After facing questions from the NDP Opposition about how far he has authorized Ottawa’s top secret eavesdropping spy agency to go, a terse Conservative Defence Minister Peter MacKay left the Commons, telling the Star: “We don’t target Canadians, okay.”
A former Liberal solicitor general says that doesn’t mean other allied spy agencies don’t collect information on Canadians and share it with the Canadian spying establishment.
Liberal MP Wayne Easter, who was minister responsible for the spy agency CSIS in 2002-03, told the Star that in the post-9/11 era a decade ago it was common for Canada’s allies to pass on information about Canadians that they were authorized to gather but Ottawa wasn’t.
The practice was, in effect, a back-door way for sensitive national security information to be shared, not with the government, but Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC) and, if necessary, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS).
The CSEC, an agency that is rarely in the public eye, has far-reaching national security powers to monitor and map electronic communication signals around the globe.
It is forbidden by law to target or direct its spying on Canadians regardless of their location anywhere in the world, or at any person in Canada regardless of their nationality.
The National Defence Act says CSE may, however, unintentionally intercept Canadians’ communications, but must protect their privacy in the use and retention of such “intercepted information.” The agency’s “use” of the information is also restricted to cases where it is “essential to international affairs, defence or security.”
CSEC’s job is to aid federal law enforcement and security agencies, including the military, in highly sensitive operations. It was a key component of Canadian operations in Afghanistan, for example.
The ultra-secret agency was thrust into the spotlight Monday following last week’s reports the U.S. government operates a sweeping electronic monitoring program of all telecommunications in the U.S., and a Globe and Mail report Monday that CSE had briefly halted but renewed, under ministerial authorization, its own broad signals intelligence gathering activity that tracks “metadata.”
That means the who, where, and when of telecommunications exchanges, but not the what — the actual content of what is said or written.
MacKay assured the Commons the CSEC, which comes under the defence minister’s portfolio, is “very much directed at activities outside the country, foreign threats.”
Sukanya Pillay, the National Security Director with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said news about the “mass grabs of information” raises concerns about whether the collection of such data bypasses Canadian privacy safeguards and leads to erroneous profiling.
“We are also concerned that information may be being shared among countries in a manner that provides the recipient country with information it could not itself lawfully have collected on its own citizens,” she said.
“Although we understand info sharing is a crucial aspect to counterterrorism it must be done in a manner compliant with Canadian Charter and international legal standards.”
Easter said that Canada’s foreign allies and their security agencies would scan global intelligence signals and would be “looking for key words on Canadians as well . . . and they’d give it to the Canadian agencies, yeah,” said Easter.
“That’s exactly what happens.”
Easter said the international arrangements did not allow for a broad targeting of, for example, a media reporter speaking to a confidential source, but would focus on specific activity of global concern such as “terrorism, crime or sex offenders.”
He has no doubt “things have changed” in both the spy business and the more sophisticated terrorist networks in the decade since 9/11, but Easter now thinks that, given the magnitude of security issues, it is more critical than ever to have “some kind of political oversight, beyond just the ministers.” He thinks the idea of a parliamentary oversight committee should be revisited.
Members would be sworn to secrecy but would provide a deeper measure of public confidence in the process, said Easter.
He added MacKay was once a proponent of such oversight when he studied the issue along with Easter on a past Commons committee looking at national security issues.
“There is a danger of using the guise of security to basically spy on your own for reasons other than security. I think there’s always a risk there. And governments nationally and internationally have to ensure they’ve got the balance.”
MacKay insisted Monday there is “rigorous oversight” of the agency’s activities through the CSE commissioner’s office. He cited the watchdog’s most recent report that CSE “activities were authorized and carried out in accordance with the law, ministerial requirements, and CSE’s policies and procedures.”
But it did little to quell opposition concerns and those of Canada’s federal privacy watchdog.
Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart’s office issued a statement Monday saying developments in the U.S. and here have raised “significant concerns” about the scope of information being collected.
Stoddart acknowledged that at this stage she, too, is at a loss to really know whether any lines have been crossed.
“Based on the limited information we have, it is difficult to assess the merit of the allegations and how American law may apply to the situation.”
Stoddart said that while there are clear privacy implications for such operations, it is also a highly specialized area that her office lacks expertise in.
“We plan to express our concerns to and seek information from the commissioner of the Communication Security Establishment to determine how the personal information of Canadians may be affected,” said a release from Stoddart’s office.
She said she will also connect with her international counterparts in data protection “who may share similar concerns about the personal information of their citizens to discuss combining fact finding efforts on this matter as appropriate.”
NDP critic Jack Harris called MacKay’s answers “obtuse.”
“I’m concerned about the same thing that everybody who knows about this is concerned about, whether it be in Britain or the U.S. or in Canada — what personal information about Canadians or citizens does the government collect, and is it appropriate they do that without the authority of the courts, through PRISM or on its own.”
“What are the directives? What information are they collecting? What are they doing with it?” asked Harris, saying Canadians’ privacy “shouldn’t be infringed upon without lawful authority.”
Original Article
Source: thestar.com
Author: Tonda MacCharles
No comments:
Post a Comment