Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 21st, 2013

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome to our committee, Minister.

In your opening remarks you mentioned a couple of incidents of late with regard to people who held Canadian citizenship and who have participated in terrorist acts abroad. You mentioned one case in Bulgaria, and the second one, which was most recently in the news, in Algeria, and the fact—I think it was just this week—a Canadian was identified through fingerprints as being part of that attack. So it is a problem.

I'm from Toronto. Scarborough Centre is my riding, home of the Toronto 18. It's an issue I and my constituents are very concerned about. Do you think radicalization of Canadian citizens is a growing problem here in Canada? Over the last number of years I think we've heard about it more and more.

Thank you.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I'm not an expert on intelligence about domestic radicalization, but I think anyone could observe that there's a higher incidence of such radicalization now than there was, for example, 30 or 40 years ago. This certainly is a challenge for many western countries.

The typical profile that's been developed by intelligence agencies with respect to the recruits targeted by terrorist organizations is that they were born in western society and are typically adolescent males who are looking for some kind of identity, who are perhaps going through very typical adolescent angst, and who are recruited initially by finding websites and material on the Internet that helps to give a comprehensive world view that leads them to a nihilistic extremism. Often after that they're connected through local discussion boards on the Internet. They eventually start finding people in what may constitute an informal cell—I think this pretty much typifies what happened with the Toronto 18—and then those people may start meeting and training and moving to action.

Our intelligence and police agencies are extremely vigilant. We should be very grateful, as Canadians. Sometimes we take this stuff for granted. Sometimes we don't think it's really serious. Sometimes the coverage of the Toronto 18 is that they were just a bunch of kids who were fooling around. That is ridiculous. The evidence is clear that they had the clear intention, a potential capability, of obtaining large-scale explosives to kill hundreds of Canadian civilians. We should not be naive about this threat that exists in our society or in other western societies.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Because I'm on this committee, a lot of what I do in my particular riding of Scarborough Centre is talk to constituents about our policies on immigration. I hear time and time again....

In a round table very diverse in ethnicity, with representation from multiple groups across Canada, the common thread was that people who come to Canada should integrate into Canadian society.

Do you think there's any correlation or connection between those who might be more easily drawn into a terrorist group or a terrorist cell here in Canada and those who have not integrated economically or socially into Canadian society, in our fabric here?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I think it's self-evident that someone who wants to launch war or acts of violence against Canada as their host country is not well integrated.

There is some evidence suggesting that there is a limited linkage between a lack of economic integration and a lack of social and cultural integration, which can sometimes be the breeding ground for radicalization. A point I always make is that we have a strong interest in ensuring real equality of economic opportunity for newcomers to Canada.

But I don't think we should overstate that. Many of the so-called homegrown terrorists in western societies were actually highly educated individuals. Think of the bombings in London and at the Glasgow airport several years ago that were committed by medical doctors trained in the United Kingdom. Many of the people involved in 9/11 had the benefit of professional graduate and postgraduate educations and professions in western countries. So this is not a function of poverty; it's a choice people make.

In terms of the broad support for integration, and more specifically the premise of Mr. Shory's bill, I'd like to reiterate that based on an NRG live-caller survey of 1,000 people in October last year, 83% expressed support for the principle that citizens found guilty of committing acts of treason against Canada should be stripped of their citizenship, as opposed to 12.9% who were opposed. Sixty-one percent strongly supported the measure, as opposed to 5.6% who were strongly opposed.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We have to move on.

Mr. Opitz, go ahead.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, thank you for being here today. I'd like to thank Mr. Shory for his bill, because those people who do serve in the Canadian Forces and who step up as permanent residents to serve this country I think are deserving of that additional consideration, because of the risks they are prepared to take on behalf of all Canadians.

You're absolutely right, Minister. There's a distinction between wilful and somebody being coerced into a particular act. I think common sense in the law and in the courts would discern that fairly quickly. It's the wilful acts we're talking about here.

