THREATS FROM WITHIN
AGGRESSIVE SCREENING OF TRANSPORTATION WORKERS AIMS TO KEEP TRAVELLERS SAFE, BUT CASTS A WIDE NET
Asystem of “perpetual vetting” is quietly running all 193,000 workers with access to restricted areas at Canada’s airports and ports through a police database each and every day in a new push to extinguish “the inside threat.”
Along with national security checks by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service ( CSIS) and organized crime background reports from the RCMP, the number of employees stripped of their security clearance — and usually their jobs — over links to the Mafia, Hells Angels, drug traffickers and other “adverse” groups or activities has jumped to record- high levels, the National Post has learned.
The program, however, is also drawing criticism of over- reach, with a wide definition of what is a threat and narrow tolerance for explaining it away.
“It is virtually real- time,” said Guy Morgan, director of the security screening program with Transport Canada, proud of the suite of security checks now at his disposal.
“When I come in Monday morning, I know who’s been charged over the weekend. This allows us to then pull those files and re-take a look at the security profiles to determine if anything has changed.
“We’re trying to protect the transportation infrastructure, the employees that work here, the users and the surrounding communities against the inside threat.”
Terrorism and organized crime are the priority targets, but a wide range of activities raises red flags, even shaking hands with a member of the Hells Angels in a bar.
Transport Canada’s security screening program started in 1986 in response to the Air India bombing. In 1985, a bomb concealed in luggage checked on a plane in Vancouver, transferred in Toronto and boarded on Air India Flight 182 in Montreal took down a jetliner, killing all 329 people aboard.
It has evolved substantially since.
“The purpose of the program is to try to prevent unlawful acts of interference with aviation. And there is also a marine clearance program,” said Morgan.
Transport Canada now has national security indices checks done by CSIS, Canada’s spy agency; organized crime checks done by the RCMP; and Immigration Canada verifying histories of new Canadians, all for workers who have access ( or are applying for access) to restricted areas at designated air and marine ports.
The RCMP started sharing criminal intelligence for background checks with Transport Canada in 2009. That year, 16 airport workers lost their security clearance, double the number from the year before. The tally has climbed almost every year since, reaching 110 in 2015, a record figure over 10 years of data provided to the National Post by Transport Canada.
Perpetual vetting is the latest addition.
Transport Canada gained access to the Canadian Police Information Centre ( CPIC), the national law enforcement database. An automated system of checking every employee who has security clearance each day began on Nov. 26, 2014.
The number of applicants denied clearance jumped significantly the next year, from 70 to 110. In just the first half of 2016, the number almost equalled that: 98.
“We review everything — if there’s a hit, we review it and make an assessment,” said Morgan.
The push, however, also brings a flurry of legal challenges from those who have been banished.
Employees who need access to restricted areas in an airport — everyone working beyond the security screening gates for passengers — requires a restricted area identity card ( RAIC). To get a RAIC, they must receive a security clearance from Transport Canada. There is a similar system for marine port workers.
Many losing their clearance leave quietly. Some of the most serious offenders seem to accept the loss as the cost of business. Morgan said the longest criminal record of an applicant for a security clearance was 78 criminal convictions. (He was denied.)
The only recourse for airport workers objecting to their clearance revocation is a legal challenge in the Federal Court. The increase in revocations is spawning increased court challenges.
At least a dozen security revocations appeals have been decided recently by the Federal Court in cases by former workers at Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal airports. At least 32 cases are before the court.
They vary significantly. For example:
• Joseph Rossi was a manager of an airline food service company at Montreal’s Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport. His first security clearance was issued in 1998 and renewed every five years.
An RCMP report on Rossi said he had ties to two coworkers i nvolved in i mporting drugs through the airport and a “suspected” association to Giuseppe Torre’s group, which brought in large quantities of drugs through the airport with the Rizzuto Mafia family.
An investigation led to the seizure of 11 kilograms of cocaine and the arrest of coworkers and others, part of the massive Project Colisée that hit the Montreal Mafia.
Rossi complained, saying he had no convictions, had only social contact with his dirty co-workers and was un- aware of drug smuggling at the airport. His appeal was rejected.
“A security clearance is not a right, but a privilege. It is reasonable for an individual to expect that his personal associations would be relevant to the granting or maintenance of a security clearance,” ruled Justice Richard Bell.
• Zahid Sattar had been employed by Securiguard Services at Vancouver airport since 1999, with access to restricted areas since 2004. His clearance was cancelled in 2015.
Sattar ’s RCMP r eport noted 10 people he associated with had ties to criminal organizations and had committed crimes, including drug trafficking, homicide, assault and possession of a prohibited weapon.
In 2005, he was named as the new owner of a bar in Surrey, B. C., “known to be frequented by Hells Angels’ members” and was seen at a Hells Angels event at the bar, Transport Canada was told. In 2010, RCMP officers caught him and a man linked to an Indo- Canadian gang trying to evade police; and in 2011, police say he attended the stag for a UN Gang member in Penticton, B.C.
Sattar said he was not involved with any criminal activity. He said he paid a deposit with the intent of buying the bar, but did not complete the sale.
His appeal to the Federal Court was denied.
• Robinder Singh Sidhu was employed as a lead station attendant dealing with cargo at Vancouver airport, where he worked since 1989, first with Canadian Airlines, then Air Canada.
