Harper’s anti-terror legislation threatens rights of all Canadians – Part 1
By Peter Ewart
The Harper government is putting forward so-called anti-terrorist legislation that should be of concern to all Canadians, no matter their point of view or political affiliation. There are many things wrong, even dangerous, about this legislation, but two things stand out: (A) the threat to the right to privacy of Canadians; and (B) the threat to freedom of speech.
One thing is very clear. Canadians value their rights to privacy and are concerned when anyone, including government, abuses or intrudes upon these rights. Indeed, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who is mandated by Parliament to act as a guardian of privacy in Canada, released the results of a poll on January 28th that show “nine out of ten Canadians were concerned about privacy,” and one in three (34%) were “extremely concerned.” The poll also reveals that “a significant majority (78%) expressed concern about how personal information about them online might be used in the context of government surveillance” (1).
Despite this, the Harper government is planning to ram through anti-terror legislation which greatly expands the ability of intelligence agencies, especially CSIS, to gather and paw through health, medical, family, tax, business, and other information from other government institutions, including Revenue Canada, on potentially all Canadians. This information only has to shown to be “relevant” in some way. This is dangerously vague and abstruse language, and open to serious abuse. As the Privacy Commissioner notes, “This Act would seemingly allow departments and agencies to share the personal information of all individuals, including ordinary Canadians who may not be suspected of terrorist activities” (2).
This expansion of surveillance powers follows the revelation recently that the federal government through its spy agency, the Communications Security Establishment, has been engaged in massive covert surveillance operations on the private online activities of millions of people around the world. Even clicking on a particular site, could result in a person being put under scrutiny. As Ron Deibert, of the Internet security think tank Citizen Lab, explains, the surveillance program, which is being conducted without search warrants, resembles a “giant X-ray machine over all our digital lives” (3).
Globe and Mail columnist Lawrence Martin poses the question that, with these kinds of “surveillance state” powers, could the federal government, under the rubric of “anti-terrorism”, decide to monitor and target its political enemies or opposition groups of one kind or another (4)? The idea is not far-fetched at all. Such anti-democratic activity and dirty tricks were carried out by Liberal governments in the 1960s and 70s against political opponents, resulting in a huge scandal and a Royal Commission into RCMP wrongdoing. With the tremendous advances in technology since then, as well as the erosion of citizens’ rights since 9/11, the potentiality for government to trample on the right to privacy of all citizens has reached a new and dangerous level.
Canadians highly value freedom of speech. But Bill C-51 mounts a grave threat to what should be a right. The legislation reads: “Every person who, by communicating statements, knowingly advocates or promotes the commission of terrorism offences in general” will be liable for an imprisonment of up to five years.
What does the vague term “terrorism in general” mean? The implication is that, if the federal government claims you are advocating or promoting “terrorism”, not only in Canada, but in any country in the world, you will be prosecuted. Of course, the big question is: Just who defines what constitutes “terrorism in general”?
As Anna Mehler Paperny, senior producer at Global News, points out: “Conceivably, if you’ve ever written a blog post railing against Canada’s actions in Iraq or Afghanistan; brought a Tamil Tigers flag to a protest; argued that Canada should restore humanitarian aid to Gazans through their Hamas government; called Israel an apartheid state; supported militant independence movements in Turkish Kurdistan or Spain’s Basque region,” you could be found guilty of advocating or promoting terrorism (5).
University of Ottawa law professor Craig Forcese comments that “if you want to … start throwing people into the clink because they’re waving the wrong flag at a protest … you’re going to have a huge free speech case. It’s going to be an enormous constitutional challenge” (6).
Canadians have many differing views on struggles and conflicts in other parts of the world, whether it be Israel / Palestine, Middle East, Africa, Ukraine, Asia or elsewhere. In previous decades and centuries, Canadians have supported people and organizations in other countries fighting for national liberation and political freedoms, but which were labelled “terrorist” or “criminal” by the government or politicians of the day. These countries include Ireland, India, South Africa, and Kenya to name just a few.
In that regard, it is a fact that, in the past, a certain member of Harper’s own Conservative Party considered Nelson Mandela and the ANC to be “terrorists (7).”
