Where an authority reversed itself

7 October 2026 · Public Safety Canada · access request A-2026-00209

A request put “on hold” went back into search five days later

The request asks which minister holds the risk of nuclear attack on Canada under the Emergency Management Act. On 1 October the Department extended its time by 120 days, to 1 February 2027. On 2 October it asked what two items of the request meant and placed the request “on hold”. The Access to Information Act contains no hold. The answer went in the same day, with a date: lift the hold by 9 October, or the hold goes to the Information Commissioner.

On 7 October the Department wrote: “they have resumed their search; the request is no longer on hold.”

Hold lifted in writing on 7 October 2026 · time limit 1 February 2027

22 September 2026 · Standing Senate Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs · written testimony of 29 August 2026

Twenty-two days of silence, then the testimony went to the senators

Written testimony on what legally obliges any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack was filed with the committee on 29 August, with a supplement on 30 August. For twenty-two days nothing came back, while the same address acknowledged a submission on another bill within a day. A written demand went out on 20 September with a date on it. The clerk answered the next morning: the two messages had gone to translation and been combined into one document for members. On 22 September the clerk confirmed that the document, with a supplement quoting the National Defence refusals of 17 September, had been sent to the members of the committee by email.

Placed before the members on 22 September 2026 · a parallel brief sits with the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence since 29 August 2026

27 February 2026 · United States District Court, Western District of Washington · No. 2:25-cv-01919

A federal court ordered release from detention

The petition for habeas corpus was filed from inside a detention facility, without a lawyer. The government answered on the last day it had. The court granted the petition and ordered release no later than 28 February 2026. The detention had run since June 2024, with no criminal conviction. Release came the day the order issued.

Filed without counsel · docket public through the federal court system

1 September 2026 · City of Ottawa, Access to Information and Privacy Office · file AGR-2026-00759

A closed file, reopened in twenty-seven hours

On 31 August the office wrote that the files were closed and that it would not respond to further enquiry. An appeal went to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario the next morning. Twenty-seven hours after the closure letter, the same officer signed a new decision granting access in part and waiving the fees.

Nothing new was put in front of them in between. No new document, no new provision. What changed was who else was now reading the correspondence.

Both letters signed by the same program manager · appeal not withdrawn

3 September 2026 · Global Affairs Canada, Access to Information and Privacy · file A-2026-00737

A fee refused, then waived, in twelve hours

The department had refused to waive its processing fee. A written request for reconsideration went out at 22:09 on 2 September, with a schedule of dates attached so that both sides would count from the same day. The waiver was granted the following morning.

Second reversal in a week · federal Access to Information Act, s. 11 (2)