He was arrested in 2014 as part of a heroin smuggling probe and accused by the RCMP of using his RAIC to move boxes in a secure area. Police said he admitted to investigators to moving goods, but thought they only contained steroids. He was not charged.
Police seized 37 kilos of heroin in the probe. At least one of those charged, another Air Canada employee, was an associate of Sidhu, police said. Sidhu denied knowingly aiding a heroin ring. His appeal was denied. • Rajkamal Singh Mangat, 39, had worked full time for Air Canada since 1997 as an aircraft maintenance engineer, including working on the prime minister’s jet.
In 2003, Mangat was charged with assault and mischief after causing a disturbance at a fast- food restaurant, although both charges were stayed; in 2008, he was charged with theft under $ 5,000 after a shoplifting incident, but the charge was withdrawn; that same year, he was charged with threatening to slit the throats of two co- workers but the charges were withdrawn when he agreed to a peace bond; in 2012, he was charged with threatening tenants of a residence, but the charges were also stayed.
In his defence, Mangat said the incidents were as bad as they looked: the shoplifter was a former wife, his brother made the threats in the first incident and he lied to court to protect him, and the second set of threats involved him yelling at squatters.
Although noting his good work record, his security clearance was denied by Transport Canada and his appeal to the court was unsuccessful.
• Li Gu Li, who worked as a groomer with Sunwest Aviation at Calgary International Airport, was first granted security clearance in 2007. She was fired in 2015 when her security access was revoked.
Her RCMP report said she was “very close” to someone associated with a Vietnamese organized crime gang who was “known to police for trafficking drugs,” although two sets of drug charges against this person were stayed.
She was also said to be associating with a second person police linked to drug production and police saw her car parked at a house in Abbotsford, B.C., where a police raid found a marijuana grow op.
Li said she did not known there was a grow op in the basement of a house where she rented a room. Her appeal was dismissed. Some links to crime are more tenuous than others. The Post has reported on a worker whose security clearance was cancelled because her former husband went on to join the Hells Angels and on another worker who was found by police near the U. S. border with about 12 kilos of marijuana and $ 353,430 in bulk U.S. currency.
Most of those seeking the court’s redress have failed.
Transport Canada has wide discretion and a low threshold to revoke security clearance and doesn’t need criminal convictions or corroborating evidence.
“The minister is entitled to err on the side of public safety,” Justice James Russell wrote in deciding Mangat’s case.
“The minister has unfettered discretion to grant, refuse to grant or suspend a security clearance,” said Justice Michael Manson in his decision in Sattar’s case.
There have been a few notable cases where the government lost.
Juliet Meyler won her appeal last year after her security clearance was yanked, costing her two groundhandling jobs at a Toronto airport.
The allegations were potentially serious: police alleged an association with the “group leader of a drug importation ring at the Lester B. Pearson International Airport” and she was a suspect in a drug importation probe in 2007 - 09.
Meyler was never told who the “group leader” was. She said she had no involvement in drug smuggling and had no idea who the leader might be. Authorities could not disclose specifics to protect an informant and because the investigation was continuing.
That secrecy helped to save her.
Noting such cases were rare, Justice Donald Rennie ruled Meyler “was unable to respond to the case against her” and her revocation was ordered to be reconsidered.
Last month, Ayaan Farah won a similar decision.
Her security clearance to work at Toronto airport as a customer service agent with US Airways was cancelled after an RCMP report said her car was seen leaving the cemetery during a gang member’s funeral in 2012; she was not in the vehicle.
She was also seen in 2011 with a long-standing member of the Dixon Crew, a street gang based in Toronto’s west end, the report said. The man has convictions for 11 serious offences, including drug trafficking, home invasions and counterfeit money. He was also involved in gun trafficking.
Farah objected, denying the allegations.
“Toronto police is falsely accusing me of having ties to gangsters. I am a law-abiding citizen with no criminal convictions,” she complained.
She asked for details on who the gang member is so she could defend herself but was not told. She said her father and cousin routinely drive her car and she did not attend the funeral.
“I ask that the police clear my name,” she told Transport Canada. Instead, her security clearance was cancelled.
Justice Susan Elliott ruled, “Farah was simply not provided with enough information to allow her to make any kind of meaningful response,” and ordered a reconsideration.
Farah’s lawyer, Mitchell Worsoff, said his client’s case highlights some of the problems in Transport Canada’s aggressive approach.
“Some people deserve to lose their clearance, and that’s fair, because travelling must be safe and some people are doing things they shouldn’t be doing,” he said.
“But some people are being swept up by this vast net that is cast, all because they know somebody with a criminal record or are in the wrong place at the wrong time.
“It’s unfair because there are no hard and fast rules. It’s a grey area. Innocent people get caught up in it.”
Sukanya Pillay, executive director and general counsel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, called for the program to be more discerning in how its information is used.
“We have serious concerns with this practice — it smacks of guilt by association and negatively impacts people who can lose their job despite having done nothing wrong and posing no threat,” he said.
“Ultimately, we can’ t abandon fairness, natural justice, and even our employment laws over fearbased conflations.”
Morgan said his department’s decisions have been taken to court 134 times that he knows of; the government has lost 10 cases.
“Every court case, whether we’re successful or not, we review it and we’re constantly looking to tweak the program,” he said.
“It is a very difficult program in terms of we’re constantly grappling with grey … very few cases are cut and dried.”
WE REVIEW EVERYTHING ... AND MAKE AN ASSESSMENT.