have reported, irreparably damaging 
    "information" about me that is factually wrong, distorted or out of 
    context. This is an extraordinary situation to befall any Canadian in our 
    own country in the 21^st Century.
    
    Even today, my counsel has advised me that I simply cannot afford the risk 
    of holding a press conference and answering questions ? as I profoundly 
    wish to do ? for fear that I might inadvertently say something that the 
    Committee could interpret as a breach of its gag order, with incalculable 
    consequences.
    
    Much in me wants to continue the fight ? because I am passionately 
    committed to carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to me to serve 
    Canadians, and because I believe what is happening threatens the whole 
    system of Officers of Parliament mandated to carry out their duties 
    fearlessly without the threat of being removed or forced out of Office at will.
    
    But what has been done in the past two weeks, and the failure of anyone in 
    a position of authority in Parliament, government or the public service to 
    speak out or intervene in my defence against the profound unfairness of 
    these proceedings, has made it impossible for me to do my job. Irreparable 
    damage has been inflicted.
    
    Therefore I have regretfully concluded that I must not continue this fight, 
    much as I wish to do so, because my duty commands otherwise. My duty, at 
    whatever personal cost, is to do what will best serve the continued 
    effective protection of the privacy rights of Canadians, what will best 
    protect the credibility of my Office and its crucial functions, and what 
    will best spare others within and outside my Office who are likewise 
    dedicated, hard-working and of the highest integrity from continuing to be 
    collateral victims of the attack directed against me.
    
    In resigning, I have recommended to the Government and to the Speakers of 
    the House of Commons and the Senate that Mr. Gerald Neary, the 
    distinguished and long-serving Director General of Investigations of this 
    Office, be appointed as interim Privacy Commissioner. I have done this 
    because I believe that in this difficult time, continuity and stability are 
    essential to the survival of this Office as an effectively functioning 
    agency. I also believe that it is essential that this appointment from 
    within be a person who has had no involvement whatsoever in the matters of 
    recent weeks. I have further recommended that Mr. Neary be considered as an 
    excellent candidate to be appointed the next Privacy Commissioner of Canada.
    
    While I am prevented by the gag order from responding in detail to the many 
    false and distorted things that have been said and reported about me, I 
    wish to reiterate in the strongest possible terms that I have always 
    conducted myself with the utmost respect for the public trust conferred on 
    me. I have been neither wasteful nor self-serving. On the contrary, I was 
    always determined that the public interest receive maximum value from 
    everything I did, and this I have accomplished.
    
    Let me illustrate with a few examples, to put into some context the deeply 
    unfair and painful damage that has been done to my reputation.
    
    Contrary to what was reported recently, I did not spend $5,000 on a 
    pre-Christmas celebration for a few senior officials of my Office. This was 
    an event for the entire staff of the Office ? approximately 100 people ? to 
    convey appreciation for their excellent and hard work throughout the year 
    and to provide me with an opportunity to address the entire staff about the 
    accomplishments of the past year and the priorities for the future. Both 
    the Executive Director of my Office and other relevant officials assured me 
    that this was an appropriate expenditure under the employee incentive program.
    
    The particularly expensive business lunches and dinners ? of which there 
    were very few - that have been the subject of much media reporting and 
    commentary did not involve any officials at all from my Office. They were 
    working meetings between me and important external contacts ? including 
    professionals, experts, Ministers and Deputy Ministers ? that were 
    necessary and valuable to the exercise of my duties. In many instances, the 
    restaurant was chosen by the guest, not myself. In the case of 
    professionals, the cost of the hospitality was a considerable saving to the 
    public purse over what they would otherwise have billed in hourly rates for 
    their time. I also had working lunches with some of my most senior 
    subordinates, although at a reasonable cost that was nowhere near the 
    amounts reported in the media. This is a practice that I understand to be 
    common at the Deputy Minister level which is the rank that the Privacy 
    Commissioner holds.
    
    In the public sector as in the private sphere, comparatively informal 
    discussions over meals are an indispensable instrument for any top or 
    senior executive to obtain information, conduct constructive dialogue, 
    resolve outstanding issues and solidify contacts. Canadians were entitled 
    to expect that I would utilize this instrument, as I utilized all other 
    means at my disposal to carry out my duties as effectively as possible.
    
    A great deal of money was spent on travel. Travel is expensive, but 
    essential to the mandated responsibilities of the Privacy Commissioner in 
    today's circumstances.
    
