Public Safety committee  I was speculating only on the basis...I was inferring from the context. That is, if you've got CSIS conducting extraterritorial operations, it may violate foreign laws, and that then becomes a matter of the record and suddenly it's on the front page of The Washington Post. That then creates certain headaches for the diplomatic corps.

Public Safety committee  Well, to be honest, I'm not in a position to imagine what a judge would do in every individual case. I do note though that the warrant provisions that would apply for both domestic and foreign warrants require CSIS to demonstrate that this is really a necessary undertaking, that there are no other means available other than to engage in this practice in order to gather information necessary for its investigation.

Public Safety committee  Of course it's ex parte in camera proceedings. I would imagine that a Federal Court that risks the prospect to be dragged into some international scandal would be even more adamant that there was a necessity undergirding this investigation and it would superimpose all sorts of obligations.

Public Safety committee  I believe it is necessary. I don't believe that the arguments that are made that it's redundant have resonance. I think the more eyes on the spies, the better, if you'll forgive my alliteration. I also think it's important to enhance your ability as parliamentarians to understand the inner workings of the security services so there's institutional knowledge within Parliament itself.

Public Safety committee  Structurally at SIRC, ideal membership is five. Even when they are at five, they're part-time, and it's an enormous undertaking for a review of CSIS if you are full-time let alone part-time. They've been at three for some time. As you know, two chairs have resigned in controversy, and as a consequence the continuity of leadership has been uneven at SIRC.

Public Safety committee  You can imagine that a Federal Court judge confronted with that prospect, and the prospect of being enlisted in an operation conducted by CSIS, would be a diplomatic firestorm if it were ever revealed. That Federal Court judge, I think, would be quite anxious to make sure that CSIS had crossed its t's and dotted its i's.

Public Safety committee  It's a bit of a mixed bag. Not purporting to have reviewed in detail the laws of hundreds of foreign countries, I would say this bill is unique in the degree to which it emphatically now authorizes a judicial officer to allow a Canadian executive agency to violate foreign law. In other jurisdictions that I have looked at that have foreign intelligence operations, their laws are creatively ambiguous on that point.

Public Safety committee  No. There's the historical context; that is, the Federal Court cases that are the genesis of this bill have dealt with extraterritorial surveillance. But of course the CSIS mandate in section 12 is not confined to surveillance, covert or otherwise. Of course, we do have instances where CSIS members have gone abroad to conduct interrogations.

Public Safety committee  That would be a question of—

Public Safety committee  Well, it's not sufficiently emphatic to constitute a use of section 33 of the Charter of Rights. It's not an override of the charter. Presumptively, “any other law” would include the bill of rights, although, again, I'm not sure if it's sufficiently emphatic there. My reading of this, my assumption, has been that “any other law” refers to international law.

Public Safety committee  Yes, the CSIS Act, in its present form, indicates that the government or CSIS needs to obtain a warrant where there are reasonable grounds to believe that such a thing is necessary, which is essentially coded language for saying where there's a charter interest in play under section 8 or to immunize and intercept what would otherwise be a crime under part VI of the Criminal Code.

Public Safety committee  I think it should be clearer; it should be more definite. Yes, absolutely.

Public Safety committee  Thanks very much, and thanks to the committee for asking me to testify today. I'm going to focus exclusively on the foreign surveillance aspects of the bill that is before this committee. Later today Professor Kent Roach will be appearing before you and he will be speaking to the informer privilege component.

Subcommittee on International Human Rights committee  We don't have that kind of information. That information might be in the possession of the passport authorities, from renewal of passports and that sort of data. What we have is that in 1996 through to 2001 the Khadr family is said to have travelled through Afghanistan and Pakistan, while making frequent trips to Osama bin Laden's compound.

Subcommittee on International Human Rights committee  In terms of transits and the like, I don't believe we have the data. That data might be on the public record, but we don't have it in our report, nor is it fresh in our memory.