Last year in the GTA, approximately 20 or so individuals were radicalized and are known to have left Canada to join terrorist groups abroad. Their actions will be taken against not only our allies but against Canadian Forces personnel, diplomats, and others across the world, contrary to Canadian interests.

A lot of this is something already written into the citizenship guide, because what was there previously was inadequate. What you have written into the citizenship guide now defines what is expected of people in this country, that they should simply not break any of our laws, they should adjust to Canada, and they should follow the tenets of freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. I don't think it’s too much to ask somebody to simply be a law-abiding Canadian citizen.

Thank you for everything you have done on that so far, and I look forward to those amendments.

Sir, I'd like to talk about act of war. You mentioned in your comments earlier that the act of war is not clearly defined in international law.

Could you please elaborate on that point—between the act of war and armed aggression or armed conflict?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I'd like one of my officials to comment on that.

[Eric Stevens]

I understand the committee has already heard from officials at the last meeting on this subject.

“Act of war” is a term we do not see very commonly in Canadian statutes. It seems we have moved to be more speaking about hostilities or armed conflict. Canada hasn't declared war against a country for decades. It's a term that's fallen out of favour, I would say. As a result, we have ambiguity.

It's worthwhile for the committee to think about whether there would be something more precise. Then everyone would know what the law is on the subject.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I'd just make a supplementary comment, which is that there is a government bill before the House, Bill S-7, which is being moved by Minister Nicholson. It would make it an offence under the terrorist offences act to leave Canada in order to join a prescribed terrorist entity. These young fellows leaving Canada to join al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda, and Hezbollah would run afoul of that bill should it pass into law.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Our time has expired, Mr. Opitz.

Obviously that issue, the act of war, did trouble the last day. Mr. Opitz asked the question.

Are there any other additional comments on how we can fix that up?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Well, that is the....

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You made some initial comments, and I appreciate that. Is there anything else you'd like to add?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Yes. I did read in French, in response to Madame Groguhé's question, the suggested basis of prospective amendments that would address this problem, which would propose that the act would apply to those who've served as a member of an armed forces of a country or as a member of an organized armed group that was engaged in an armed conflict with Canada; or have been convicted of high treason under section 47 of the Criminal Code; or have been sentenced to five years or more of imprisonment for terrorism offences, as defined in section 2 of the code, or equivalent foreign offences for terrorism; or have been convicted of offences under sections 73 to 76 of the National Defence Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life because they acted traitorously; or have been convicted of an offence under section 78 of the National Defence Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life; or have been convicted under section 130 of the National Defence Act for committing high treason punishable under section 47 of the Criminal Code or for committing a terrorism offence and it is defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to at least five years in prison.

My apologies to the translators.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

That gives us something to work with.

Thank you, Mr. Stevens, Ms. Girard, and Mr. Piragoff.

Mr. Minister, thank you for your attendance today and for helping us with this bill.

We will suspend.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We'll start the second part of our meeting.

We have two witnesses before us. The one witness isn't here, but he will be present shortly.

The first witness is with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Superintendent Joe Oliver is director general of operational prioritization and protective policing, federal policing.

We know someone named Joe Oliver. I recognize that name. He's a minister.

We also have a representative from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Michael Peirce, who is assistant director of intelligence.

Gentlemen, welcome to our committee. We thank you for coming and helping us out with this bill. You each have up to 10 minutes to make a presentation, and then members of the committee will have some questions or statements for you.

Superintendent Oliver, perhaps you could begin. Thank you very much, sir.

[Chief Superintendent Joe Oliver, Director General, Operational Prioritization and Protective Policing, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for inviting me here to speak to Bill C-425, the Honouring the Canadian Armed Forces Act. I appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions about the implications for law enforcement arising from this bill.

As written, Bill C-425 would not directly impact the RCMP's enforcement activities. Our role with respect to Bill C-425 would be to support Citizenship and Immigration Canada where appropriate.

Section 6 of the Security Offences Act gives the RCMP primary responsibility for criminal acts that constitute threats to the security of Canada as defined by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act. The RCMP's role is to prevent, detect, deny, and respond to criminal threats to Canada's national security, including acts of terrorism, either in Canada or abroad, if they involve Canadians. The RCMP has responsibility for investigating acts of terrorism, either offences that have already occurred or those that are being planned.

