If a receiving institution amasses everything that is known by the government about an individual, regardless of how that information was obtained, that same institution will have the capacity to piece together the bits of seemingly unrelated pieces of information to create an invasive profile of Canadian citizens.įinally, intelligence-to-evidence has been a historic concern for national security agencies (see Craig Forcese, Intelligence Swords and Shields in Canadian Law).
The amount of information that the government collects on citizens is substantial and raises concerns for the meta-analysis of data. Second, review and oversight of what information is being collected by receiving institutions is difficult (see Craig Forcese and Kent Roach, False Security: The Radicalization of Canadian Anti-Terrorism (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2015) at 140). This means that a plethora of private information that the Canadian government possesses about individuals must be protected even when it is no longer in the individual’s possession. Privacy interests do not evaporate once in the possession of a third party. Justice Moldaver stated that, “there is a residual and continuing expectation of privacy in wiretap information that persists even after it has been lawfully collected” (at para 40). In that decision, the Court held that disclosing to a foreign body information that had already been lawfully obtained by a search warrant nevertheless raised s 8 privacy concerns. Wakeling also indicates that section 8 privacy interests persist when the information is no longer in the individual’s possession. The Supreme Court’s reasoning in R v Wakeling, 2014 SCC 72 (CanLII), is particularly salient to when shared information will be protected by the Charter. Personal information triggers section 8 of the Charter, which protects the individual’s right to be secure against an unreasonable search and seizure by the government. First, information obtained by disclosing government institutions ( SCISA, s 1) is often personal in nature. There are three main concerns about information sharing within government bodies that we have identified. This part introduces key concerns that follow sharing information, reviews the current and proposed regime, and suggests an alternative. The SCISA/SCIDA’s treatment of different types of information is problematic. Each part of this post includes not only critiques but also proposed solutions to the various problems surveyed. Similar areas of concern are mentioned in Part III relating to recipient institutions. Part II addresses concerns related to disclosing institutions and how they function with regard to information sharing. Part I argues that treating all types of information as the same, as the SCISA does, is problematic. We discuss some of these problems in three parts. Beyond the existing critiques, the proposed amendments in Bill C-59 still do not address significant problems. Rather, our focus is on novel problems with the SCISA and the proposed amendments in Bill C-59 that have largely gone unaddressed. This post does not intend to canvass the issues afresh. The majority of the criticisms that are associated with Bill C-59 and SCISA/SCIDA in particular are the threshold for sharing information, the overbreadth of the exception, circularity, and a lack of review. Experts in the field of national security law in Canada have pointed to weaknesses that are not being addressed in the SCISA (see Craig Forcese and Kent Roach, A report card on the national security bill).
Among a host of other national security changes, this Bill proposes to make amendments to SCISA, which will become the Security of Canada Information Disclosure Act ( SCIDA), Bill C-59, s 114. Bill C-59, An Act Respecting National Security, 1st Sess, 42nd Parl, 2017 (first reading 20 June 2017) is currently in Committee (SECU). SCISA gave Government of Canada Institutions the power to share information in their possession with listed receiving institutions. On August 1 st, 2015, the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act, SC 2015, c 20 ( SCISA) came into force by Bill C-51, 2nd Sess, 41st Parl, 2015 (assented to 18 June 2015). Policy Commented On: Bill C-59, An Act Respecting National Security Matters
Nick scida pdf#
PDF Version: Proposed Security of Canada Information Sharing Act Amendments By: Ben Allison, Lindsay Kvellestad, and Wajeeha Sattar
0 kommentar(er)
