‘
4
;

By PASCAL ST. PAUL
Remember the McDonald Commis-
sion? This Royal Commission in-

vestigated ‘‘certain activities of the
Royal Canadian Mounted Police.”’ Al-
though the Commission was considered
at the time to be too biased toward the
federal Liberal Party and the federal
government, it nevertheless had to state
in its voluminous report that a serious
house cleaning had to be made in the
RCMP’s security service in order to pre-
vent a repetition of illegal acts (stealing
membership lists of political parties and
popular organizations, arson, etc.) or
questionable acts (intimidation of in-
dividuals, publishing tracts inciting vio-
lence in the name of the FLQ, harass-
ment of presumed opponents and for-
eigners resident in Canada, etc.).

The McDonald Commission recom-

All you were afraid to know about the new bill

‘CARTE BLANCHE TO VIOLATE
ALL OF CANADA’S LAWS’

““(a) espionage or sabotage against
Canada or any state allied or as-
sociated with Canada or activities di-
rected toward or in support of such
espionage or sabotage.

(b) Foreign influenced activities with-
in or relating to Canada that are detri-
mental to the interests of Canada or
any state allied or associated with
Canada and are clandestine or decep-
tive or involve a threat to any person,

(c) activities within or relating to -

Canada directed toward or in support
of the threat or use of acts of violence
against persons or property for the
purpose of achieving a political objec-
tive within Canada or a foreign state,
and _
(d) activities directed toward under-
mining by covert unlawful acts, or di-
rected toward or intended ultimately
to lead to the destruction or overthrow
of, the constitutionally established
system of government in Canada.”’
Furthermore note that the CSIS can
also remain ‘‘informed about the politi-
cal, economic and social environment
within Canada and matters affecting that
environment.” (Art. 14, para. 2)
All-powerful Director

The above formulation on activities ,
constituting *‘threats toward the security _

of Canada’’ is elastic to the point that the
attorneys general of the provinces to-
gether denounced them as an immediate
threat to citizens’ civil rights. But it is not

SPIRAL 5 a aa i a i ea SRA ia Tae
The CSIS can-remain “informed about the political,
economic and social environment within Canada and
matters affecting that environment.” — Bill C-157.

Se ee te EO ia Se Ec Ree AO Be ib Ug TO? SECA DIE PN oe

mended the establishment of strict con-
trol, through a court, of the activities of
the federal organization responsible for
investigating matters of ‘‘national
security.”

Today, two years later, Robert Kap-
lan, the present solicitor-general has de-
cided to answer these recommendations
with Bill C-157 which, if voted for by
parliament without substantial changes,
will constitute one of the most important
attacks of all time on the rights of Cana-
dians and immigrants.

But before discussing the Bill itself,
recall that following the McDonald and
Keable Reports (the latter is the Quebec
Commission dealing with the same sub-
ject), a series of trials were brought
against RCMP agents for having violated
the laws of the land. Only one was con-
victed and with a suspended sentence
(that is, no fine). Informed sources in-
dicated to us that the agents of the
RCMP’s security service feel they have
almost absolute impunity to do whatever
they think is right, since the chance of
conviction is practically nil!

And here is Kaplan planning to give

them a carte blanche to violate all of °

Canada’s laws instead of establishing
strict control on the security services.

The Canadian Security
intelligence Service

The Bill creates a Canadian Security
Intelligence Service (Art. 3) with a man-
date to “collect, by investigation or
otherwise, and analyze and retain in-
formation and intelligence respecting ac-
tivities that may on reasonable grounds
be suspected ofconstituting threats to the
security of Canada ...’’ (Art. 14). The
following activies are considered
threatening toward Canada’s security
(art. 2):

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JULY 1, 1983—Page 10

only the federal government which will
decide on the implementation of these
criteria. The CSIS’s director will have
the power alone and will not even have to
be accountable to the solicitor general or
some other minister! Article 6(3) is worth
quoting in full: *‘6.(3) The Minister is not
empowered to override the decision of
the Director
(a) on the question of whether the
Service should collect or disclose in-
formation or intelligence in relation to
a particular person or group of per-
sons; or
(b) as to the specific information, intel-
ligence or advice that should be given
by the Service to the Government of
Canada or any department thereof, a
Minister of the Crown, the govern-
ment of a province or any department
thereof or any other authority to
which the Service is authorized by or

This same Director will have absolute
power over his personnel: he will exer-,
cise the powers assigned to the Treasury
Board and the Public Service Commis-
sion. In case of dismissal, the employees
will not have the right to adjudication
(Art. 8 and 9(2)).

