NCCAR’s Key Points on C-51

The National Council on Canada-Arab Relations (NCCAR) is pleased to share its “Key points and Backgrounders” project to educate and inform about important Canadian policy issues discussed during the 2015 Canadian federal elections.

NCCAR’s Media and Policy Analysis team will be developing non-partisan, educational “Key Points and Backgrounders” accessible to the public on a series of topics such as Canadian policy on Syrian refugees, potential impact of “security” policies as well as foreign policy in the Middle East and the Arab Word. NCCAR will also provide its perspectives on these issues.

These “Key Points and Backgrounders” are featured as part of Your Voice voter education campaign which NCCAR is a partner in along with the Canadian-Arab Institute.

Issue:

The Antiterrorism Act, 2015 (Bill C-51) was passed by the Government of Canada earlier this year to expand Canada’s anti-terror laws.

Background:

As a result of a lone gun man’s terrorist attack on Parliament Hill on October 22, 2014, the government introduced legislation to expand the powers of CSIS and the RCMP, increasing information sharing and creating new Criminal Code for offenses such as promoting terrorism.

Considerations:

What have politicians been saying?

NDP leader Mr. Thomas Mulcair strongly opposed Bill C-51 and has called into question the necessity of many of these measures, suggesting that Canada’s new security legislation is an unnecessary infringement on the civil liberties of Canadians and an overreaction to an isolated attack. Mr. Mulcair offered several amendments to the bill, including oversight of CSIS powers by a body of elected officials. Liberal leader Mr. Justin Trudeau voted in favour of Bill C-51 and specified that his party, if elected to government, would introduce legislation to amend the law to heighten protections for the individual rights of Canadians. Green Party leader Ms. Elizabeth May also said she would present amendments but strongly opposed the bill as it moved Canada towards a police state.

What have commentators and experts been saying in the media?

The concerns expressed have been in the following areas:

1. The use of broad and undefined terms leaves a disproportionate amount of unchecked discretion in the hands of law enforcement.
2. The limits on Charter rights are likely to be challenged in the courts and distract from genuine efforts of law enforcement officials to protect Canada.
3. Community-based programs such as the RCMP’s new counter-extremism initiative, among other progressive programs will likely be undermined and create additional challenges for law enforcement to identify and prevent terror threats.
4. The Antiterrorism Act, 2015 is likely to be selectively applied with the potential to alienate and marginalize Arab Canadians while turning a blind eye to a range of threats to Canada’s national security.

NCCAR’s Perspective:

The implications of the Antiterrorism Act, 2015 as adopted concerns NCCAR. National security and the protection of all Canadians is essential for a thriving democracy. However, national security must be balanced with democratic freedoms while ensuring law enforcement are provided with effective tools which comply with the Charter. Absent time-tested judicial checks and parliamentary oversight, the Antiterrorism Act results in a Faustian bargain that trades away core Canadian values with the potential to alter the fabric of Canada’s democracy by moving towards unchecked state and police powers.

To read the complete document with the Key points and Backgrounder, click here.

Posted on October 01, 2015