CANADÁ

Access to public records by the press and citizens in general took a step forward in September when state-owned corporations became subject to provisions of a revamped Access to Information Act. The seven agencies, among them Canada Post, Via Rail and Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, would now have to release information concerning their “general administration,” such as travel and hospitality expenses. But the agencies, which had long battled attempts to bring them within the scope of the freedom-of-information law, saying that increased public scrutiny would be detrimental to their competitive business positions, can still withhold certain information from the press and general public. They cited the Federal Accountability Act, passed last year with the intention of shedding more light on government activities but which specifically protected trade secrets and confidential business information from disclosure. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation said that it would keep secret any information “that relates to its journalistic, creative or programming activities.” As a result, it was predicted that the flow of information rather than expanding greatly would be a mere trickle. Earlier this year the Toronto Globe and Mail reported that when journalists from across Canada asked government officials for a total of 85 public records they were refused in 41 percent of the cases, even though they had filed their requests under existing information access laws. In June, the organization Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE) hailed a decision by the Quebec Labor Relations Board to refuse to force journalist Karine Gagnon from Le Journal de Quebec to reveal her confidential sources for a story about the threat of asbestos in government buildings. In another case, Bill Dunphy, a reporter with The Hamilton Spectator, succeeded in having a court reverse an earlier order that he hand over his notes regarding an interview with the alleged head of a crime family. The court ruled that the police had failed to show that Dunphy’s material would provide any more evidence than they already had. Meanwhile, pubic prosecutors pursued an appeal against a January 2004 decision by Superior Court Justice Mary Lou Benotto quashing a warrant issued by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police seeking to have the National Post newspaper reveal who had leaked to it material on a case it was investigating. Press freedom advocates monitoring the issue said it would be a big step backwards should the appeal be upheld. In a similar case, journalist Derek Finkle won further backing in his fight to quash an order by the Ontario Court of Justice that he turn over documents used in writing his book “No Claim to Marcy” about the alleged perpetrator of a 1990 murder. Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, the Professional Writers Association of Canada and the Writers Union of Canada jointly came out in Finkle’s support, saying the court order threatens journalists’ independence. “Canadians have no interest in seeing journalists compelled to do the work of police and prosecutors,” said CJFE Executive Director Anne Game. “Ultimately we all lose if they are not free to do their jobs without interference.” In Vancouver, an attempt by a local police officer to lure a suspect to his arrest by posing as a reporter from 24 Hours, a free daily paper, came under criticism. The paper’s editor, Dean Broughton, condemned the ploy, saying it undermined the publication’s credibility. Canadian Association of Journalists President Paul Schneidereit called the police officer’s action “reprehensible” and “a callous disregard for the media’s ability to do its job.” Lawyers for media mogul Conrad Black, who headed the former Hollinger International Inc. (now Sun Times) and gave up his Canadian citizenship in 2001 to become a member of Britain’s House of Lords, filed a request for a new trial or acquittal following his conviction in Chicago on charges of fraud and obstruction of justice. Sentencing has been set for November 30. The charges concern payments Black and other Hollinger executives are alleged to have personally diverted from the sale of Hollinger International Inc. assets, money that the prosecution says belonged to shareholders. In the motion for acquittal it was claimed that the US government had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, having produced no real evidence that Black had attempted to obstruct justice by removing 13 boxes of documents from his Toronto offices despite an Ontario court order sealing the premises.