    Most of the expenditure was on travel within Canada, criss-crossing the 
    country to deliver speeches, primarily to business audiences and primarily 
    about the /PIPED Act /which is coming into effect in stages and affecting 
    the private sector across Canada. Last year alone, I delivered 31 speeches. 
    Since I became Privacy Commissioner less than three years ago, I have given 
    a total of 92 speeches, all but a few of them outside Ottawa. Even at that, 
    I had to decline more speaking invitations than I accepted.
    
    All this travel to deliver speeches, answer questions, give media 
    interviews and conduct meetings was in direct execution of my statutory 
    obligation under the /PIPED Act /for public education and raising awareness 
    about privacy and privacy issues.
    
    Canadians are well served by the extent to which I was able to succeed in 
    meeting this obligation. Three years ago, most Canadians did not know who 
    the Privacy Commissioner is, what he does or why it matters. Now privacy is 
    increasingly being recognized as the fundamental human right that will so 
    greatly determine what kind of society, with what level of freedoms, we not 
    only will have for ourselves but will leave for our children and grandchildren.
    
    There is clear empirical evidence of the results that all my communications 
    efforts, but particularly my incessant travels to spread the word in every 
    part of Canada, have brought to Canadians in terms of awareness of their 
    rights. Inquiries to my Office have increased from* *11,500 in the year 
    2000 to 30,000 last year. Hits on the Web site of my Office have increased 
    from 5,000 per month in the year 2000 to more than 60,000 per month last year.
    
    I have also travelled internationally to deliver speeches, attend 
    conferences and conduct meetings, and it was to the benefit of Canadians 
    that I did so as part of the execution of my duties. Last year, I made 10 
    international trips, half of them to the U.S. To put this into context, it 
    was recently reported that last year a fellow Officer of Parliament, the 
    well-respected Auditor-General, made five international trips. Taking into 
    account that privacy protection in a post-September 11 environment of 
    increasingly globalized anti-terrorism measures and law enforcement has far 
    more of an international dimension than does auditing, my foreign travel 
    was certainly not disproportionate.
    
    My trips to the U.S. enabled me to raise awareness among American 
    decision-makers about Canada's different approach to privacy rights and 
    about the role of the Privacy Commissioner in our system. I was 
    specifically advised at a very high level of Government that this would 
    help to make it easier for the Canadian Government to resist some U.S. 
    pressures for new intrusions on privacy rights.
    
    My trips to the U.S. also helped me to serve Canadians by better 
    understanding the initiatives that American authorities are implementing or 
    contemplating, and their potential impact on privacy rights in Canada. They 
    also enabled me to forge relationships with leading U.S. privacy advocates, 
    in order to make common cause in protecting privacy rights on both sides of 
    the border. Through an initiative of the American Civil Liberties Union, I 
    was invited to testify before the City Council of Washington, D.C. on 
    street video surveillance. As a result of meetings I conducted in 
    Washington on another occasion, several members of the U.S. Congress 
    expressed an interest in creating an American position of Privacy 
    Commissioner along the Canadian model.
    
    Likewise my international travels outside the U.S. benefited Canadians by 
    helping me to better understand privacy issues that have an international 
    dimension, including the monitoring of internet and wireless 
    communications, biometric passports and identity cards, collection of 
    airline passenger information, and genetic privacy. They also helped me to 
    work to position my Office as an international leader in privacy 
    protection, with a view to developing common approaches that would benefit 
    Canadians and others around the world.
    
    As a result of my efforts, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada will host the 
    International Conference of Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners from 
    around the world in Ottawa in September, 2004. This will massively raise 
    the profile of privacy rights and privacy issues not only in Canada but in 
    the neighbouring U.S. through media coverage and observer participation, 
    and will allow the Privacy Commissioner of Canada to set the agenda for 
    international discussions.
    
    All the travel costs, domestic and international, were doubled by my 
    decision that it was necessary and appropriate for me to be accompanied by 
    a senior official to serve as a witness when I answered questions, gave 
    interviews or conducted discussions to protect me against misquotation or 
    misinterpretation; to participate in meetings and discussions; to take 
    notes and make follow-up arrangements; to establish contacts for future 
    relations with my Office; to assist in dealing with media requests; and to 
    help me with continuing the ongoing work of the Office while traveling. 
    Some people may disagree with this decision, but it was within my rights as 
    Commissioner to make it. I did so in order to have the assistance I 
    considered essential to serve Canadians as effectively as possible.
    
