**
In a significant decision, Canada’s Information Commissioner has ruled that a confidential list of over 700 alleged Nazi war criminals who settled in Canada after the Second World War should remain undisclosed. The ruling, announced on Friday, was based on concerns that releasing the names would jeopardise Canada’s diplomatic relations with certain foreign powers, particularly in light of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
A Long-Held Secret
The list in question was compiled as part of an official inquiry led by retired Superior Court judge Jules Deschênes, dating back to 1986. For nearly four decades, this document has remained under wraps, with requests for its release met with resistance from Library and Archives Canada (LAC). Last year, LAC denied a request to publish the second part of the report, citing potential harm to international relations and Canadian interests as justification for its secrecy.
The Access to Information Act allows government entities to withhold information if its release is expected to negatively influence international affairs, national security, or defence operations. In an email to The Globe and Mail, the Information Commissioner’s office supported LAC’s position, asserting that disclosing the identities could damage Canada’s relationships with foreign governments. Warnings were particularly raised regarding the implications for Ukraine, where it was feared that revelations of Ukrainian Nazis in Canada could bolster Russian propaganda narratives.
Concerns Over Historical Accountability
The decision has ignited a debate about governmental transparency and the ethics of harbouring alleged war criminals. Several groups, including a number of historians and advocacy organisations, have urged the Canadian government to reconsider its stance. They argue that the passage of time should lessen the potential fallout from disclosure, as many individuals listed would now be deceased. The Globe and Mail highlighted findings from U.S. researchers who had previously uncovered a draft version of the list, suggesting a growing consensus among scholars that it is time to declassify such historical records.
Among the notorious figures linked to this matter is Volodymyr Kubiovych, a collaborator who played a significant role in the SS Galicia division, and who later became prominent in Canadian academia. His involvement in war crimes has raised troubling questions about the extent to which Canada has shielded individuals with dark pasts.
The Global Context
While Canada remains reticent about transparency regarding its own historical figures, other nations have begun to open their archives. Argentina, for instance, has recently made strides in disclosing information relating to Nazi war criminals that found refuge within its borders. Scholars, such as Professor Per Rudling from Lund University, have noted Canada’s comparatively restrictive policies and have called for greater accessibility to archival materials related to alleged war criminals.
In light of these developments, the Information Commissioner’s decision has drawn criticism from various quarters. Jaime Kirzner Roberts of the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center expressed disappointment, arguing that the government’s justification for secrecy insults the public’s intelligence. The notion that uncovering the truth about Nazi war criminals could threaten national security is perceived as a flimsy excuse for accountability.
Why it Matters
The decision to keep the list of alleged Nazi war criminals secret raises crucial questions about Canada’s commitment to historical accountability and transparency. As global norms shift towards openness regarding wartime histories, this ruling risks isolating Canada from a broader movement advocating for justice and truth. The potential consequences of the ruling extend beyond historical inquiry; they challenge Canada’s moral standing and its role in international discussions about the legacy of the Second World War. As calls for transparency grow louder, it remains to be seen whether the Canadian government will heed demands for a more open dialogue regarding its past.