Canada's national security remains a key strategic priority for the RCMP. Radicalization of Canadians to the point where they prepared to engage in extremist violence is a continuing challenge to our society. The RCMP works proactively to counter extremist messaging through our outreach efforts with communities vulnerable to recruitment to extremism across the country.

My intention today is to provide a law enforcement perspective on the threat of individuals engaging in terrorist acts, both within Canada and abroad.

Canada is not immune from terrorism, as our recent investigations have shown. Since the Anti-terrorism Act was introduced in 2001, 15 individuals have been convicted of terrorist-related offences in Canada. That's 14 offences under section 2 for terrorism and one for a hoax.

The convictions obtained to date mostly reflect individuals engaging in terrorist acts within Canada, but we are also concerned about individuals who radicalize within Canada and then leave to engage in violent criminal activity.

There is no shortage of instability and conflict in places like Somalia, Syria, and Afghanistan, which provide numerous opportunities for individuals to engage in violent extremist acts. The RCMP has investigated individuals who have become radicalized to the point where they've decided to leave Canada to engage in terrorist activities abroad. We've also seen instances where Canadians have travelled abroad to receive terrorist training that they then used upon their return to Canada. For example, Momin Khawaja was convicted in 2008 for manufacturing an explosive device for a group in the United Kingdom after he had travelled to Pakistan.

In order to prevent one of these individuals from leaving Canada, the police would have to obtain admissible evidence of the individual's intent to engage in terrorist activities. In practice, law enforcement will not always be able to obtain this information before the individual leaves the country. For example, in March 2011 the RCMP laid charges against two individuals suspected of leaving Canada to participate in the activities of a terrorist group. Neither individual has been apprehended.

The RCMP seeks to prevent terrorist activities from occurring whenever possible. From the RCMP's perspective, we would prefer to deal with these individuals before they leave Canada to commit violent acts abroad. However, in cases where law enforcement only learns of an individual's intent to engage in terrorist activities after he has left the country, we would liaise with our international partners to prevent the planned terrorist activities if possible.

Even in cases where law enforcement is unable to prevent the individuals from engaging in terrorist activities abroad, we can still collect evidence and liaise with our international partners in order to support prosecution should the individual return to Canada.

Another bill, S-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Canada Evidence Act and the Security of Information Act, is currently before the House of Commons. It includes new offences for leaving Canada to commit terrorist activities. The proposed new offences of leaving or attempting to leave Canada to participate in activities of a terrorist group will assist law enforcement in stopping the activities of prospective terrorists at an earlier stage of their preparations, before they leave to join a terrorist training camp or to do harm elsewhere.

Again, thank you for inviting me to participate in this important meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Superintendent Oliver, for your presentation.

Mr. Peirce, if you could address the committee, we would appreciate it.

[Michael Peirce, Assistant Director Intelligence, Canadian Security Intelligence Service]

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, good morning. I am pleased to be here to discuss issues relating to private member's Bill C-425.

As I understand it, in its present form Bill C-425 would seek to provide an advanced path to citizenship for permanent residents who are also members of the Canadian Forces. It would also provide a means to remove Canadian citizenship from dual citizens who engage in acts of war against the Canadian Forces.

I am also aware of the comments by Minister Kenney and Mr. Shory, the bill's sponsor, that they intend to introduce amendments to the bill to provide authorities to remove Canadian citizenship from dual citizens convicted of terrorist offences in Canada or abroad.

I would like to be very clear on this point. CSIS is not a law enforcement agency. People convicted of terrorist offences are convicted by a court of law based on evidence gathered for prosecution purposes by law enforcement agencies. While CSIS intelligence may sometimes provide investigative leads to police, it is not typically used in such proceedings.

Mr. Chair, that being said, in order to provide some context to the committee's study of Bill C-425 and the possible amendments thereto, I'd like to speak to the general terrorism threat environment, especially as it relates to alleged Canadian involvement in terrorist-related activities.

