|
|
December 2010 e-bulletin
December 21st, 2010
This is the last issue of our e-bulletin for 2010. This past year has been a very busy one for our organization. If you’re a CCLA member, you should now have received your copy of our biannual newsletter, NewsNotes. It’s also available as a PDF document on our website – http://ccla.org/2010/12/15/winter-2010-newsnotes
Speaking of which, I hope you will visit our newly redesigned website – please let us know what you think and send us your feedback. We are striving to make the website clearer, more accessible, and always with up-to-date, quality content.
Expect more from CCLA in January 2011, as we prepare to launch a report with the National Union of Public and General Employees regarding G20 political and police accountability. Nearly 60 testimonials from our November public hearings are available on the website in MP3 format, and I recommend you listen to some of their stories to deepen your understanding of what happened in June in Toronto.
Finally, if you haven’t done so already, I invite you to make a contribution to CCLA, or our public education and research arm, the Canadian Civil Liberties Education Trust. Our work is possible only because of your support, and we are grateful for your generosity.
Warm wishes for the holidays,
Nathalie Des Rosiers
General Counsel
In this issue:
CCLA participates in meeting of International Network of Civil Liberties Organizations
|
|
|
CCLA participated in a workshop for a network of international civil liberties groups in Washington DC from December 15th-17th, 2010. The network includes CCLA, the American Civil Liberties Union, and civil liberties groups leading the fight for rights and justice in Ireland, Kenya, Egypt, Argentina, the United Kingdom, South Africa, Hungary, and Israel.
CCLA presented its work on issues including G20 and policing, anti-discrimination, freedom of expression, and national security. Discussion topics included the threats to privacy rights in the face of increased international surveillance and information-sharing in the name of national security; militarization of security forces; xenophobia and challenges to civil liberties; freedom of expression and rights of protest; and the criminal justice system and protection of rights.
Members of the Network met with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and high-level members of her team, to discuss key civil liberties issues. CCLA General Counsel Nathalie Des Rosiers spoke about the need for legal safeguards and key privacy protections in Canada-US aviation security measures; the need to uphold rule of law and international legal commitments in counter-terrorism initiatives.
|
CCLA reacts to Wikileaks
|
|
| Wikileaks presents itself as the Robin Hood of governmental information, publishing widely documents from the U.S. Department of State, documents which had not been made public and that embarrassed many. Although many would object to the tactic and fear that individuals could be put at risk by such disclosure, it does not appear that Wikileaks did anything illegal. Although the documents may have been obtained illegally and in breach of obligations of confidentiality, but the publication of such documents is not an illegal action and would be protected by freedom of expression. VISA, Pay Pals and other companies have withdrawn their service to Wikileaks, seeking to effectively shut it down. A internet guerrilla is unleashed with cyberattacks now on Visa and PayPal.
We should worry about such overreaction to the Wikileaks affair: governments often seek to operate in secrecy and they could use Wikileaks as an excuse to further restrict the information that they made available to the public. This would be the wrong reaction. Furthermore, the withdrawing of financial services from a group that is not doing anything illegal is equally problematic for a free society : what criteria will VISA and PAypal use to determine when they want to breach a contractual arrangement and no longer offer services to a website? Indeed, our reliance on a small group of financial companies to operate websites and obtain donations suggests a real vulnerability for groups critical of governments and of corporate interests. Will VISA of PayPal become the new censors? The Wikileaks affair will be analysed in multiple of ways. Let’s hope that it does not bring about more secrecy and less critical public debate.
|
| Bill C-17 and the Anti-Terrorism Act |
|
|
After the September 11, 2001 attacks in the U.S., Canada passed the Anti-Terrorism Act (“ATA”). Two provisions of the ATA were subject to a sunset clause, and expired on December 31, 2006. Bill C-17 seeks to ‘resurrect’ these sections of the ATA, and is currently before Parliament.
The two sections would allow for (1) investigative hearings, and (2) for preventative arrest. “Investigative hearings” means that a person can be forced to provide testimony. “Preventative arrest” means a person who has not committed a crime, will be detained because there is a “reasonable belief” they may commit a crime.Detention can be ordered for up to 12 months.
CCLA believes the Government has a duty to protect national security; the threat of terrorist acts is real. CCLA also believes that all Government actions must comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; this means that any actions which violate Charter rights must be proven to be “justified” in a free and democratic society.
There is little evidence that Bill C-17 actually has any potential to help police in their investigations or abilities to prevent a terrorist act. Indeed, the provisions were almost never used while they were in force.However, Bill C-17 has the potential to violate the rights of liberty, privacy, due process, fair trial, and equality, in a manner that may not be legally justifiable under the Charter.