The Right to Violate Laws
and the Ban on
Denouncing Agents

Furthermore, the ‘‘Director and
employees are justified in taking such
reasonable actions as are reasonably
necessary to enable them to perform the
duties and functions of the Service under
this Act.’’ (Art. 21(1)). The Director
may, if he so desires, submit a report.to
the Attorney General of Canada if, in his
opinion, ‘‘an employee has, on a particu-
lar occasion, acted unlawfully in the pur-
ported performance of the duties and
‘functions of the Service under this Act

.” (Art. 21(2)).

“Persons whose reputation will have
been destroyed by intelligence ‘‘revela-
tions’, even false ones, from the CSIS
will not be able to sue for damages from
the federal government (Art. 23 (2)).

Article 12 prohibits anyone from

communicating any information which
would uncover the identity of an agent or
an informer of the CSIS with a maximum
penalty of five years imprisonment. Kap-
lan wants no Phillip Agee in Canada!

Changesin Acts on Human Rights,
Citizenship and Immigration

This same Bill will amend other federal
Acts. Thus, a recourse against dis-
crimination before the federal Human
Rights Commission would be inoper-
ative if the solicitor general thinks that it
affects ‘‘Canada’s security’? (Art. 65).
The (new) Act on access to information
is amended so that it is impossible to
have access to dossiers affecting *‘Cana-
da’s security”’ (Art. 64).

The Canadian citizenship Act will be
amended to allow the easier rejection of
requests for citizenship in matters of
“Canada’s security’ and the immigra-
tion Act will be modified as well to
eliminate practically any recourse to per-
sons affected by a security certificate.
The definition of a deportation order is
repealed and any dispute on the content
of the certificate is prohibited. The sol-
icitor general has clearly taken the Re-
galado affair badly and wants to prevent
public opinion from becoming aware of
the injustices committed by the security
services.

A Security Intelligence Review Com-
mittee has been created (Art. 30), to
examine dossiers, notably on citizenship
and immigration matters. This commit-
tee will have no independent judicial

federal government from among formé!
federal ministers. This committee, whi¢
would have the power to review t
CSIS, will not have any real power ove!
the director.
Rule of the Most
Absolute Arbitrariness

If we were to recall the blots on tht
security service of the RCMP, the larg
number of injustices committed in a
citizenship and immigration areas
which the Regalado case was only in
among many), the discrimination agail
democrats and progressives, th®
harassment of union or political activists |
and the persecution of their organi
tions, we would have to conclude thi
Robert Kaplan wants to create the meats
to attack in general the peace, union and
people’s movements. Already today, the
struggle for peace is seen as subversive:
solidarity work with the Chilean people
can entail the denial of residence.
will happen tomorrow?

Unanimous Opposition _

Kaplan’s Bill is creating contradi
tions within the ruling class.
governments of the provinces will not
able to accept the loss of any right ! i
apply criminal law on the grounds of “1”
tional security.’’ Large sections of i
right are far from convinced of the neé
of the exorbitant powers contained int
Bill. There are large sections of the uli
class who will become involved in th?
defence of democracy, some of whol
are important persons in the federal Li
eral Party.

The popular forces have to organi?
themselves in order to force the fede
government to retreat. Their energell
opposition will crystalize the taking °
positions by all sections of the peoplé;

The New Democratic Party bears a
responsibility in this struggle in the fe
eral parliament. All forces will have 10
act ina unified way without exception. It
is the breadth of the opposition whi¢
will guarantee victory. ‘

It is possible at the present time to W!”
the fight against Bill C-157. Victory mu
be only a first step in the long stru
against the excesses of the securit

i

under this Act to give information, in- existence, as the McDonald Commission forces and for obtaining the!’
telligence or advice. wanted, but rather it is nominated by the democratization.
ee
we ALWAYS STEM A KIT AND PEOPLE re THES RE
WeRe A BIT OF DYNAMITE, POInT THE FMGEn ia Sas
“OBVIOUS AT THe Pukn A BAU, a. SAN THE CIVILIANS can
SecuRITY BUG A UNION, es Mt Pspouronr BREAK THE LAW
BRANCH LITTLE CRIMES on THE
“2 : A CivillaN AP |
£
é
Dy
\( P
a
2)
—-