CSIS is currently investigating a number of individuals in Canada on terrorist-related grounds. Their activities range from fundraising and logistical support to terrorist training and operations. As we recently indicated in our public report, these individuals fall into no distinct class, educational, or psychological category. Mr. Chair, there's simply no single terrorist type or mould.

In addition to individuals being investigated for terrorist-related activity in Canada, the spectre of radicalized individuals from Canada being involved in terrorism overseas is a significant concern for the service. Canada has an international obligation to prevent the exporting of terrorism, when and where possible, especially if it involves some of its citizens.

The committee will also be aware of recent reports of alleged Canadian involvement in attacks in Bulgaria and the recent confirmation that the remains of Canadians suspected of involvement in a terrorist attack in Algeria have been located.

As well, the director of CSIS recently stated to the Senate Standing Committee on National Security and Defence that the service is aware of dozens of Canadians who have travelled abroad to engage in terrorism-related activities.

Mr. Chair, such cases represent a serious threat to security, both in Canada and abroad, and may adversely affect Canada's international reputation. Canadians involved in terrorist activities abroad could transfer their skills and knowledge to terrorist organizations. They could also bring skills and knowledge acquired abroad back to Canada. They could possibly use that knowledge to conduct terrorist attacks on Canadian soil. This terrorist feedback loop is obviously a concern for us.

Moreover, individuals returning to Canada from conflict zones abroad have been known to radicalize others. Indeed, because of their adventures overseas, such individuals often gain a large amount of credibility—in the vernacular, they get “street cred”—among some like-minded individuals in groups, particularly impressionable youth.

That being said, Mr. Chair, tracking Canadians who travel abroad to conduct terrorist activities is not an easy task. They often escape into ungoverned spaces such as tribal regions along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, or into conflict zones such as Syria where the situations are fluid and very difficult to navigate.

Mr. Chair, there are significant challenges with constructing a clear picture of foreign fighters and terrorists overseas.

First, it's often difficult for us to ascertain motive. In Syria, for instance, there has been an influx of foreign fighters, some for the Free Syrian Army, some for al-Qaeda-related groups, like the al-Nusra Front, and still others for the al-Assad regime, so differentiating the motives and alliances of individuals can be extremely difficult. I should also point out that we see movement at times. An individual may go over and begin activities with the Free Syrian Army and move over and end up fighting for or with the al-Nusra Front, for example. It's very difficult to track.

Second, investigations of individuals who have travelled overseas are particularly challenging because corroborating and finding reputable sources overseas and reporting takes time. During that time, individuals may move, and they may move into other locations where it's very difficult to track them, so time is a significant factor.

Third, confirming the identities of Canadians overseas is notoriously difficult and is sometimes impossible. Often, we must rely upon foreign intelligence agencies that may have other priorities, different resources, and different mandates.

Mr. Chair, despite these challenges, I'd like to underline that the service works extremely hard to provide as accurate a picture to the government as we can on this and many other threats related to national security.

Let me bring some international context to this discussion. Canada is not the only country dealing with radicalized citizens travelling abroad to engage in terrorism. Countries such as Australia, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States have all experienced this problem to some degree, in many instances to some significant degree.

In fact, just last week, the Dutch government raised the terrorist threat level in the Netherlands from “limited” to “substantial” because radicalized Dutch youth travelled to Syria to engage in violent armed jihad.

I thought I'd bring this fact to the committee's attention, lest there be any perception that Canada is somehow an outlier among our allies. We are not. Many western nations are facing a similar threat, which will likely continue for some time.

This is an international problem.

On that note, I'd like to thank you for your attention. I welcome questions from members.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Peirce and Superintendent Oliver. We will have some questions of you, starting with Mr. Leung.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, witnesses, for appearing.

Canada is a very successful multicultural society. We're also a very diverse society, and we have a very active immigration policy.