The term “terrorism in general” is so vague that Stephen Harper himself could conceivably be charged with terrorism for expressing support for so-called “moderate rebels” in Syria who, abundant evidence has shown, are working with and supplying arms to Al Queda and ISIS linked groups (8). For his part, foreign minister John Baird could also be charged for supporting, selling military equipment to (and kissing the cheeks of), the government of Saudi Arabia which has been doing the same with the Syrian rebels.
Bill C-51 constitutes a direct threat to the privacy of all Canadians, as well as their right to conscience and freedom of speech. People of all political persuasions, including those who traditionally vote Conservative, should take a serious look at this legislation. Once it is in place, whatever government happens to be in power will be able to use and abuse it as they see fit. It constitutes a further step towards a police state and a surveillance society.
The question needs to be asked: Why is the Harper government bringing in such flagrantly anti-democratic legislation at this time and why is the terror threat being magnified and exaggerated to such an extent in this country? These are topics that will be further discussed in Part 2 of this series.
Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia. He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca
(1) News Release. Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. January 28, 2015.
(2) Statement of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada following the tabling of Bill C-51. January 30, 2015.
(3) Gallagher, Ryan & Glenn Greenwald. “Canada casts global surveillance dragnet over file downloads.” (4) Martin, Lawrence. “Mulcair is right to question the politics of terror.” Globe & Mail. January 20, 2015.
(5) Paperny, Anna Mehler. “Are you already violating the feds’ new anti-terror bill?” Global News. January 30, 2015.
(6) Forcese, Craig. Quoted in: “Are you already violating the feds’ new anti-terror bill?” Global News. January 30, 2015.
(7) Payton, Laura. “Rob Andrews still no fan of Nelson Mandela.” CBC News. December 6, 2013.
(8) Henningsen, Patrick. “’Al Queda R Us’: John McCain’s ‘moderate rebels’ in Syria are ISIS.” Global Research. January 24, 2015.
(9) Cockburn, Patrick. “Iraq crisis: How Saudi Arabia helped ISIS take over the north of the country.” The Independent. July, 13, 2014.
Comments
This bill is clearly about political access to information on anyone that could challenge the government. Its one thing to have a tool in which to find terrorists, but when one considers that it is set up with no parliamentary oversight because our elected MPs are not deemed trustworthy enough and then it clearly becomes a tool which can be used for blackmail of opponents, or finding information on them in which to use in election campaigns.
Look at the way the Harper government already attacks their opponents like the succession of liberal leaders, or the so called eco-terrorists as our finance minster calls those that opposed the Gateway pipeline.
In the EU right now they are debating a new law that would make criticism of Israel a form of antisemitism that will legally be classified as terrorism with a penalty of prison. Its part of the fall out from the Rothchilds owned Charlie Hebdo terrorism event in Paris. That should do wonders for putting a chill on free speech in Europe, despite that everyone was marching for protecting free speech.
Harper is building a police state for banksters to hold and control power so they can continue to socialize their loses with governments that buy up their bad debts, while the banksters get ever richer printing money for their own gains that can be used to buy the political system with the insider knowledge of our own intelligence agencies.
Time to hack your neighbours wireless.
“You won’t recognize Canada when I’m through with it,” warned Stephen Harper
The world has changed. Are we going to sit back and hope we don’t get terrorized again or are we going to try to prevent more Canadians being murdered? Nobody likes any erosion of privacy rights, but the fact is that if you want to find out what these guys are up to you have to have the tools to look over their shoulders.
I don’t see any alternative to the bill purposed in the article, just the same old political rhetoric. This is serious problem and we need to have a serious debate to find solutions to deal with it.
From the article: “One thing is very clear. Canadians value their rights to privacy and are concerned when anyone, including government, abuses or intrudes upon these rights.”
This a common bit of rhetoric, but people are eagerly willing to sell their privacy for a price, or even a free app on their smartphones.
Have to agree with JohnnyBelt on this one. Canadians have sold out when it comes to their privacy many many years ago.
1 Video Cameras on every street corner, and store, plus private and police cars.
2. Police having the ability to run your license plate number through their computer system without your knowledge and basically get information on you, even if you have not broken any laws.
