You say threats of violence. The act refers to threats of “serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of”—not independent of—“achieving a political, religious or ideological objective within Canada”.
I agree with you that there was some evidence of some violent acts. There were threats of harassment. There were threats of assault, if not actual, then perceived threats of assault. How does that then go into the further definition of achieving a political, religious or ideological objective within Canada?