As an immigrant myself, I must admit that prior to becoming a Canadian citizen, I travelled on the passport of the Republic of China. In the 1960s and 1970s I was persona non grata, I'll say. There were only something like 31 countries around the world that recognized that particular country, and I had extreme difficulty in travelling anywhere for either a conference or academics, or just for leisure.

Since becoming a Canadian citizen, I have viewed the Canadian passport as something that is very valuable and very dear to me.

I wish to hear your comments on how others, such as these radicals, these extremists, are using the Canadian passport as a tool for their own self-fulfillment, or as a tool for ease of entry into various countries around the world in order to engage in terrorist activity, or if they sometimes are using the convenience of the Canadian passport to ease entry for spying purposes.

What I'd like you to share with me perhaps is where the Canadian passport sits in terms of ranking, in terms of how well we are seen internationally when one travels with a Canadian passport as a document.

[Michael Peirce]

I'll start, and if Chief Superintendent Oliver wants to comment, he can follow up.

The Canadian passport, as you've described it, is an extremely valuable document for anyone travelling. As a result, it is subject to use and abuse in a limited number of circumstances by a small group of people who would seek to use it to facilitate terrorist movement and terrorist activity. We certainly see intelligence reporting that suggests that individuals actively seek the Canadian passport for those purposes.

Individuals may come to Canada and attain dual citizenship to gain the Canadian passport so that they can subsequently travel under that passport. We also see the active use of the passport with individuals who travel overseas. It makes it extremely difficult to track, because the vast majority of people, of course, travelling on a Canadian passport are travelling for good and legitimate reasons. So it's not immediately subject to question.

We see certain terrorist organizations in particular target the use of the Canadian passport because of its value, because it facilitates travel so easily and so smoothly. They will seek out dual nationals for the purpose of using that passport to facilitate travel. We've seen at least some indications of that in regard to Hezbollah, for instance.

So that document is an extremely valuable document, and gaining citizenship in order to be able to use that document is a noted goal.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Oliver, do you have a comment? No.

Then let me ask the next question. It's somewhat related. In May 2000, CSIS issued a report entitled “International Terrorism: The Threat to Canada”. In this report it was found that Canada is signing a dozen international conventions combatting terrorism. Yet Canada has been a frequent destination for international terrorism and their supporters. Recently, CBC obtained a report entitled “The Threat Environment to 2025” report.

What do these reports find? Perhaps you can share with us. What is the shift that has happened in the post-September 2001 era to the present? How are we addressing that issue of having better control over using Canada as a convenient place for training, for radicalization, and our citizenship and our passport as a travel document for these radicals?

[Michael Peirce]

I think we will be able to tag team on this one.

Certainly, we have seen in the post 9/11 environment that the al-Qaeda narrative has become more popular, and al-Qaeda itself took significant steps to propagate that narrative, resulting in increased threat. We've seen that for the past number of years. As a result, CSIS has actively expanded its counter-terrorism capacity in order to be able to identify and track individuals. CSIS has, within Canada, upped its game on the counter-terrorism level, and in addition to the pure investigative role, it has upped its game in regard to an understanding and appreciation of radicalization. One of the biggest issues is individuals who are radicalized in Canada, who become a threat to conduct violent extremist activity, and who may travel.

In addition, CSIS has expanded its international footprint because of the numbers of individuals who travel and the threat that arises with their travel. It's a threat to Canada's reputation. As I outlined in my opening remarks, it's a threat because it brings overseas the threat to Canadian interests, and it also facilitates others engaging in threat-related activity against Canadians.

In general, the response is that we've upped our game very significantly on counter-terrorism, on tracking, and on the study and understanding of radicalization. There's no question that the threat has changed over the last few years. The international terrorist threat has changed. Al-Qaeda and the core leadership of al-Qaeda, for example, have suffered significant losses, and that has disrupted the al-Qaeda core capacity. What we see, though, are related cross-affiliated groups, so groups like—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Peirce.

Ms. Chow.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Superintendent Oliver, how many officers does the RCMP have abroad, overseas, to track down criminals, whether they be child sex offenders, terrorists, or any other kind of criminal?