Political prisoners are kept in a special wing at Sarposa prison in Kandahar, Afghanistan. (Dene Moore/Canadian Press)

The government isn't legally blocked from giving documents on possible Afghan detainee abuse to a parliamentary committee, according to a legal opinion given to Liberal defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh.

While uncensored papers may present some concerns about national security for the government, "at the end of the day, the government is obliged to supply to the committee whatever information it requests in the performance of its mandate from the House" of Commons, parliamentary law expert Robert Walsh says in a letter to Dosanjih.

As parliamentary law clerk, Walsh is Parliament's own expert on the laws that affect it.

Opposition MPs have demanded access to all government documents relevant to allegations made by Richard Colvin, a former senior diplomat with Canada's mission in Afghanistan.

Richard Colvin, a former senior diplomat with Canada's mission in Afghanistan. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

Colvin alleged that prisoners were turned over to Afghanistan prison officials by the Canadian military in 2006-07, despite his warnings to Canadian officials that they would be tortured.

Opposition MPs also want Colvin's reports to the government made public. The Conservatives have repeatedly said the committee will get "all legally available" documents.

Security risk cited

Defence Minister Peter MacKay has said the material needs to be checked by the Justice Department to ensure nothing is disclosed that could pose national security risks.

"There's a mandatory obligation on public officials to ensure that when information is released that it is in compliance with the Canada Evidence Act," MacKay said last Wednesday.

MacKay said that legislation was made more robust by the previous Liberal government.

"We want to protect operational matters — information received from other countries, other sources, confidential sources, national security," he said. "Those are the reasons these documents are being examined by the Department of Justice."

However, Walsh rejected the legal opinion the government was relying upon, "which is not worth the paper it was written on," Dosanjh said Tuesday.

"The Conservatives are making this absurd argument that Parliament, in passing Section 38 of the Canada Evidence Act, barred itself from seeing uncensored documents in violation of its own constitutional rights," he said.

"I believe that bureaucrats are feeling the chill after Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his minister went after Richard Colvin's reputation. The Justice Department's lawyers are bowing to the wishes of the Conservatives, rather than upholding the independent attorney general function of the Department of Justice."