    In leaving my position, I wish to thank all those, in government and 
    outside, in Canada and abroad, who were so helpful and supportive to me in 
    the exercise of my duties.
    
    I above all want to thank all the outstanding members of my staff who 
    worked with superb and shining professionalism, effort and dedication to 
    contribute to the well-being of every Canadian, and indeed of the nation as 
    a whole, by overseeing and defending the fundamental human right of 
    privacy. I challenged them to achieve excellence, and they rose to this 
    challenge beyond measure. I am profoundly and forever proud of them, and I 
    hope that when this current climate of character assassination has faded, 
    perhaps they will also be proud of me and the good that we were able to 
    achieve together.
    
    I hope that all fair-minded Canadians will judge me by what I have 
    accomplished on their behalf and by the unwavering vigour, commitment and 
    spirit of service with which I have carried out my duties, and not by the 
    vicious, untrue and distorted things that have recently been said and 
    reported about me. I have paid a heavy price in these past days for doing 
    my job of overseeing and defending the privacy rights of all Canadians as I 
    believe they deserve to have it done, but I leave proudly and with no 
    regrets except for being unable to carry on this vital work.
    
    I will continue to seek to serve Canadians and contribute to the public 
    interest in whatever future ways may be open to me, as I have done in one 
    capacity or another my whole adult life.
    
    ? 30 ?
    
    For more information, please contact:
    
    Anne-Marie Hayden
    Media Relations
    Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
    Tel: (613) 995-0103
    ahaydenat_private <mailto:ahaydenat_private>
    www.privcom.gc.ca <http://www.privcom.gc.ca>
    
    Last Updated: 6/26/2003 4:
    Top of page 
    <http://www.privcom.gc.ca/media%2Fnr-c%2F2003%2F02_05_b_030623_e.asp#Top>
    Print Version 
    <http://www.privcom.gc.ca/media/nr-c/2003/02_05_b_030623_e.asp?V=Print>
    
    
    ---
    
    To: declanat_private
    Subject: <Infoat_private>: RE: Censorship of George Radwanski's 
    resignation statement
    Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 07:00:03 -0700
    From: John Gilmore <gnuat_private>
    
    ------- Forwarded Message
    
    Return-Path: Infoat_private
    Delivery-Date: Wed Jul  2 06:11:38 2003
    Return-Path: <Infoat_private>
    Received: from tomts12-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts12.bellnexxia.net 
    [209.226.175.56])
    	by new.toad.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h62DBb6J022130
    	for <gnuat_private>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 06:11:37 -0700
    Received: from cproulx ([206.47.188.146]) by tomts12-srv.bellnexxia.net
               (InterMail vM.5.01.05.32 201-253-122-126-132-20030307) with SMTP
               id <20030702131134.IYER27314.tomts12-srv.bellnexxia.net@cproulx>
               for <gnuat_private>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:11:34 -0400
    Reply-To: <Infoat_private>
    From: <Infoat_private>
    To: "John Gilmore" <gnuat_private>
    Subject: RE: Censorship of George Radwanski's resignation statement
    Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:10:32 -0400
    Message-ID: <CPEIIKBDOALNGBAPNGHCCEMCCLAA.Infoat_private>
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    Content-Type: text/plain;
    	charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
    In-Reply-To: <200306302134.h5ULY96J026245at_private>
    Importance: Normal
    
    Dear Mr. Gilmore:
    
    	This will acknowledge receipt of your e-mail of June 30, 2003 addressed to
    the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, which was referred to me
    for review.
    
    	Once we have had the opportunity to review your correspondence, and if
    required, an Inquiry Officer may have further communication with you, or may
    respond directly to your inquiry.
    
    	In the interim, should you require any additional information, you may call
    our office from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (in all time zones across Canada) at (613)
    995-8210 or 1-800-282-1376 and ask to speak to an Inquiry Officer.  You may
    also communicate with us by e-mail at infoat_private
    
    							Yours sincerely,
    
    
    
    
    							Michel K. Vitou
    							Manager, Inquiries Unit
    
    - -----Original Message-----
    From: John Gilmore [mailto:gnuat_private]
    Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 5:34 PM
    To: infoat_private; gnuat_private
    Subject: Censorship of George Radwanski's resignation statement
    
    
    The censorship of his statement from the Privacy Commissioner web site
    is reprehensible.  The public and the press deserve to hear all sides
    of the story.
    
    	John Gilmore
    
    
    ------- End of Forwarded Message
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 02 2003 - 10:28:12 PDT