Thank you.
Distinguished members of the committee, I'm pleased to accept your invitation to be here today as the co-chair of the Counter Terrorism and National Security Committee, representing Chief Clive Weighill, president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and its members.
The mandate of CACP is safety and security for all Canadians through innovative police leadership. This mandate is accomplished through the activities and special projects of a number of committees and through active liaison with various levels of government and departmental ministries having legislative and executive responsibilities in law and policing.
A primary principle for every law enforcement organization in Canada is that safeguarding the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and human rights legislation is important. Law enforcement agencies also understand that it is important to respect victims of crime and to understand their needs.
CACP has supported Canada's counterterrorism strategy of building resiliency against terrorism and the four pillars of the strategy, which are prevent, detect, deny, and respond. CACP has also assisted in the development of terrorism legislation and supported past programs and activities sponsored by the federal government. In preparation for the response from CACP to the proposed legislation, Bill C-51, police leaders must ask themselves how much risk they can carry. The space between civil liberties and the terrorist threat is the area of risk. The police and the public live within that risk. Suppression and prevention are important to successfully reduce the terrorist threat, and Bill C-51 provides legislation that can support both the prevention and suppression efforts of law enforcement.
The recent collective efforts by police to increase community safety and well-being demonstrate the need for cooperation between police services, social service organizations, governments, and communities. Our efforts are reflected in the new approach to community safety and well-being through the establishment of community hubs or situational tables. The situational table is the early warning system that predicts the need for better or improved social development of people and groups. Identifying and mitigating those risks requires leadership and collaboration, with sharing of information in a prescribed format that protects privacy while allowing for the table to identify acutely elevated individuals who have demonstrated anti-social behaviour and who need assistance before they become radicalized to terrorism or other harmful criminal behaviour within our communities. The police must continue to rely on intelligence-led and evidence-based policing and to use the community situational table to reduce the chances for those who are on the pathway of radicalization.
Bill C-51 includes the security of Canada information sharing act as part of the anti-terrorism act and grants clear authority for federal government institutions to share with other designated federal government institutions information about activity that undermines the security of Canada. The fluid sharing of information will enhance the government's ability to establish or share information at situational tables and in other forums that can assist in early identification and implementation of solutions for people on the pathway to radicalization and to becoming terrorists. Information sharing as a controlled and methodical process to protect privacy is possible in today's world of big data and high-velocity solutions to radicalization, high-risk travellers, high-risk individuals, and those embarking on the path to violent extremism.
Provincial and municipal services will have to rely on our pre-existing authorities and formal agreements to continue disclosing and sharing information at local levels to support police activities of prevention and suppression of the terrorist threat. Bill C-51 creates a new Criminal Code offence—promoting or advocating others to carry out a terrorism offence—with a provision for a maximum of five years' imprisonment. If enacted, Bill C-51 would allow the courts the new authority to order the seizure of printed and audio terrorist propaganda and to order the removal of terrorist propaganda made available to the public through a Canadian Internet service provider. This piece of legislation is consistent with similar provisions regarding the ability to seize and destroy criminal material related to child pornography offences in section 163.1 of the Criminal Code. To now have a similar offence to include terrorist propaganda is consistent with the changing terrorist landscape and threats in Canada.
Having the ability to deter and remove the propaganda material used by sympathizers and supporters, which incites or propagates terrorism, is a critical factor in creating off-ramps from the path to radicalization. The new Criminal Code provisions of Bill C-51 will provide law enforcement and the courts with the tactical ability to intervene and stop those individuals who, by communicating statements, knowingly advocate or promote the commission of a terrorist offence.
There is also a second aspect to this offence, that there will exist a burden on the crown to prove that the person had knowledge that an offence would be committed or that the person was reckless with regard to whether any of those offences would be committed.
Proposed section 83.222 will allow a judge, who is satisfied by information on oath that there are reasonable grounds to believe that any publication, copies of which are kept for sale or distribution and is terrorist propaganda publications, to order seizure of the material and destroy it if necessary.
Seizing and destroying terrorist propaganda removes the influences of the terrorism, the terrorist message, and provides more space to the voice of community groups and government programs that are promoting the counter-narrative.
Other important amendments to the Criminal Code include the recognizance threshold requirements that replace “will be carried out” and “is necessary to prevent the carrying out of an offence” with “terrorist activity may be carried out” and “likely to prevent the carrying out of a terrorist activity”. The new thresholds speak to the preventable opportunities for law enforcement versus the higher threshold of response opportunities. The amendment actually permits a judge to order a person to be detained in custody for two additional periods of 48 hours each.
The proposed change will allow police the opportunity to ensure that when time is critical—between becoming aware of information about a possible terrorist attack and the ability to identify, detect, and apprehend as to prevent a terrorist attack—there will be an opportunity to detain a person based on the “likely to be carried out” threshold. The new threshold actually speaks to preventing an attack in today's terrorist environment.
The difference may be subtle, but in recent investigations the time between a source coming forward with limited and chaotic information of a terrorist attack and the planned date of the attack has been as little as two days. The threshold of “may be carried out” can be crossed in two days but “will be carried out” may not be crossed in the two days. The opportunity to lawfully detain someone to ensure an attack does not occur is important in today's context as it serves toward the principle of preserving life.
Determining the veracity of the source information, mixing it with known intelligence, conducting analysis, and searching for more information to prove the reliability and credibility of source information can take days and weeks to corroborate or prove. Accessing investigative assistance in other countries can also take many days, if not weeks.
The next area I would like to discuss is the amending portion of the Criminal Code affecting section 810, the peace bond section. The new section will allow a judge to order a defendant who it is feared may commit a terrorist offence to enter into a recognizance to abide and follow conditions imposed by the court for a period of up to one year and up to five years if the person has been convicted of a past terrorist offence.
Court-imposed section 810 conditions upon individuals have limited use as the strength of the recognizance may be limited to the compliance of the person and the ability for the police to monitor compliance and take appropriate action as necessary. We must be careful that the section 810 process is used for persons who are not considered a high risk to public safety but are persons who show commitment to change and are believed to have a strong potential to redevelop positive social behaviours.
I believe that there is an expectation from the provincial court justices that the police are responsible and accountable to monitor compliance of court-ordered section 810 recognizances and report back as necessary. This is an additional burden to law enforcement.
Similar to other anti-terrorism legislation, there is no new money attached to this legislation and the requirement to use this information will cause police services to re-prioritize and re-direct our limited resources away from other priorities that include commercial crime, organized crime, proceeds of crime, and specialized police services. Terrorism investigations require the same skilled and experienced members who investigate those other offences, but are now being used to respond to the new terrorist threat in Canada.
ln closing, I would like to state that underestimating the threat is dangerous and overestimation is expensive. Bill C-51 offers improvements for the federal police to share information among our justice sector partners, security partners, but more importantly and hopefully, with the community partners and government situational tables designed to reduce the terrorist threat and improve community safety and well-being.
What has been successful to date will not make us successful in the future. Our learning and education must outpace that of the terrorists. The members of the CACP are committed to upholding the laws of Canada and working within the legislative construct that is provided.
Thank you. I look forward to answering any of your questions.