CCLA will be providing written submissions to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, and will make these submissions available on our website. We will also continue to monitor the progress of Bill C17 and keep you informed.
|
| Religion and expression in the schools |
|
CCLA has recently been involved in a number of civil liberties issues facing students in our schools. On the freedom of expression front, CCLA became aware of the situation facing a grade 12 student at a Toronto high school. The student, Emil Cohen, was disciplined for a speech he made at an athletics assembly that was critical of the way in which the school treated the soccer team. Although Emil’s speech was not threatening or defamatory, and did not contain crude or offensive language, his speech was cut short, he received a two-day suspension, and he had his physical education privileges revoked for the rest of the school year.
CCLA wrote to Emil’s principal urging her to reconsider this decision and pointing out the importance of encouraging expression and critical thinking in the schools. Some of his classmates also organized a rally just outside of the school to support Emil’s right to free speech. The case received a significant amount of media coverage and the school subsequently decided to reinstate Emil’s physical education privileges. While CCLA continues to believe that the suspension should be removed from Emil’s record, we were pleased to see students standing up for their rights and the school responding.
An issue that always ignites controversy, in or outside the classroom, is religion.CCLA recently wrote to the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) about a policy and recent decision to allow Gideons International to distribute the Gideon Bible to those fifth grade students whose parents sign a consent form.CCLA has serious concerns about this practice, which may have the effect of suggesting that Christianity is endorsed or in some way preferred by the school or the school board. The distribution of the Bible also brings proselytization into the classroom, contrary to the Charter’s guarantee of freedom of religion. While the CCLA supports the rights of schools to teach about religious topics, indoctrination and proselytization have no place in a public school system. CCLA is contemplating taking legal action against the WRDSB.
Finally, CCLA will be seeking leave to intervene in the case of S.L. v. Commission Scolaire des Chênes, a case which considers whether parents have the right to exempt their children from Quebec’s mandatory Ethics and Religious Culture curriculum. The case is expected to be heard in the Supreme Court of Canada in May of 2011 and will consider the role of both public schools and parents in the religious education of young people. Watch for more updates about this case early in 2011.
Religion et expression dans les écoles.
|
Immigration and social welfare
|
|
A man sponsored his mother who was alone in Russia and not doing well, to come to Canada under the immigration law, signing the obligatory undertaking that he be responsible for her financial needs. Unfortunately, he fell on hard times, lost his job and had to rely on social benefits. His financial situation was so poor, that he could not support his mother. A case worker noticing his mother’s disability, recommended that she also receive disability benefits, but did not inform her son that he would be responsible to repay them.
Five years later, despite the man’s extremely low income of $7,763 per year, he received a demand from the government to repay the $26,000 in benefits that his mother had received. This demand not only placed enormous financial and psychological pressure on him, but it also violated the government’s own policy of not enforcing demands against people under the Low Income Cut Off line.
Furthermore, this man had in the interim married a Russian citizen. But as he was now considered in “default” of his sponsorship to his mother, he was prohibited from sponsoring his wife to come to Canada, even though she was pregnant at the time.
This is just one of the unfortunate stories that emerges from the case of Attorney General of Canada, et al. v. Pritpal Singh Mavi, et al. concerning similar governmental demands that sponsors pay for social assistance benefits, regardless of the circumstances. Other stories involve women who sponsored parents and siblings, but were later forced to flee marriages due to cruelty or violence and were left in very difficult financial circumstances; sponsors whose familial relationships broke down and believed their relatives were no longer in Canada, only to receive demands for payment years later; and sponsors whose own income was so low that they were unable to pay for their family members’ social assistance benefits.
CCLA intervened before the Supreme Court of Canada, stating that there needs to be a fair procedure, an opportunity for sponsors to have their stories heard and their circumstances taken into consideration, and decent government policy that would not leave individuals destitute. The case is now on reserve.
|
CCLA continues to push for G20 accountability
|
|
CCLA continues to be actively involved in the various reviews of G20 policing that are currently underway. Over the past few months, we have made submissions to the review of the Public Works Protection Act being conducted by the Honorable Roy McMurtry and the systemic review of G20 policing being conducted by Ontario’s Office of the Independent Police Review Director. Our submissions have focussed on the many policing excesses that occurred during the G20 Summit, the legal and policy failings that are responsible for these excesses and the need to restore public faith in the police. We are hopeful that these processes will make a significant contribution to promoting both accountability and policy changes in the wake of the G20 Summit.
CCLA also recently welcomed the Ontario Ombudsman’s report titled Caught in the Act, which examines the role of the Public Works Protection Act in G20 policing and makes several recommendations about its future use in Ontario. Since the release of the report, CCLA has called upon the Ontario government to implement its recommendations, which we believe would reign in the Act’s potential to intrude on civil liberties. CCLA has long-objected to the manner in which the PWPA was used in relation to the G20 Summit. In particular, we have denounced the secrecy surrounding the unprecedented adoption of a Regulation under the Act that increased the authority of police to search and demand identification from private individuals. We are pleased that Ombudsman’s report has endorsed this view and will be closely monitoring this situation to ensure that his recommendations are implemented.
|
|
|
