1. Kwantlen did not comply with TCPS2 Article 2.1, which “requires ethics review and approval by an REB before the research commences.”

The confidential agreement prevented a determination.

2. Kwantlen did not comply with TCPS2 Article 5.1, which holds that, “… Institutions shall support their researchers in maintaining promises of confidentiality.”

2. Contrary to TCPS2 Article 5.1, Kwantlen did not support Ogden when the BC Coroner summoned him on November 13, 2014.

The confidential agreement prevented a determination

3. Kwantlen did not comply with the Tri-Agency Framework Section 4.2, which holds that research institutions must “strive to provide an environment that … fosters researchers’ abilities to act honestly, accountably, openly and fairly in the search for, and dissemination of knowledge.”

3. The confidential agreement inhibited his capacity to be totally honest and accountable with research participants. Contrary to Article 4.2 of the Tri-Agency Framework, Ogden could not tell participants that Kwantlen disassociated itself from the REB-approved research it assigned him to carry out.


4. Kwantlen did not comply with TCPS2 section 6.14, which requires that the institutional REB must conduct an annual review of all human research conducted under the institution’s auspices.


5. Kwantlen violated Section 4.4.a.ii of the Agreement on the Administration of Agency Grants and Awards by Research Institutions, which says that one way an “institutional default” occurs is “If the Institution has submitted materially false or misleading information or has made representations of a material nature to an Agency, other than in good faith.”

1. By claiming that he had access to the arbitration mechanism in the confidential agreement after the arbitrator had ruled that only Kwantlen and the KFA could access the mechanism, Kwantlen gave false and misleading information to the Secretariat contrary to section 4.4.a.ii of the Agreement on Administration of Grants and Awards by Research Institutions.



4. By preventing Ogden from submitting annual reports to the REB between 2011 and 2015, and instead requiring a report to the Kwantlen President, Kwantlen acted on a conflict of interest. (Although Ogden did not identify the relevant policy, TCPS2 Ch. 7 section II prohibits institutional conflict of interest of this sort, as an institution must carry out ethics review independently of the institution’s administration.)



5. TCPS2 Article 1.1 spells out the three “core principles” guiding TCPS2, i.e. respect for persons, concern for welfare, and justice. From a participant perspective, the confidential agreement ensured confusion about the auspices under which Ogden conducted his research, particularly if a participant were to complain to Kwantlen about her or his rights.