This page contains the Applicant’s Supplemental Written Representations for Notice of Motion #2 in McLean v. RCMP et al, filed June 29, 2026 and submitted for adjudication before the Acting Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Canada. These representations address all outstanding issues arising from the Application Record (2nd Updated), including the RCMP’s refusal to participate in the judicial review, its failure to file a Notice of Appearance, its failure to produce the Certified Tribunal Record under Rule 317, and its systemic non‑compliance with statutory duties under the Privacy Act and Access to Information Act.
The submissions outline the Applicant’s position that the RCMP’s conduct constitutes an unconstitutional functional ouster of judicial review, contrary to Crevier v. Québec and the record‑based imperatives reaffirmed in Vavilov. The representations emphasize that judicial review cannot proceed without a Certified Tribunal Record, and that the RCMP’s deliberate withholding of the record—combined with its failure to file any affidavits, evidence, or submissions—creates an evidentiary vacuum that impermissibly undermines the supervisory jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
The document details the RCMP’s systemic failures in assigning statutory access requests to the correct Office of Primary Interest (OPI), demonstrating that Privacy Act Request #1, ATIA Request #2, and ATIA Request #3 were never lawfully tasked. The representations cite Tabs 6, 8, 35, 39, and 41 to show that RCMP personnel misrepresented the involvement of an OPI, misdirected requests to administrative bodies lacking technical capability, and fabricated correspondence to conceal the absence of lawful searches. These failures, the Applicant argues, constitute jurisdictional nullities rather than mere procedural irregularities.
The submissions further address the imminent risk of spoliation of volatile digital evidence, including CPIC foundational metadata, offline database telemetry, hexadecimal memory dumps, ORI codes, MAC/IP logs, and systemic ingestion trails. The Applicant explains that routine purge cycles, algorithmic overwrites, and enterprise‑level PDF manipulation software (including the GrapeCity/Mescius SDK) pose an immediate threat to the preservation of critical forensic artifacts. The representations identify specific anomalies—such as the “CL (M)” signature vector collapse—requiring urgent judicial intervention to prevent irreversible destruction of evidence.
The document also analyzes the “False Information Package” associated with RCMP Case ID 457197, demonstrating that the Information was never sworn, never signed, and never judicially authorized, rendering the entire criminal process a nullity under Landreville. The Applicant argues that the RCMP’s refusal to disclose CPIC metadata prevents the vindication of Charter rights and perpetuates ongoing reputational harm, misidentification risks, and potential unlawful arrest.
Finally, the representations situate the Applicant’s case within the broader public‑interest context, referencing the Information Commissioner’s report Access at Issue (2020) and the quasi‑constitutional status of access rights under Dagg and Blank. The Applicant submits that the RCMP’s systemic failures reflect a collapse of the federal ATIP framework and justify immediate structural, interim, and mandamus relief to preserve evidence, compel statutory compliance, and restore the integrity of the judicial review process.
This page forms part of LawCap’s Federal Court litigation archive documenting administrative law oversight, record‑integrity doctrine, ATIP/Privacy Act compliance, and the Federal Court’s supervisory jurisdiction over national policing institutions.