Demonstrators protesting vaccine mandates and other pandemic restrictions gather as part of a truck convoy blocking the highway at the busy U.S. border crossing near Coutts, Alta., on Jan. 31, 2022.Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press
The RCMP used undercover operatives and emergency wiretaps to collect information on protesters who blocked a border crossing in southern Alberta for weeks this past winter as part of a protest against COVID-19 public health measures, according to court documents.
A provincial court judge unsealed four documents that were used to obtain warrants before and after a raid that uncovered a cache of weapons and prompted RCMP to charge four people with conspiracy to commit murder. Investigators alleged the accused were plotting to kill police officers. News outlets including The Globe and Mail applied to the court for the documents’ release; some parts are redacted.
The documents indicate the RCMP used wiretaps without judicial authorization – a rare tool that is legal and reserved for urgent circumstances, such as when lives are at risk.
During the protests, demonstrators gathered near Coutts, a village of about 250 people, in solidarity with the larger convoy that took over downtown Ottawa. Participants in both protests were angry over COVID-19 restrictions – particularly vaccination requirements – and demanded governments roll back all public-health measures related to the pandemic.
In Ottawa, protesters occupied the streets around Parliament and frustrated local residents by honking their horns for hours. In Coutts, the protesters used vehicles, campers and farm equipment to block access to the U.S.-Canada border, halting trade into February.
The federal government invoked the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 to quell the protests, which also shut down the Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ont., and Detroit. A public inquiry into the government’s use of the act scheduled to begin later this month has been delayed until October.
The documents – known as information to obtain, or ITOs – provide a glimpse of the evidence the RCMP gathered, the techniques they used, and investigators’ theories before and after a raid shortly after midnight on Feb. 14, when officers descended on a mobile home and two camper trailers in Coutts. They seized 15 guns, ammunition, and a body-armour vest with a “Diagolon” patch, the insignia for a far-right group. In the days that followed, RCMP investigators filed ITOs alleging that some of the protesters wanted to murder Mounties at the blockade and asked the court to approve more search warrants.
The first ITO was filed on Feb. 13 and three more in the days after the raid.
“This investigation has relied on emergency intercepts of private communications,” said an ITO filed on Feb. 14, in a section where the police asked for the document to be sealed because it could compromise their work. “The situation at the Coutts blockade is still ongoing and police may need to rely on emergency intercepts to protect against imminent harm during the remainder of this incident.”
Nearly three pages are redacted under the title “Imminent Harm Interception of Private Communications” in the Feb. 14 ITO. The same title is visible, followed by even more redacted pages, in ITOs dated Feb. 17 and Feb. 19.
Police can conduct wiretaps without court authorization under Section 184.4 of the Criminal Code in an urgent situation, such as a kidnapping or a bomb threat. Officers must believe the interception is immediately necessary to prevent serious harm to people or property, and either the originator of the private communication or the intended recipient is the person who would cause harm. Police can also use the provision to legally wiretap a victim or intended victim of harm.
RCMP declined to comment, saying the case is before the courts.
Parliament granted law enforcement this tool in 1993, but the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional because it had no accountability measures. In response, Parliament passed legislation in 2013 that included constitutional safeguards, including annual disclosure requirements and stipulations that authorities must inform anyone who was the object of an interception within 90 days. Police can seek extensions from the courts to the 90-day notice requirement of up to three years; exemptions can be given when criminal organizations or terrorism offences are involved.
The unredacted portions of the Coutts ITOs include few details about the unauthorized wiretaps; it is unclear whose communications were intercepted under the imminent harm provision and what information officers gleaned.
After the raid, RCMP charged Anthony Olienick, Chris Carbert, Jerry Morin, and Christopher Lysak with conspiracy to commit murder. The allegations have not been tested in court. All four have been denied bail, and their combined trial is scheduled for June, 2023. The court has been informed the prosecution plans to use wiretap evidence.
Mr. Olienick interacted with at least three undercover operatives at Coutts, according to the ITOs. RCMP deduced Mr. Olienick was providing security for protesters at the blockade.
“Olienick showed [an undercover operative] a live surveillance feed on a device showing police walking through parked vehicles,” the Feb. 14 ITO said. “Olienick also said there was a live feed on all of the checkpoints to monitor police activities.”
Mr. Olienick told undercover operatives he was staying in a camper in Coutts and had access to weapons, the documents said.
On Feb. 10, Mr. Olienick said he had a “delivery” coming and asked two undercover operatives if they could help. He introduced them to his friend, Mr. Carbert, who said the “bags would be too heavy for [the two undercover operatives] to carry,” according to one of the documents. However, “Olienick believed that the police would not think much of it if [the two operatives] carried the bag because they were ‘girls,’” the document said. One operative said they were fine with guns and neither Mr. Olienick nor Mr. Carbert “denied it was guns in the bag.”
The document said: “Carbert asked Olienick if Olienick preferred to use guitar cases like they usually did [and] Olienick said the package was too big and they needed a hockey bag.” The undercover operatives, according to the document, believed Mr. Morin “was delivering a hockey bag with guns” in a truck later linked to his partner, who is among other people connected to the blockade who were charged with lesser offences.
While the raid in Coutts yielded a stockpile of firearms, investigators believed Mr. Olienick and his associates had access to more. The RCMP searched Mr. Morin’s rural property near Olds, Alta., and received clearance to comb Mr. Olienick’s place in the Municipal District of Willow Creek. The court also authorized RCMP to search the Smuggler’s Saloon, which the broader protest group used as a home base in Coutts, but Mounties did not make a move there because demonstrators largely left after the Feb. 14 raid and subsequent arrests.
Investigators did not think Mr. Olienick met his associates for the first time at the protest, according to the documents. Instead, police believed “some of this planning occurred prior to Olienick, Morin and Carbert attending Coutts,” and that some of the guns ferried into town came from outside the area.
“Based on the totality of the circumstances, I believed on reasonable grounds Olienick, Carbert and Morin were part of a subgroup with loose ties to [REDACTED] and were arming themselves for a standoff against police,” RCMP Constable Trevor Checkley wrote in the ITOs dated Feb. 14, 17 and 19.
Mr. Olienick’s lawyer said he is concerned that lifting the publication ban could affect his client’s right to a fair trial. Lawyers for the others declined to comment.