Canada deserves answers after a national security case fell apart

The acquittal of William Majcher raises troubling questions about Canada’s national security system

The acquittal of former RCMP inspector William Majcher on foreign-interference-related charges should not be the end of the story. It should be the beginning of a public inquiry into one of Canada’s most controversial national security investigations.

In July 2023, as the Trudeau government faced mounting criticism over allegations of Chinese foreign interference, the RCMP charged Majcher under the Security of Information Act. The case quickly drew national and international attention because it emerged during a period of intense public debate over allegations that the Chinese government was attempting to influence Canadian politics and intimidate critics living abroad.

Last month, however, the prosecution collapsed.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Martha Devlin acquitted Majcher, ruling that the Crown had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the acts alleged. The decision marked a dramatic end to a case involving a former RCMP inspector who spent decades investigating organized crime before later working in Hong Kong. It followed earlier rulings in which Devlin found Majcher’s airport arrest unlawful and invalidated the search of the Vancouver home of retired RCMP Staff Sgt. Kenneth “Kim” Marsh.

Taken together, those rulings raise troubling questions about investigative judgment, prosecutorial decision-making and accountability within Canada’s national security system.

Foreign interference is real. China’s efforts to influence democratic societies have been well documented. But the existence of genuine threats does not relieve police and prosecutors of their obligation to meet the highest legal standards. If anything, national security cases demand greater care because of the serious consequences for both individuals and public confidence.

That is why the fallout from Project Severo, the RCMP’s code name for the national security investigation into Majcher, demands a public inquiry.

The central question is simple: how did a prosecution widely viewed as a major foreign-interference case end with findings of an unlawful arrest, an invalid search and an acquittal?

Canadians deserve answers.

The timing alone warrants examination. Project Severo emerged at a moment when Ottawa was under intense political pressure to demonstrate that it was responding to allegations of Chinese interference. A public inquiry should determine whether politics played any role in the investigation’s timing, public presentation or advancement through the justice system.

The inquiry should also examine how Majcher’s work in asset recovery and financial investigations evolved into a national security prosecution. The Crown alleged he was preparing to assist efforts to coerce Chinese businessman Hongwei Sun, also known as Kevin Sun, for the benefit of Beijing. Yet Justice Devlin ultimately concluded the Crown had failed to prove the essential elements of the offence charged.

How did investigators assess alternative explanations for the conduct they viewed as suspicious? What safeguards existed to challenge assumptions before a criminal case was launched?

Equally important is what happened after the court began identifying serious problems.

The unlawful arrest and invalid search warrant were not minor procedural setbacks. They struck at the foundation of the investigation. A public inquiry should examine how those rulings were evaluated internally, who reviewed the file afterward and why the prosecution continued despite those judicial findings.

Questions also remain about the treatment of retired RCMP Staff Sgt. Kenneth Marsh.

Although never charged, Marsh became publicly associated with the investigation after police searched his home as part of the case, linking him to allegations that were never tested against him in court. Questions remain about the evidence used to justify that search and the decision-making process that brought him into the case.

There are also unresolved questions surrounding information provided to federal prosecutors by Marsh’s legal counsel. According to Marsh, that information included his account of the Kevin Sun matter, his dealings with Majcher and his earlier decision to bring concerns about Sun to law enforcement. If potentially relevant evidence existed that could have affected the understanding of events, Canadians deserve to know how it was handled and whether it was properly considered.

The inquiry should further examine why certain witnesses were never called to testify, including former RCMP Supt. Calvin Chrustie. Decisions about witnesses are normally matters for prosecutors but when a major national security prosecution ends in failure, it is reasonable to ask whether key evidence was fully explored.

The broader management of Project Severo also warrants examination. National security investigations should be among the most disciplined and carefully supervised files in the country. Canadians need confidence that appropriate safeguards, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place throughout the process.

Finally, Project Severo should be studied alongside other failed national security prosecutions. The goal is not to second-guess every acquittal. Courts acquit people every day. The goal is to determine whether there are recurring institutional problems involving evidence assessment, investigative assumptions or prosecutorial judgment.

None of this is about undermining efforts to combat foreign interference. If anything, it reflects the need for stronger investigations, better evidence and greater accountability.

When police and prosecutors bring weak cases, public confidence suffers. When investigations collapse in court, genuine national security threats become harder to confront because trust in the institutions responsible for addressing them is weakened.

A public inquiry is not about finding someone to blame for the sake of blame. It is about finding out what went wrong, who made the key decisions, which safeguards failed and how to make sure this does not happen again.

Fabian Dawson is a veteran Vancouver-based journalist who has been following this case for the last four years. During his tenure as a Postmedia deputy editor, he worked with both William Majcher and Kenneth Marsh on several media investigations. He is currently the media advisor to Mata Press Service, an independent news agency.