Assignment on Government by Bill C51

Bill c-51
Student’s name
Institution Affiliation(s)

"The powers afforded to the federal government by bill C51 are reasonable and necessary
given national security concerns, and do not constitute a violation of the privacy of
Canadian citizens."
Triggered by the threats of terrorism in Canada, Bill C-51 was introduced in early 2015.
The legislation sets out to extend Canada's Anti-terror laws. However, the Bill is not just about
terrorism in particular but granting higher powers to police authorities to target activities,
individuals and groups that could undermine Canada's security as well as events that are harmful
to Canada’s interests. Some argue that it gives the government too much power to choose targets
for scrutiny and violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In summary, Bill C-51
allows information sharing between government institutions to protect against activities that pose
a threat to security; allows the Minister to put Canadians on a “no-fly list”; creates an offense of
advocating or promoting terrorism; and gives powers to the Canadian Security Intelligence
Service to take measures to reduce security threats (Geist, 2015). Bill C-51 cannot be justified in
a democratic society considering the Bill alters Canadian security while risking civil liberties,
including violations of sections of the Canadian Charter Rights and Freedoms, the constitution
and Canadian law. It has worrisome implications in people's freedom of speech and privacy and
cumbers too many liberties in the process (Geist, 2015). A lot of concerns were raised when this
legislation was introduced such as the uncertainty of what kinds of speech and activities are
labeled to be a form of terrorism and threat. The issue raises ethical concerns most especially the
people's right to privacy.
The first section of the bill enacts the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act. The Act
allows government institutions to freely share information with other government institution “in
respect of activities that undermine the security of Canada” (Scotti, 2016). This cannot be

justified in a democratic society because it undermines information privacy. “Activities that
undermine the security of Canada” is extensive and deceptive to our understanding of
information privacy. The Act goes further than just sharing information related to terrorist
activity since there is a wide range of institutions that have access, for example, CSE, Health
Department, Public Safety Agency. The broadness allows for total information sharing,
information obtained for one institution can be shared with independent institutions without the
individual's consent, which can lead to a breach of privacy (Forcese & Roach, 2015). All
provincial privacy commissioners jointly warn that “it could be used to authorize, in effect,
surveillance across governments in Canada, and abroad, for virtually unlimited purposes. Such a
state of affairs would be inconsistent with the rule of law in our democratic state and contrary to
the expectations of Canadians” (Foley, 2018).
Another information technology privacy concern under this Act is that there are no
safeguards to prevent an abuse of power. There are no safeguards put in place to reinforce the
proper use of information sharing for the Canadians. Privacy Commissioner of Canada Daniel
Therrien slammed the bill saying, "the scale of information sharing being proposed is
unprecedented, the scope of the new powers conferred by the Act is excessive, particularly as
these powers affect ordinary Canadians, and the safeguards protecting against unreasonable loss
of information privacy are seriously deficient. While the potential to know virtually everything
about everyone may well identify some new threats, the loss of privacy is excessive. All
Canadians would be caught in this web.”(Roach & Forcese, 2015).
Without proper safeguards, information may be shared improperly and can endanger a
Canadian. For example, say the government institution FINTRAC is investigating a person they
think is funding terrorists. They share this information with other institutions like the CSIS. Later

FINTRAC determines the individual was not funding terrorist but the incorrect information may
still be in other institution's databases and information systems (Scotti, 2016). Without proper
safeguards, the CSIS may arrest or mistreat this individual which is similar to what happened in
the Iacobucci inquiry, where Canadian officials incidentally contributed to the ill-treatment of
three individuals who were in foreign custody when they shared private information about the
detainees which establishes how the Information Sharing Act may threaten Canadians and cannot
be justified in a democratic society (Foley, 2018).
In conclusion, the secretive process of this act may lead to issues concerning information
technology privacy. The sharing of private information is done in secret and without consent.
Victims do not know they are victims, so legal restrictions, like the Charter Rights, are
challenging to enforce. Furthermore, there are no safeguards to enforce legal limit so information
sharing among institutions can be done freely. Privacy is a natural human right and a vital pillar
of a democratic society and the Canadian government should not abuse rights to protect against
terrorism.

References
Foley, R. I. M. (2018). (Mis)representing terrorist threats: Media framing of Bill C-51. Media,
War & Conflict, 11(2), 204–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635217702557
Forcese, C., & Roach, K. (2015, February 13). Bill C-51: The Good, the Bad . . . and the Truly
Ugly. Retrieved February 10, 2020, from The Walrus website: https://thewalrus.ca/bill-c-
51-the-good-the-bad-and-the-truly-ugly/
Geist, M. (2015, February 19). The Disastrous Privacy Consequences of Bill C-51. Retrieved
February 10, 2020, from OpenCanada website: https://www.opencanada.org/features/the-
disastrous-privacy-consequences-of-bill-c-51/
Roach, K., & Forcese, C. (2015). Bill C-51 Backgrounder # 3: Sharing Information and Lost
Lessons from the Maher Arar Experience (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2565886).
Retrieved from Social Science Research Network website:
https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2565886
Scotti, M. (2016, October 13). Does Bill C-51 violate your privacy? Watchdog says new law ‘not
properly evaluated.’ Retrieved February 10, 2020, from Global News website:
https://globalnews.ca/news/2966418/does-bill-c-51-violate-your-privacy-watchdog-
addresses-new-law-in-annual-report/