Ottawa Citizen

ANTI-TERRORISM BILLS NEAR VOTES

Two anti-terrorism bills that would give more powers to Canada’s police and spies are being pushed toward fruition, but critics say the bills might be tossed by the courts, writes Dylan Robertson.

- dcrobertso­n@ottawaciti­zen.com Twitter.com/withfilesf­rom

Q What’s being proposed?

A Bill C-13 is expected to pass a final Senate vote next week, the last step before it is signed into law. The so-called cyberbully­ing bill will allow police to obtain surveillan­ce warrants on “reasonable grounds for suspicion” — a lower threshold of evidence than now exists. The bill also shields Internet providers from lawsuits for voluntaril­y giving police private data without a warrant.

Bill C-44, on the other hand, is a series of amendments to the act governing the spy agency, the Canadian Security Intelligen­ce Service (CSIS).

If passed, the bill would grant CSIS informants near-total anonymity, and confirm that Canadian courts can issue spy warrants that have effect outside Canada.

The bill has had four hours of committee study and faces another two hours Monday before it returns to the House for a third reading. Then the Bill will be voted and move on to the Senate.

Q Why the rush on Bill C-44?

A Both bills were drafted before the deadly attack on Parliament Hill in October. Since then, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has stressed his belief that security agencies need more power of “surveillan­ce, detention, and arrest,” and has said legislatio­n would be “expedited.”

Liberal critic Wayne Easter says C-44 requires more scrutiny. “CSIS is already doing these things; there’s no rush,” he argues.

Q Are the bills constituti­onal?

A Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney called C-44 “the most constituti­onal piece of legislatio­n that we have ever brought in.”

Official Opposition critic Randall Garrison says he’s worried a court could later toss out the law. “If you’re going to do this, you can’t make mistakes that will inadverten­tly make it harder to use CSIS informatio­n in prosecutio­ns of people actually guilty of terrorist acts,” he says.

As for Bill C-13, critics say a Supreme Court ruling in June suggests courts will discard informatio­n police collect from Inter- net providers without sufficient cause.

Q Has everyone been heard?

A In an unusual move, the government denied Privacy Commission­er Daniel Therrien’s request to appear at the committee discussing Bill C-44 last week.

A Conservati­ve MP even quashed an NDP proposal that would have Therrien appear if some other witnesses was absent.

Therrien thus wrote a letter detailing his concerns. He says C-44 doesn’t include enough safeguards to ensure Canadians being spied on abroad by other government­s aren’t, as a result, abused or tortured by them.

“Clear statutory rules should be enacted to prevent informatio­nsharing by CSIS from resulting in a violation of Canada’s internatio­nal obligation­s,” he wrote.

A similar letter he co-wrote last month with the informatio­n commission­er said the government hasn’t clearly establishe­d why authoritie­s need any new counter-terrorism powers at all.

 ?? SEAN KILPATRICK/ THE CANADIAN PRESS FILES ?? Daniel Therrien, the privacy commission­er, was not allowed to appear before the committee looking at anti-terror legislatio­n this week.
SEAN KILPATRICK/ THE CANADIAN PRESS FILES Daniel Therrien, the privacy commission­er, was not allowed to appear before the committee looking at anti-terror legislatio­n this week.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada