Canada

first_imgNews Receive email alerts CanadaAmericas November 11, 2020 Find out more Links:Electronic Frontier CanadaLigue des droits et libertés (in French)Privacy Commissioner of CanadaCommunications Security EstablishmentCanadian Radio-television and Telecommunications CommissionThe C-36 anti-terrorist lawAbout legal access to go further June 18, 2003 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Canada January 15, 2021 Find out more After the 11 September attacks, parliament passed an anti-terrorist law on 18 December 2001 that undermined the principle of protecting journalistic sources. News Organisation “We must impose democratic obligations on the leading digital players”center_img Help by sharing this information News The law amended the Criminal Code, the National Defence Act, the Official Secrets Act and the law about individual freedoms. Changes to the Criminal Code extended electronic surveillance of criminal organisations to cover terrorist groups and police will no longer have to show that such monitoring is a last resort. The decision remains one for a Supreme Court judge to make but the maximum authorised period of it was increased from 60 days to a year.A change in the National Defence Act allows the defence minister to authorise the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) to intercept private communications (including electronic ones) linked to activity defined by the defence minister (chapter 273.65.1). The confidentiality of e-mail communication, and with it the protection of journalistic sources, has clearly been destroyed. The CSE’s rules, however, say it cannot monitor Canadians or people living in Canada.The government began consultations on 25 August 2002 about adapting to new technology various laws allowing legal access by prosecutors to private documents in the interest of the security and welfare of Canadians. It proposed that all ISPs be obliged to ensure they had the technical means to provide legal access to their data by national security officials. In effect, they would have to retain and provide data about their customers.The government noted that the Criminal Code banned deliberate interception of private communications. But, in an attempt to justify possible interception of e-mail messages, it argued that when a message was written down, it was no longer really private, since it could easily fall into the hands of someone else.These views were fiercely attacked by Privacy Commissioner George Radwanski in a report in late January 2003. He accused the government of using the 11 September attacks as an excuse to collect and use more and more data about private individuals. Such measures had no place in a free and democratic society and showed the government’s contempt for privacy, he said On eve of the G20 Riyadh summit, RSF calls for public support to secure the release of jailed journalists in Saudi Arabia Forum on Information and Democracy 250 recommendations on how to stop “infodemics” RSF_en November 19, 2020 Find out more Follow the news on Canada News CanadaAmericas last_img read more