Statistics generally don't prove in the sense of 100% certainty. They provide evidence. A way to provide such evidence in for your purposes is via re-randomization of your data:
Choose a type I error rate ($\alpha$).
Choose $\delta$—the smallest positive number that you would consider relevantly difference from zero (i.e. maybe .002 is, for your purposes effectively zero).
Create, say, 9,999 data sets by re-randomizing (shuffling) each variable independently of each other variable (thus you get an M-by-N data set with precisely the same univariate distributions, but covariances due entirely to chance). Your originally observed data is the 10,000th data set.
Estimate the covariance matrix $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, and extract the $\frac{N^2-N}{2}$ covariances $\sigma_{ij}$.
Perform $\frac{N^2-N}{2}\times 10,000$ tests of the form:
$H^{-}_{0}: |\sigma_{ij}| \ge \delta$
$H^{-}_{A}: |\sigma_{ij}| < \delta$
Which require two one-sided tests to actually do the inference:
$H^{-}_{01}: \sigma_{ij} \ge \delta$
$H^{-}_{A1}: \sigma_{ij} < \delta$
$H^{-}_{02}: \sigma_{ij} \le -\delta$
$H^{-}_{A2}: \sigma_{ij} > -\delta$
Your p-value ($p_{1}$) for a test of $H^{-}_{01}$ for a single $\sigma_{ij}$ is the number of rejections of its $H^{-}_{01}$ (the number of times $\hat{\sigma}_{ij}\le\delta$) divided by 10,000.
Your p-value ($p_{2}$) for a test of $H^{-}_{02}$ for a single $\sigma_{ij}$ is the number of rejections of its $H^{-}_{02}$ (the number of times $\hat{\sigma}_{ij}\ge-\delta$) divided by 10,000.
Perform the Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate adjustment for multiple comparisons for your $\frac{2\left(N^2-N\right)}{2} = N^2-N$ tests (let's call this number $m$ for a moment) by:
- Ordering the p-values (both $p_{1}$ and $p_{2}$) from largest to smallest (and retaining which p-value goes with which covariance you are testing)
- Calculate $\alpha^{*}_{i} = \frac{\alpha\times(m+1 -i)}{m}$, where $i$ is the number of the ordered p values. ($\alpha$ not $\alpha/2$ because the join TOST null's are non-intersecting)
- In order from smallest to largest, compare $p_{i}$ and $\alpha^{*}_{i}$, and if both $p_{1}\le \alpha^{*}_{i}$ and $p_{2}\le \alpha^{*}_{i}$ (for their respective $i$s) reject $H^{-}_{0i}$, and all remaining $H^{-}_{0>i}$ for which both $H^{-}_{01}$ and $H^{-}_{02}$ are rejected at $i$ or later. Stop.
If you reject $H^{-}_{0}$ for a covariance $\sigma_{ij}$, you conclude that that covariance is equivalent to zero, given your preferred type I error rate $\alpha$ and your equivalence/relevance threshold $\delta$.
Remember: you must choose $\delta$ and $\alpha$ a priori... otherwise you are in p-hacking territory. NB: if your preferred type I error rate is really tiny ($\alpha=0.0001$, say), you will want to increase the total number of data sets accordingly. For example, it is difficult to reliably estimate 0.0001-sized probabilities in a sample size of 10,000.