Skip to main content

A vehicle passes a sign outside the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) headquarters in Ottawa November 5, 2014. REUTERS/Chris Wattie (CANADA - Tags: POLITICS CRIME LAW)

CHRIS WATTIE/REUTERS

In the bad old days, before there was CSIS, the RCMP did some dangerously goofy things, such as burning down a barn that belonged to an FLQ terrorist's mother.

In contrast, the "I" for "intelligence" in CSIS was meant to say the new agency would only gather information. It would not, for example, try to discredit radicals by employing agents provocateurs.

Professors Kent Roach and Craig Forcese of the University of Toronto and the University of Ottawa respectively are right to worry about Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Act, and specifically about some of the bill's alarmingly vague wording.

Story continues below advertisement

If the bill become law, CSIS agents may take "measures" to reduce threats; whatever those measures might be, they would go well beyond the collecting of intelligence.

Mr. Roach and Mr. Forcese call these ostensibly threat-reducing measures "kinetic operations" based on a "kinetic power." The word "kinetic" means "having to do with motion." In other words, CSIS is being turned into something other than a government department designed to just observe.

Bill C-51 does require CSIS agents to get the authorization of a judge each time they want to use any of these new, dynamic "measures." But the judges will not be working with long-standing law and criteria when they consider such warrants. The whole context is altered from normal searches for guns and other familiar types of evidence, or electronic interception of common criminals' phone calls – to international politics and religious radicalism.

Mr. Roach and Mr. Forcese have good reason to be concerned. Back in the 1970s, the federal cabinet authorized the Mounties to "deter, prevent and counter individuals and groups" that might be subversive – a role in which they performed clumsily.

The government has spoken of judicially authorized warrants to engage in "disruption," without elaborating on what that means. It's not a stretch to imagine CSIS agents playing James Bond (though without the violation of individuals' sexual integrity, specifically prohibited in the bill), or engaging in provocateur activities and sabotage of computers. It suggests a broad new mandate, of questionable utility or legality.

The new kinetic CSIS could turn out to be the old political RCMP under a new name.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter