Canada: Spy chief dismisses witness's remarks on torture

From Friday's Globe and Mail :

CSIS legal expert was 'confused' when he suggested Canadian spies can rely on intelligence obtained through coercive interrogation

Colin Freeze and Bill Curry

3 Apr 2009

TORONTO and OTTAWA — Canada's top spymaster says one of his subordinates was "confused" earlier this week when Parliament was told there are circumstances where Canadian spies might rely on information obtained from foreign torture.

Jim Judd, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, appeared before the House of Commons public safety committee yesterday to inform MPs that they should disregard certain remarks from a previous CSIS witness, Geoffrey O'Brian, as hypothetical musings.

"I think it's unfortunate that Mr. O'Brian may have been confused in his testimony. He will be clarifying that," said Mr. Judd, who appeared with Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan.

On Tuesday, Mr. O'Brian, a CSIS legal expert who co-authored the legislation that created the spy agency in 1984, inadvertently revived a dormant debate. After MPs essentially asked him to rule out all use of torture intelligence, he replied that a doomsday scenario can prompt reconsideration of proscriptions.

"We only do so if lives are at stake," he said, adding that an impending 9/11, or a likely repeat of the Air India bombing, might force officials to follow up on tips derived from foreign torture.

These remarks were regarded as controversial, so Mr. O'Brian was forced to write a letter to the committee yesterday.

"I wish to clarify for the Committee that CSIS certainly does not condone torture," it said, "and that it is the policy of CSIS to not knowingly rely upon information that may have been obtained through torture."

Mr. Judd, a top public servant appointed from outside CSIS to head the agency in 2004, took a strong anti-torture stand, though some elements of his testimony were unclear.

For example, he said that "it may have occurred in the past where information was received by the service that had been obtained through torture ... [but] it's clear now that our policy is that such information is not to be relied upon."

But at another point, he said, "I know of no instance where such use of information has been made by our service."

~ more... ~