The UK government has published the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill ahead of its first reading in the House of Commons, scheduled for today. It includes several measures that have civil rights activists concerned.
Among them is the ability to temporarily exclude British citizens from returning home if they have been suspected of engaging in terrorists activities outside of the UK. This could leave some UK nationals stateless while overseas.
Another concern regards forcing internet providers to retain more identifying data to provide to the government for anti-terrorism purposes.
Other issues involve the ability to cancel passports at the border for up to 30 days, a ban on insuring ransoms, requiring more data from airlines, mandating anti-radicalization measures from educational institutions, and greater control on the domestic movements of suspected terrorists.
David Anderson, QC, the independent review of terrorism legislation (and appointed by the government), voiced his concern over the bill.
“The concern I have about this power and the central concern about it is: where are the courts in all of this? …One could look at it in terms of young, possibly vulnerable people caught up with the wrong crowd in Syria – didn’t really know exactly what they were doing… Do you want to throw the book at them straight away in terms of arrest and charge? Or is there something to be said, even though you do suspect them of having fought, of keeping them under a very light regime where they might have to report daily to a police station? They might have to notify [of] their residence; they might have to go along to meetings with probation or with some similar which perhaps might be for some people be a more sensible way of dealing with them than putting them straight into the criminal justice process.”
For more details of the bill and its specific concerns, see here.
The latest development in the Conservative “Touch on Crime” approach is the Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act. Bill C-26 had it’s second reading in the House as of November 20th 2014.
Read the rest of this entry »
A case was heard at the UK Court of Appeal last week that could determine whether drinking while pregnant constitutes criminal negligence.
The case is on behalf of a six year old girl with fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS). While an administrative decision ruled that her FAS was a direct result of her mother’s drinking during the pregnancy, the girl was denied access to compensation from the Criminal Injuries Authority. They are now arguing on her behalf that the mother’s behaviour fulfills all the elements of the offence of criminal negligence so she can be deemed eligible for victim’s compensation.
If it is ruled in her favour, the decision risks criminalizes any woman who imbibes while pregnant. There are fears that the criminalization could extend to any amount of alcohol, despite any absent of damage. It could also be extended to drug-use during pregnancy. It may even eventually extend to criminalizing all sorts of behaviours, such as eating sushi or drinking caffeine.
Read the rest of this entry »
Bill C-43 the Omnibus budget Bill sponsored by Conservative Joe Oliver had its second reading in the house on October 31st 2014. The changes to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program would give the government the power to list employers who are found to be in violation of federal immigration rules. This is found in Division 24 of the Bill some of which is excerpted below:
Read the rest of this entry »
Earlier this week, a two day sentencing hearing commenced in Moncton for Justin Bourque, the 24-year old who pleaded guilty to 3 counts of first-degree murder in connection with the deaths of 3 police officers in Moncton earlier this year.
CBC has reported that as a result of a change of Criminal Code sentencing laws in 2011, the ineligibility period of parole for Bourque for these convictions may be as high as 75 years. Crown prosecutor Cameron Gunn is reported to be seeking the maximum parole ineligibility period, whereas defence attorney David Lutz has argued for a parole ineligibility period of 50 years. In argument, Lutz stated that anything besides 50 years would be academic as Bourque would be 99 before being eligible for parole under the maximum ineligibility period. More can be read on these proceedings here.
Today in an interview with the CBC, St. Thomas University criminology professor Karla O’Regan weighed in on the sentencing hearing and called for a more methodological and uniform approach to criminal justice sentencing rather than basing it on potent emotions and reactions of fear. Her entire interview can be seen here.
The UK prison system is under fire this month after a comprehensive report was released.
The report details a 69% rise in self-inflicted deaths in prison in just one year, totaling 88. One article cites 125 suicides in 20 months, averaging on 6 suicides a month. The report also details a 14% rise in prisoner-on-prisoner assault, including a 38% rise in serious assault among adult male prisoners. Additionally, it lists a rising problem with drugs.
The report blames overcrowding as the root cause of the problem. The prison system is currently using 99% of “the usable operational capacity”. One group also attributes the problems to massive budget cuts. While the numbers are uncertain, between 27 and 41% of prison jobs have been cut since the election of the Cameron government. Meanwhile, employees who have spoken publicly about the safety implications these job cuts have created are allegedly being reprimanded and may loose their jobs.
