Skip to main content

After months of inaction, the committee that watches over Canada's spy agency appears to be moving swiftly to renew its probe into allegations by a former agent that the agency broke the law and invaded the privacy of Canadians.

But John Farrell, the former Canadian Security Intelligence Service undercover agent who made the allegations, said the Security Intelligence Review Committee has expressed a renewed interest in pursuing the allegations of CSIS wrongdoing only because he recently went public with his explosive accusations.

"For months they [SIRC]did nothing and now, all of a sudden, I'm getting letters and phone calls asking when I can meet with them," Mr. Farrell said.

Story continues below advertisement

Last week, Mr. Farrell alleged that while working for the intelligence service from 1991 to early 1999, senior CSIS managers asked him to break the law and to intercept the mail of Canadians who were not the targets of national security probes.

He also alleged that senior intelligence officers renovated their homes at public expense, billeted their children at CSIS "observation homes" that should have been used to watch targets and that the agency contracted out the bulk of its mail intercepts and some other top-secret covert operations to a private firm run by a former Mountie.

Mr. Farrell said he was paid cash for his "professional services" and was offered $6,000 by CSIS director Ward Elcock for unnamed "humanitarian reasons" and in return for dropping a lawsuit against CSIS.

SIRC was first informed in May of 1999 about Mr. Farrell's allegations involving CSIS actions and that he was owed $50,000 by the intelligence service. Six months later, the watchdog committee informed Mr. Farrell that it would proceed with a probe. But Mr. Farrell heard nothing for months.

But two days after The Globe and Mail detailed his allegations in a front-page article, Mr. Farrell said he received several telephone calls from Sylvia MacKenzie, a lawyer and SIRC complaints officer. She wanted to meet with him immediately to discuss his allegations yet again, he said.

"In the space of 24 hours, she [Ms. MacKenzie]left me at least four messages on my answering machine," Mr. Farrell said. "She said she was prepared to fly down to Toronto to meet with me as soon as possible."

Ms. MacKenzie declined to comment on Mr. Farrell's complaint and referred all inquiries to the agency's press office. A SIRC spokeswoman said the agency's chairwoman, prominent Quebec lawyer Paule Gauthier, had "no further comment on any of the issues."

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Farrell said he is convinced the new sense of urgency on SIRC's part was triggered by his decision to go public, rather than a commitment by the watchdog to ferret out the truth.

"I met with her [Ms. MacKenzie] I wrote them [SIRC]two letters detailing the allegations. I called asking about what was going on and not a damn word. Now, they're just trying to cover their butts," Mr. Farrell said.

Indeed, on June 29, just days after The Globe first approached SIRC for comment about Mr. Farrell's allegations, Susan Pollack, the agency's executive director, wrote the former agent a two-page letter acknowledging that there was "some confusion about the status" of his complaint.

Ms. Pollack asked Mr. Farrell to write SIRC a letter, no later than July 10, to make it clear if he wanted to pursue his complaint against CSIS.

"I trust that any ambiguity or misunderstanding that may exist can be clarified," Ms. Pollack said.

Mr. Farrell said he has told Ms. MacKenzie that he wants the committee to pursue his complaint and that he will meet with her in Toronto later this week. He added that he has approached a prominent Toronto lawyer to represent him in his dealings with SIRC to ensure that his rights and privileges under the CSIS Act are respected.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Farrell has asked SIRC to help cover his legal costs. According to Mr. Farrell, the agency is considering the request.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter