Very little information is ever willingly disclosed by the RCMP concerning the laws governing and the degree of protection afforded to RCMP informants and agents. Most of the time the public is forced to read between the lines and figure it out for themselves. That usually comes at great expense to some poor unsuspecting family member seeking justice for a victim unknowingly murdered by a "confidential"  RCMP informant/agent. 



The government once looked into the laws and actions of the RCMP and their agents. Many of the problems were identified and discussed but little was changed, in fact it has worsened. The RCMP have been granted additional powers since and that law now makes it illegal to disclose information on crimes committed by RCMP agents even to the Public Safety Minister. Clifford Olsen was one of the last RCMP informants who's name was disclosed to the government during the discussions. That would be illegal now. If the same events were to occur today, no one would be allowed to know who it was that had just murdered eleven Canadian Children.  

quote from:  government document

Furthermore, there is no assurance that a protectee who does break the law will be prosecuted for that offence. It is possible that the RCMP could ignore a criminal offence or protect a protectee from criminal liability.


We'll move now to some past situations that I'm sure have caused some embarrassment to the RCMP. I think they need to be looked at in order to get a better understanding of the type of individual the RCMP have to deal with. Probably the most infamous would be Clifford Olson.

The potential for abuse was noted but no remedy for any abuse was incorporated in the legislation.


I have some real concerns about this. Unless there are proper checks and balances to it.... As Madison said about the Constitution of the United States, it'll only work for a righteous people; so too this will only work for good, honest policemen. It will not work for what John Doe calls ``the bad apples''. They will use it in a way that it is not designed for.

How can we ensure on the one hand that all policemen have access to this kind of an enforcement tool, while at the same time ensuring that what has been inferred here concerning the Clifford Olson matter does not occur again? Is there anything you can offer? Are there any more horror stories you can tell us? I don't want to hear horror stories for the sake of horror stories, but I'd like to hear of instances so that we can say that it happened here and determine what can we do to stop that. What can we do to amend this and to grant a greater degree of balance so that if it does begin to happen, it can be stopped as soon as possible?


Internal changes to the RCMP code of conduct came slowly at first. The RCMP were implicated in breaking the law back in the 70's but they had their Political backers even then. Who was in control of the RCMP was under question even then.

see- RCMP powers


Prime Minister Chretien may have answered that question for everyone by way of the Apec inquiry.

see- Chretien



England has had to involve the government to enforce their policies of not allowing Police total control over the handling of and disclosure on the activities of police informants. One case shows that there should be and are laws there that prohibit certain activities currently authorized here in Canada. There was a government investigation following the death of a police officer at the hands of an informant. None of that is allowed to even be discussed here in Canada.

see- England's story


Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I agree with the first comment made by the noble Lord and with the second part of the statement in that informants properly employed--I emphasise properly employed--consistent with all the regulations laid down, are essential to criminal investigation and combating crime. It is essential and the police are highly accountable for the way in which they exercise it.


Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the Minister was literally right when she replied to my noble friend that the employment of police informers is an operational matter for the police. But that is not the whole story, is it? Is it not the case that the principles which underlie the employment of police informers and the safeguards which are necessary--for example, to ensure that police informers do not also act as agents provocateurs--are matters for the Secretary of State and for the Government?


The following are some of the few articles ever written on this subject here in Canada. The story only came to light because the RCMP were being sued and had to disclose the provisions afforded by the law that shields them. This law could be applied to protect anyone of the numerous protected RCMP agents/informants. Note the steady undisclosed increase in the secretive powers given to the RCMP since the 1970's.


"The RCMP has said it's illegal for anyone to tell the committee, or even Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, the full story. The victim's family members also cannot be told that their loved one was killed by an agent of the state."

From- Globe and Mail


Mounties accused of hiding behind witness program


From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

June 5, 2007 at 10:03 PM EDT

OTTAWA — The RCMP is using Canada's witness protection law to avoid a wrongful death lawsuit in the case of a man who murdered someone under his new government-issued identity, the Commons public safety committee heard Tuesday.

The Mounties failed to screen the man, said Tom Bulmer, a British Columbia defence lawyer. “Anyone who did any investigation into this rogue police agent would have known that he was a danger to the public,” Mr. Bullmer said, calling the crime both “preventable” and “predictable.”

The accusation of negligence against the Mounties was just part of two hours of testimony yesterday, which featured Mr. Bulmer and, via a video conference link from Toronto, Barry Swadron, a lawyer who has represented numerous protected witnesses with complaints about the program.

Both men called on the committee to overhaul the program and wrest control away from the Mounties and give it back to lawmakers.

see- Related Articles

The Globe and Mail

(many of these links have been  disappearing from internet archives)   
Story 1
  Story 2  Story 3 

Copies  of the stories:
Quote from: story 1.htm
The RCMP made some disturbing mistakes with at least one informant and agent in its witness protection program. That is what we know. What we don't know may be worse yet; but federal law in effect shields Canada's national police force from scrutiny for this aspect of its work. Trust us, Canadians are told. The story of the informant who committed homicide and maintained his confidentiality shows why trust is not enough.

_story_2.htm _story_3.htm _story_4.htm _story_5.htm

 The comments about this story were particularly telling: (since removed from source)

quote from: story comments

As has been noted in earlier articles related to this story, Canada's Witness Protection Programme is essentially a black hole once a "witness" gets into it. There is, effectively, no review or oversight by any external, civillian authorities. What this case, in particular, proves, is that the programme essentially provides a blank, signed cheque to anyone in it.


The latest progression of this law has now authorized an out of court settlement for an an RCMP agent accused of murdering a child. This was a case in which the agents RCMP handler actually ordered the DNA to be washed from the victims clothing. The actions of the RCMP handler ensured the agents acquittal and the subsequent payoff from  government coffers..
see news article - out of court settlement
full story-

Lack of action and the deafening silence on the part of the government has given rise to a growing mistrust and is generating dissent and allowing unbridled conspiracy theory to run rampant !