About a week ago, Canada introduced Bill C-2. Officially known as the Strong Borders Act, the legislation has sparked debate regarding its potential impact on privacy, civil liberties, and sweeping powers.
While the government says that the bill is designed to combat organized crime and drug trafficking and enhance immigration system integrity, critics argue that in its pursuit of security, it erodes fundamental privacy rights, undermines civil liberties, and grants government agencies unprecedented authority with insufficient oversight.
For one, the Strong Borders Act is omnibus, proposing amendments to numerous acts, including the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Oceans Act, the Criminal Code, and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act (CSIS Act), among others. This expansive nature raises concerns about inadequate parliamentary scrutiny, as such rules often bypass the detailed review that more focused legislation would receive.
Eroding Privacy and Expanding Surveillance Powers
One of the most contentious aspects of Bill C-2 is its potential impact on digital privacy and government surveillance. There are “lawful access” provisions buried within the legislation that appear to grant law enforcement and intelligence agencies easier access to internet subscriber information and communications.
Warrantless Access Concerns: The bill reportedly makes it easier for agencies like the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) to access basic subscriber information, such as IP addresses and personal data, potentially without a warrant in “urgent” circumstances. This directly challenges previous Supreme Court of Canada rulings that affirmed a reasonable expectation of privacy in such data.
Electronic Service Provider Obligations: C-2 proposes obliging “electronic service providers” (e.g., internet providers, social media platforms) to ensure they can fully comply with requests to access or intercept communications. While the government assures no “backdoors” into encryption will be required, I must say that the document’s language around defining “encryption” could pave the way for such mandates in the future, compromising secure communications.
Expanded Mail Searches: The legislation also reportedly amends the Canada Post Corporation Act, removing barriers that prevent police from searching mail and expanding Canada Post’s own inspection authority to open letter mail.
Impact on Asylum Seekers and Immigration Rights
The bill’s proposed changes to Canada’s immigration and asylum system have drawn sharp condemnation from human rights groups, who describe them as a significant rollback of protections:
Arbitrary Deadlines for Asylum Claims: C-2 introduces new ineligibility measures for asylum claims, notably a one-year deadline for individuals to claim asylum after arriving in Canada, and a 14-day deadline for those entering irregularly from the United States by land. Critics argue these arbitrary time limits ignore the often complex and traumatic circumstances faced by asylum seekers and could lead to vulnerable individuals being unjustly denied protection, potentially in violation of international human rights law.
Government Power to Cancel Documents: A particularly alarming provision grants the government broad authority to cancel, suspend, or modify groups of immigration documents (such as visas, work permits, or permanent resident cards) in the “public interest,” including for reasons related to national security or public health. This power could lead to mass cancellations, suspensions of new applications, or pauses in processing existing ones, introducing immense uncertainty and potential financial ruin for applicants without clear recourse or compensation.
Increased Information Sharing: The bill facilitates wider sharing of personal information of individuals immigrating to Canada with other government departments and even foreign entities, raising significant data privacy concerns for newcomers.
Overreach and Lack of Oversight
Beyond specific provisions, critics express fundamental concerns about governmental overreach and a lack of independent oversight embedded within C-2. For instance, the Canadian Coast Guard will double as a security force with new powers to conduct security patrols and collect intelligence. However, there is no independent oversight or review body for these expanded security functions.
Meanwhile, the broad and undefined nature of “public interest” as a basis for cancelling immigration documents grants significant discretionary power to the Cabinet, raising fears that this could be used for political purposes or to target specific groups.
In general, many see the asylum reforms as an attempt to align Canada’s immigration policies more closely with those of the United States, which have historically been criticized for their restrictiveness.
In conclusion, civil society organizations, including the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG), Amnesty International Canada, and the Migrant Rights Network, have unequivocally called on the government to withdraw Bill C-2. They argue that if genuine border security concerns exist, the government should introduce targeted legislation developed through full consultation with experts in civil liberties, privacy, and immigration and refugee rights.
PIVX. Your Rights. Your Privacy. Your Choice.
To stay on top of PIVX news please visit PIVX.org and Discord.PIVX.org.