Taking a look at Bill C-51

2/6/2015

On Friday of last week, the Federal Government introduced Bill C-51– “The Anti-Terrorism Act”. This is a bill that proposes a number of changes to enhance the abilities of our security agencies to better protect Canadians against terrorists and acts of terrorism. There are eight key measures proposed in this bill.

The first measure is to increase the mandate of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) to include the ability to disrupt potential threats to Canadians when there are believed to be reasonable grounds to do so. In the event that disrupting a potential terrorist act may be in contravention to the Charter or of other Canadian laws, a court order issued by a Judge would be required to authorize such actions. CSIS will also have the ability to issue a temporary threat disruption order that is intended to be limited to a maximum of 120 days. The intent of this provision is to prevent individuals from engaging in acts of terrorism, sabotage, or other serious criminal acts.

Another provision proposed in this anti-terrorism Bill is the criminalization against those who knowingly promote or otherwise encourage terrorist attacks against Canadians. Under Canada’s current laws a specific terrorism offence must be referenced in order to be a criminal act; under the new definition, any instructions to carry out terrorist attacks against Canadians can be a criminal offence subject to a maximum of five years in prison if convicted.

Another such proposal as is the ability to seize terrorist propaganda. This is a change that would be made to the Criminal Code (and be subject to an order by a Judge) that would allow materials to be seized if they promote or encourage attacks against Canadians or otherwise recruit those who would do Canadians harm. These changes would work in a similar manner as current provisions that enable child pornography to be seized.

Changes to Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act are also proposed as part of these eight key measures. It proposed that the Government can use and protect classified information to determine if non-Canadians can enter Canada or in other cases remain in Canada. Other proposed changes include modifications to Canada’s Passenger Protect Program (PPP). This is an air travel program that was created in 2007 and the proposed changes seek the removal of potential threats from commercial flights in a more expedited manner.

Aside from the measures already mentioned, the final key points cover a range of other initiatives such as increased information sharing between Canada’s national security agencies while adhering to the Privacy Act.

Other measures this bill introduces enhancements to witness protection and strengthened enforcement prevention provisions. The enhanced prevention provisions include the ability to detain suspected terrorists before they can harm Canadians. Although the threshold to make an arrest is lowered in these changes, they remain subject to judicial oversight by necessitating an authorization by a Judge for detention. Lastly Bill C-51 proposes enhancements to witness protection. Currently the witness protection program is structured to protect those who provide evidence in criminal matters. The changes proposed in the anti-terror bill similarly ensure that witnesses in matters involving national security are also protected.

This is a brief summary of the measurers proposed in Bill C-51 “The Anti-terrorism bill”. The Federal Liberals have indicated support for this Bill while the NDP position is still unclear (from my perspective). Although there were other items I had intended to include in this week’s report, as this is a very important bill it has been the focus for my report this week. We’ve learned this week of arrests being made in Ottawa relating to terrorism by the RCMP and also of the disturbing execution of a pilot who savagely burned alive by the terror group ISIL, it is important that our Canadian laws allow our enforcement agencies to keep pace protecting Canadians and our way of life. If you have further comments, questions or concerns on this or any Bill before the House of Commons do not hesitate to contact my office. I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or toll free at 1-800-665-8711.

1 Comment

Dianne Varga

2/11/2015 08:22:49 am

Almost everyone knows that new anti-terrorism legislation has been tabled. Legal experts are now asking what the law would do and why we need it.

Current laws already govern terrorism, treason, sedition, espionage and other offences against the state. They allow the RCMP to disrupt terrorist plots, detain suspects without the burden of due process, and deport unwanted non-citizens.

About the usefulness of current laws, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association says, “There are still no answers as to why our existing laws and powers didn’t work – or if they didn’t work.”

The proposed law will exceed existing laws by criminalizing speech and intent, not just action, and by expanding concerns to include the sovereignty, security or territorial integrity of Canada, and the integrity of critical infrastructure such as pipelines. Although lawful advocacy, protest and dissent will be protected, nonviolent civil disobedience will not.

Legal scholars Kent Roach and Craig Forcese write, “We will inevitably be asked if the bill could reach Quebec sovereigntists, Indigenous activists or environmental protesters. The answer is that it could.”

Worryingly, the new law would also erode privacy provisions and let courts act on mere suspicion rather than conviction. Only when a Charter violation is anticipated would CSIS need to ask a judge to issue, through a secret process, a warrant to act. CSIS agents would be free to do “just about anything except bodily damage or assassination or sexual abuse,” according to the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group.

“The idea that a court could ever, ever have the jurisdiction or power to authorize a breach of these unqualified Charter rights is absolutely alien to our public law tradition,” says Forcese. “To ask judges to do that puts judges in the positions of enablers of illegality and not guardians of the rule of law.”

The law’s mandate, scope and lack of oversight cause Green MP Elizabeth May, herself a lawyer, to warn, “This bill is not about terrorism. It’s about creating a secret police.” Commenting on the tabled legislation, Edward Snowden concurs, “We should always be extraordinarily cautious when we see governments trying to set up a new secret police within their own countries. We need to make sure that the laws we live under are the ones we truly want and truly need.”

Stephen Harper often conflates the war with ISIS and events in Australia, France and Ottawa when claiming we need new anti-terrorism legislation.

But war is not terrorism, and foreign terrorist events, if they’ve been terrorist events at all, should not persuade Canadians to reduce our civil liberties in response.

Paul Robinson, a professor at the University of Ottawa’s School of Public and International Affairs, says we need to keep terror in perspective. Through its Global Terrorism Database, the University of Maryland “has collected statistics on terrorist attacks from 1970 onwards. According to its numbers, terrorist attacks peaked worldwide in the 1980s. In North America, the number peaked even earlier, around 1970, when groups like the FLQ in Canada and the Weather Underground in the United States were active.”

“That is why, for Canada and the Western world, I say that the greatest danger facing us is not terrorism. I believe that the greatest danger facing us is self-inflicted threat inflation. By imagining the world is more dangerous than it is, we end up harming ourselves.”

The Harper government and its cadre of analysts have access to the Global Database like anyone else. Nevertheless, Harper has warned Canadians, “A great evil has been descending upon our world, an evil which has been growing more and more powerful: violent jihadism. It is one of the most dangerous enemies our world has ever faced. [In Canada] we cannot avoid the stark reality. Jihadist terrorism is not a future possibility, it is a present reality.”

Why does Harper promote fear, while Obama warns against doing so? “What I do insist on,” says Obama, “is that we maintain a proper perspective and that we do not provide a victory to these terrorist networks by overinflating their importance and suggesting in some fashion that they are an existential threat to the United States or the world order.”

Journalist Alexander Panetta explains the different approach. “In Canada, yet another polling firm this week described terrorism as a winning issue for the prime minister’s party. And Harper faces re-election in nine months.”

As informed Canadians, we need to reject Harper’s fear-mongering, along with his blatant bullying of opposition leaders by portraying them as weak-kneed if they refuse to agree to his self-serving political theatre. We need to tell them that we have their backs

MP Report

Taking a look at Bill C-51

Leave a Reply.

Subscribe to the MP Report

Author

Archives

Categories