Canadian Bar Association Denounces Bill C-51

[Romero]

The Canadian Bar Association says the Conservative government's anti-terrorism bill contains "ill-considered" measures that will deprive Canadians of liberties without increasing their safety.



The bar association objects to the planned transformation of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service into an agency that could actively disrupt terror plots.



It argues the bill's overly broad language would capture legitimate activity, including environmental and aboriginal protests.



The association wants a sunset clause that would see the bill expire and trigger a parliamentary review no more than five years after its passage.



The association, which represents more than 36,000 lawyers across Canada, released a draft summary of its concerns today.



Association representatives are scheduled to appear before the House of Commons committee studying the bill next week.



http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/03/20/canadian-bar-association-_n_6913178.html">//http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/03/20/canadian-bar-association-_n_6913178.html

Committing terrorism and conspiring to commit terrorism are already illegal. How would C-51 stop terrorism? How would it have stopped the Ottawa shootings and the Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu hit-and-run?

[RW]

I wish them luck.  At the same time, it almost seems counter intuitive for those who stand to profit from "ill-considered measures" to be opposing them.  Maybe lawyers aren't so terrible after all.

[Romero]

First, the bill permits information-sharing across government for an incredibly wide range of purposes, most of which have nothing to do with terrorism. The government has tried to justify the provisions on the grounds that Canadians would support sharing information for national security purposes -- but the bill allows sharing for reasons that would surprise and disturb most Canadians.



Second, the scope of sharing is exceptionally broad, covering 17 government institutions with government granting itself the right to expand sharing to other departments. In fact, the bill even permits further disclosure "to any person, for any purpose." In other words, there are few limits on how information the government collects can be shared internally, with other governments, or with any entity it sees fit.



Third, oversight is indeed a problem since the privacy protections found in the Privacy Act are widely viewed as being already outdated. In fact, Bill C-51 effectively neuters the core protections found in the Privacy Act by opening the door to the very kind of information-sharing that the law is intended to prevent.



In recent weeks, all privacy commissioners from across the country have spoken out. For example, Privacy Commissioner of Canada Daniel Therrien, appointed by the government less than a year ago and described as an expert by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, slammed the bill in a submission to the Standing Committee on Public Safety.



All provincial privacy commissioners have offered a similar analysis, jointly calling on the government to withdraw the information sharing aspects of the bill.



http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/michael-geist/canada-anti-terror-bill_b_6910530.html">//http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/michael-geist/canada-anti-terror-bill_b_6910530.html