3. Any deposits of over $10,000.00 into your bank account is reported to Revenue Canada.
4. Police criminal record checks required before being hired for work, or for some volunteer organizations.
5. Gun Registry
6. We are now in the process of having our drivers licenses and our care cards folded into one. This means that some people will have access to this information, where they did not in the past.
7. Tracking you with your credit cards.
8. If you owe money to the Government for any reason, its reported to ICBC and you cannot renew your license or get insurance until you pay the Government.
It goes on and on. Right back to the day that they required us all to have a Social Insurance Number.
Rather than blame Harper for all this H….S..t. Let come up with some solutions.
Seems having Canadians take an interest in what’s happening in their Country would be a good start.
Anyone who has a smartphone can have their location monitored quite easily via GPS. Canadians may say one thing when it comes to privacy, but their actions (or inactions) speak much differently.
The capitalists hate democracy . Capitalists don’t need democracy . Capitalists can operate in any and all political systems. capitalists have the hardest time operating in real democracies because of rights charters and laws . This is why we are in danger of losing all our rights . Our so called democracy is broken . Want to fix it ? Work for proportional representation .
bill C-51 is scary! especially since the government calls Canadian citizens who oppose the gateway pipeline eco-terrorists. or any one who does not like the changes to our environmental laws= eco-terrorists.
this new bill lets police collect information on people and arrest them without a warrant. if the police ‘think’ you are going to commit a crime or are ‘thinking’ about crime they could arrest you. what is the definition of terrorism ‘generally’? when we toss around this word so freely does it hold its meaning?. the Canadian government changes its name to the Harper government giving us all a clear view of who this government serves… well if you are willing to open your eyes I suppose!
Proportional representation is a loser’s road map into Government. Once there they will join with other elected representatives, and continue to screw us over.
There is no logic that says that a person elected under proportional representation would serve us any better than the present system.
What we need to do, is force the Government to give our elected representatives some authority to look after the concerns of their constituents. The present system gives very little or no power to back benchers.
To change the system would require people to join political parties, and make changes. This is not likely to happen, because believe it or not a great majority of Canadians do not even know that they can join a party and have influence on policy.
To have millions of Canadians complaining on the one hand, but doing absolutely nothing to make any changes, shows just how out of touch with reality Canadians are.
What we have to-day are exchanges of ideas between newspaper articles and bloggers, that somehow gives he impression that people are involved, however in actual fact they are not involved at all.
Using C-51 as an example. How many local yokels, have written a letter to the PM, or to their elected representative complaining about C-51. How many have actually read the bill and know what the hell it is about. How may give a s..t.??
Listen to CBC right now.
“bill C-51 is scary! especially since the government calls Canadian citizens who oppose the gateway pipeline eco-terrorists. or any one who does not like the changes to our environmental laws= eco-terrorists.”
There have been threats of physical harm or haven’t you been paying attention. Who are these NGO’s protesting the pipeline and their financial backers? There is evidence of money coming in from interests such as Russia and Saudi Arabia since the oil sands is competition.
Eagleone you will have to tone down your miss-guided ant-Zionist rhetoric with this bill.
Peter, personal privacy went out the door a long time ago. Eye Spy, Palopu and JB make very good points.
Considering some of the extremist rhetoric coming out of some mosques and the attacks in Canada recently some measures need to be taken. Having said that, intelligence does not seem to stop drugs and guns crossing the border so will added measures on terrorism have any effect, wait and see I guess.
Hey I got an idea, how about we stop helping the U.S. kill foreigners and plunder their resources to suit their own geopolitical economic pursuits? Then maybe these people who’s countrymen and family members we kill won’t feel so aggrieved and feel like they have nothing left to lose and everything to gain by killing westerners. Sounds novel I know, but it just might work. Then you won’t have to strip everyone of their rights and self-respect in a vain attempt to “protect” us from people that by their very nature are almost impossible to stop because they’re willing to give their lives to achieve their goals. What’s worse is they believe that there is a reward waiting for them on the other side of death. How perfect is that? Maybe we should look at our foreign policy, not domestic liberties.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin
Harper needs to go before he completely destroys the fabric of this country. I’d rather our country was headed up by a boy than by a coward.
You do realize the vast fighting and atrocities are between Muslim factions. Been at each others throats since the beginning of time.
Comments for this article are closed.