Missing Persons Act

Summary#

This bill creates a new law to help the RCMP find missing people when there is no criminal investigation. It lets police get certain records and, in some cases, enter places to look for a missing person. The goal is to speed up searches while setting rules to protect privacy and share limited public updates.

Key changes:

• Lets a justice (judicial officer) order people or organizations to give the RCMP copies of records that could help locate a missing person.
• Lets a justice authorize RCMP to enter a named place, including a home, if there are grounds to believe the person may be there and entry is needed to protect the person’s safety.
• Allows “emergency demands” for records without a court order when delay could cause serious harm to the person or the records may be destroyed.
• Requires a public‑interest test: the need to find the person must outweigh privacy concerns; the justice must consider signs the person does not want to be found (for example, leaving an abusive situation).
• Sets limits on what the RCMP may disclose to the public about a case, and allows minimal disclosure once a person is found unless they consent.
• Requires an annual public report on emergency demands (totals and types of records), without any identifying details.
• Creates offences and fines for not complying or for misusing information.
• Applies even where it conflicts with the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act or the Health Information Act.
• Timing: starts on a date set by the Commissioner (not stated).

What it means for you#

• Businesses and organizations (phone and internet providers, banks, hotels, airlines, hospitals and clinics, schools, employers, social services, CCTV operators):

  • You may be ordered to give the RCMP copies of records that could help find a missing person. This can include contact details, phone/text and location data, GPS, video, attendance, travel and accommodation, employment, child and family services, health, and financial records.
  • In urgent cases, you may receive a written emergency demand from an RCMP member without a court order and must provide the specified records as soon as practicable. If you cannot find them, you must promptly give a written description of the efforts you made.
  • With the member’s consent, you may provide the information orally instead of copies.
  • Failure to comply without a reasonable excuse can lead to fines. Corporations can be fined up to $25,000; individuals up to $10,000.

• Property owners and occupants:

  • The RCMP may be authorized by a justice to enter a named place (including a home) to find a missing person if needed for the person’s safety. Entry is normally between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m., unless a justice allows another time for safety reasons. Reasonable force may be used to carry out the order.

• Individuals whose information may be in records:

  • Your information (including health or financial details) could be disclosed to police under a court order or an emergency demand if it is likely to help find a missing person. This Act applies even if other privacy laws would say otherwise.
  • People whose information was produced under an emergency demand must receive notice, in the manner set by regulations. Details of timing and method are not in the Act.
  • The Act does not force disclosure of privileged information (for example, lawyer‑client communications).

• Relatives and friends of a missing person:

  • Police may be able to act more quickly to locate the person. If the person is found, police may share only minimal information with the public, unless the person consents.
  • If the found person consents, police can share information to help connect them with a spouse, family, friends, or acquaintances.
  • If the found person is a minor, police may share information, including location, without the minor’s consent if they reasonably believe it is needed to protect the minor’s safety (subject to regulations).

• General public:

  • Police may release certain information (name, age, photo, vehicle details, when/where last seen, and limited information about health needs without naming the condition) if they reasonably believe it will help find the person or for a purpose set by regulation.
  • After a person is found, public updates are limited to confirming that the case is no longer a missing‑person case, that the person was located, and, if applicable, that the person is deceased.

• RCMP members:

  • May apply ex parte (without notifying others) and electronically for orders to obtain records or to enter places. Must balance public interest and privacy, and consider signs the person does not want to be found.
  • May issue written emergency demands in urgent cases. Must provide notice to people whose information was produced under an emergency demand, per regulations.
  • May use information collected only for listed purposes (locating the person, complying with law or court orders, assisting similar investigations, with consent, limited public disclosure, and annual reporting). Information can be used if the case later becomes a criminal investigation.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

• This could lead to added administrative work for the RCMP and the courts to process applications and reports; no cost estimate is provided.
• Businesses and institutions may face compliance costs to search for and produce records; no estimate is provided.
• Enforcement and training could add costs; no estimate is provided.

Proponents' View#

• The bill appears intended to let police act quickly to find missing people when no crime is suspected, closing gaps that can delay access to key records.
• Emergency demands allow rapid action when delay could cause serious harm or records might be destroyed.
• Judicial orders, a public‑interest test, time‑of‑day limits on entries, and respect for legal privilege provide safeguards for privacy and rights.
• The requirement to consider whether a person may not want to be found, including those leaving violent or abusive situations, could help protect victim safety.
• Limits on public disclosure and an annual public report (with no identifying information) could improve accountability and transparency.

Opponents' View#

• One concern is privacy: the range of records that can be compelled is broad (including health, financial, telecom, GPS, school, and child‑protection records), and this Act overrides other privacy laws when in conflict.
• Emergency demands allow access without prior court approval; the Act does not set clear timelines or standards in the law itself for notifying affected people (left to regulations), which may raise oversight questions.
• It is unclear how consistently the public‑interest test will be applied, and how often the “person may not want to be found” factor will limit orders.
• Search orders can authorize entry into homes and the use of force, which may affect the privacy of other occupants or owners not connected to the case.
• Organizations may face compliance burdens and potential penalties, but the Act provides no guidance on cost recovery or support.
• The start date is not stated, so timing for training, procedures, and regulations is unclear.