The New Democrats have called on the government to split Bill C-13, arguing that the cyberbullying provisions should be examined separately from the return of lawful access provisions. Somewhat surprisingly, outgoing Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart has expressed support for the government’s decision to include lawful access powers in the bill.
Latest Posts
Government Names Bernier Interim Privacy Commissioner
The federal government has announced that Chantal Bernier will take over as Interim Privacy Commissioner next week with the end of Jennifer Stoddart’s term. The government is currently advertising the position.
Federal Ct Takes CSIS To Task In Case Involving CSEC Requests for Foreign Agency Spying on Canadians
Since the first Snowden revelations earlier this year, there has been much speculation about the use foreign intelligence agencies (such as the NSA) to conduct surveillance on Canadians. While the government is always careful to say that CSEC does not spy on Canadians, many suspect that each of the “five eyes” agencies (the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) do it on their behalf. Yesterday, a federal court judge confirmed the practice as part of a decision that found CSIS “breached its duty of candour to the Court by not disclosing information that was relevant to the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court and to the determination by the Court that the criteria of investigative necessity and the impracticality of other procedures set out in subsection 21 (2) of the CSIS Act had been satisfied.”
The lack of candour appears to arise from the failure to disclose that the CSIS warrants would involve seeking CSEC assistance in requesting foreign interception of Canadian communications:
the Court has determined that the execution of the type of warrants at issue in Canada has been accompanied by requests made by CSEC, on behalf of CSIS, to foreign agencies (members of the “Five Eyes†alliance), for the interception of the telecommunications of Canadian persons abroad.
The Privacy Threats in Bill C-13, Part One: Immunity for Personal Info Disclosures Without a Warrant
The introduction of Bill C-13 – the “cyberbullying bill” with extensive lawful access provisions – has generated considerable discussion on its privacy implications. While many have noted that Justice Minister Peter MacKay took less than a year to retreat from the government’s commitment that “any attempts that we will continue to have to modernize the Criminal Code will not contain the measures contained in C-30”, the question will soon focus on whether the new bill contains any privacy threats in need of reform.
It is certainly true that the government has removed two of the most controversial C-30 provisions by excluding warrantless mandatory disclosure of basic subscriber information and the requirement for telecommunications service providers to build intercept capability within their systems. However, several provisions still featured in the bill are cause for concern. This post focuses on the new safe harbour protections for voluntary disclosure of personal information without a warrant. Posts to follow later this week will examine the lower thresholds for access to metadata and location information.
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 237: A Conversation with Jason Woywada of BCFIPA on Political Party Privacy and Bill C-4 
Lawful Access on Steroids: Why Bill C-2’s Big Brother Tactics Combine Expansive Warrantless Disclosure with Unprecedented Secrecy 
Government Reverses on Privacy and the Charter: Department of Justice Analysis Concludes Political Party Privacy Bill Raises No Charter of Rights Effects 
“Big Brother Tactics”: Why Bill C-2’s New Warrantless Disclosure Demand Powers Extend Far Beyond Internet and Telecom Providers 
Government Seeks To Exempt Political Parties From Privacy Laws Even As CRTC Reports They Are Leading Source of Spam Complaints
