Senate, Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs

Re: Written testimony — what legally obliges any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack

Hello,

3 submissions are with the Committee and none of them has been answered.

Written testimony on what legally obliges any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack was filed on 29 August 2026. A supplement to it followed on 30 August, resting on 1 statute and 1 published federal report. The third submission, of the same day, asked the Committee to put questions to me in writing instead of an appearance. That was 22 days ago.

This same address acknowledged a different submission of mine, on Bill C-22, within a day of receiving it on 2 September, so the channel works.

The subject matter has moved since. On 18 September the Department of National Defence released 3 files to me under the Access to Information Act: A-2026-01143, A-2026-01144 and A-2026-01154. They cover how far allied guarantees can be relied on and whether they bind. Inside is the Department's own costing of an independent Canadian deterrent and of latency. Inside too is the defence plan for an armed attack on Canada under paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Emergencies Act. The executive holds the analysis on the question the Committee was handed on 29 August.

3 things, by 1 October 2026.

1. Acknowledge the 3 submissions of 29 and 30 August in writing
2. State whether they have been placed before the members and under which study
3. Put the written questions to me, or state that the Committee refuses

Where that date passes, the request goes to the Chair of the Committee. The 3 submissions and the dates of their silence go into the public register.

Respectfully,
Danilo Dzyuban

Re: RE: Written testimony — what legally obliges any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack

Hello,

Thank you. The message of 20 September was addressed to the clerk's office on the status of the file, and it is not for members. Its description of the National Defence files is superseded by the text below, because the files were opened later that day. The text below is the third communication. Add it to the document going to members in place of the message of 20 September.

1. Confirm the date on which the combined document is circulated
2. State the study under which it is placed before members
3. Remove the telephone number from the signature of the 2 earlier messages before circulation

SUPPLEMENT TO THE WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF 29 AUGUST 2026.

Submitted by Danilo Dzyuban, Ottawa, Ontario
21 September 2026

WHAT THE DEPARTMENT ANSWERED.

The testimony of 29 August told the Committee that requests under the Access to Information Act were with the Department of National Defence. It said that either assessments of allied assurances exist, or they do not. The Department has answered, and it chose neither.

On 17 September 2026 the Department answered 3 requests, files A-2026-01143, A-2026-01144 and A-2026-01154. They hold 14 numbered items. The answer to all 14 is the same 46 words:

"We regret to advise you that this Department neither confirms nor denies records exist pursuant to section 10(2) of the Access to Information Act. If the documentation did exist, it would be exempted in its entirety pursuant to section 15(1) of the Access to Information Act."

The 3 letters went out over the signature block of the Executive Director, Access to Information and Privacy. No record was released.

AMONG THE 14 ITEMS.

Any assessment of the reliability or legal enforceability of assurances given by an allied state to defend Canada against nuclear attack.

Any analysis or cost estimate of an independent Canadian deterrent.

The instrument that records an obligation of any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack, or a record stating that none exists.

The emergency management plan in respect of nuclear attack on Canada. Subsection 6(1) of the Emergency Management Act requires each minister to prepare such plans, and paragraph 6(2)(d) names the case of war or other armed conflict. The supplement of 30 August set that duty out.

Whether nuclear attack on Canada has been identified as a risk under subsection 6(1).

WHERE IT STANDS.

3 complaints were filed with the Information Commissioner on 20 September 2026. The Minister of National Defence received the same questions in writing on the same day.

WHAT THIS CHANGES FOR THE COMMITTEE.

A person in Canada cannot learn whether the assessment exists, or whether the plan the statute requires has been written. The Committee can. The first request of 29 August asked the Committee to require the Department to state in writing whether it holds any assessment of allied nuclear assurances. That request stands, and the refusal of 17 September is now the reason for it.

Danilo Dzyuban