Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Sunday, February 19, 2012

'Gag order' in Internet snooping bill prevents Canadians from knowing whether personal information is handed to authorities

A "gag order" written into the government's proposed Internet snooping bill makes it an offence for telecommunication companies to tell customers whether their personal information has been handed over to investigators, police or government, according to one privacy lawyer.

The contentious and dense piece of legislation intends to make it easier for government and law enforcement authorities to get warrantless access to personal information of any Canadian using the Internet, under the pretence of protecting children from online predators.

The law would compel Internet service providers to hand over a person's name and home and emailing addresses to the government, RCMP, CSIS or even the Competition Bureau. But that individual has no right to know their information was tapped -- even long after an investigation has been closed.

The "gag order," as a leading privacy lawyer called it, is contained in Section 23 of Bill C-30. The paragraph is very technical and references provisions of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.

"Under that law, if an individual asks about a disclosure of their information, the commercial entity -- so in this case the telecommunications companies -- can not disclose it unless the RCMP, CSIS or whoever gives express permission. It would be an offence for the company to hand over that information," said David Fraser. "That's a gag order."

Fraser, who is partner with the McInnes Cooper firm in Nova Scotia, suggested this provision could violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- but the gag order would prevent a Canadian from ever knowing their rights were violated.

"So you're never going to have standing to challenge it," he said.

The only way someone would find out their information was disclosed under C-30 is if they become a defendant in a criminal trial where the information is used, he explained.

"The only people who are going to hear about this ever happening are the people who end up in court because of child exploitation or other nasty sorts of things," he said. "Nobody with clean hands who might have had their information inappropriately disclosed will find out. So, nobody with clean hands will be able to bring (the violation)to court."

Analysts, lawyers, security experts and MPs on both sides of the House of Commons have criticized the bill for overreaching and invading the privacy of Canadians.

Under current laws, Internet service providers hand over customer name and address information without a warrant in about 95 per cent of cases involving exploitation investigations, said Michael Geist, a University of Ottawa law professor who holds a Canada Research Chair in Internet and e-commerce law.

The shift towards "warrantless access" is one of the professor's main concerns with the proposed legislation, he said during an appearance on The West Block with Tom Clark.

"Mandatory disclosure of that information really strikes at a bedrock principle of privacy," Geist said. "That, for me, is the top issue, but there are others. Because what's ultimately happening here is that we are truly reshaping the Internet in Canada, creating a full-surveillance infrastructure."

Once that happens, he said, there's no undoing it.

"Once we install surveillance capabilities, there will be no way to take them away."

Matt Torigian of the Waterloo Regional Police Force and a representative of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police said it's high time the surveillance laws are updated.

"We need legislation that is current," he said on The West Block with Tom Clark. "Some of the legislation we have that provides the investigative tools necessary to capture some of the most serious offenders in the country were written at a time during rotary phones."

Source: global news
Author: Tom Clarck

No comments:

Post a Comment