For more, see here.
Quebec’s student uprising in the spring and summer of 2012, the Maple Spring, brought new laws and protest response tactics that resulted in hundreds of protestors experiencing fines, detention and arrest. Now, Quebec courts may be feeling the strain.
On October 23, 2014, a municipal court in Montreal dismissed the cases of 75 self-represented litigants who were fined and detained at a protest in April 2012. Judge Gilles Pelletier’s decision rested on the fact that such fines, handed out in large quantities, were creating unreasonable delays in the system. Without a plan provided by the Crown to end the cases within a reasonable time period, Judge Pelletier found the massive resources and time required to process the tickets to be unjustifiable.
The 75 litigants in question had been fined under Montreal bylaw P-6, which was amended during the Maple Spring to allow police to fine protestors wearing masks or people gathering for a protest where the itinerary had not been provided to police.
P-6 continues to be a controversial. In August 2014, the Quebec Superior Court authorized eight class action law suits against the City of Montreal involving police response to protests. The class in question includes over 1600 protestors who were ticketed and claim to have been mistreated by police.
In February 2014, The Guardian reported that the Australian Department of Immigration and Border Protection (Department) accidentally released the personal information of 10,000 people seeking asylum in Australia. Asylum seekers’ full names, nationalities, location, and arrival date were inadvertently posted on the Department’s public website. The egregious mistake has been labelled as “one of the most serious privacy breaches in Australia’s history.” The breach raised serious questions regarding the possibility of asylum seekers falling prey to retributive actions if they returned to their countries of origin.
In addition to security issues, the breach highlights the Department’s failure to adhere to privacy laws. Australia’s Privacy Act regulates the government’s collection, use, disclosure, and storage of personal information. One of the guiding principles of the Privacy Act requires government organizations in possession of personal information to “take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to protect the information… from unauthorised access, modification or disclosure.” In a statement reported by the The Guardian, the Department acknowledged that the personal information was “vulnerable to unauthorised access,” and internal investigations were ongoing.
Following the breach, several asylum seekers applied to the Federal Circuit Court for orders preventing their deportation and mandating that the security breach be considered when their claims for asylum were processed. The Federal Circuit Court delivered conflicting judgments pertaining to the privacy breaches. Appeals from the Federal Circuit Court judgments were heard together on Friday, October 24, 2014.
The Guardian reported that the Federal Court held that the appeals should be allowed for two of the claimants and the matter was referred back to the Federal Circuit Court. The Federal Court also determined that the Minister of Immigration was obliged to pay costs. The Federal Court Judges took the opportunity to criticize the Minister’s handling of the privacy breach. In particular, the Federal Court was critical of a letter sent to asylum seekers stating that the Department would examine the privacy breach’s impact on the claimants “as part of its normal processes.” However, the Minister’s counsel conceded during the appeal that there was, in fact, no “normal processes” in place.
The written judgment, while not available at the time this article was posted, will be published here in due course.
Police in New Zealand have begun deploying advanced roadside technology called the Booze Bus Biometrics (BBB) system to better identify drunk drivers.
According to Police Minister Michael Woodhouse, “The BBB system will enable police to confirm, within minutes, the identities of people in the system that they intend to charge with drink-driving offences by electronically scanning fingerprints, taking digital photographs and comparing the data to existing police records.”
The stated purpose of this new tool is to aid in identifying high-risk drivers and recidivist drunk drivers at the roadside so that police will be able to respond quickly and appropriately to the circumstances, and to ensure alleged offenders are charged appropriately from the outset.
Following a trial of the BBB system in Wellington earlier this year, the new technology is set to be installed in all 21 of the police’s booze buses by the end of November.
Under the new biometrics system police claim that will only able to keep the data they collect if an offender is convicted.
However, with new police capabilities comes the risk of abuse. Due to the ease of use of this new technology police may use it to unnecessarily intrude on the privacy of more innocent drivers than before in their mission to catch drunk drivers.
Read more here.
Public Safety Minister Stephen Blaney will table a bill when Parliament returns next week to expand the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s powers. The legislation is a response to the growing number of Canadian citizens traveling abroad to fight for extremist groups like ISIS, as well as a Supreme Court decision in May that declined to grant a class privilege to CSIS informants.
The bill is expected to contain three key provisions:
Read the rest of this entry »