We will go back and forth, but seamlessly, and thank you for letting us go first. I assure you, Mr. Chair, you would not want to lose Béatrice Vaugrante.
Since the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, a misleading debate has taken hold about the relationship between national security and human rights. The debate assumes an inescapable trade-off between the two goals, that more security requires weaker human rights protection and that stronger regard for human rights will inevitably leave us more insecure.
That could not be further from the truth.
Governments have a vital obligation. Part of their responsibility is to uphold human rights, to prevent terrorist attacks, and hold accountable individuals who commit such acts. It is also essential that laws and actions taken to counter terrorism comply with international human rights. These two responsibilities do not compete with each other; they are one and the same.
The current view of Canada's national security framework offers a valuable opportunity to reject this false dichotomy and affirm that the strongest approach to upholding national security is one grounded in full regard for human rights.
The timing and the necessity of your deliberations on this review are imperative. It is indeed both opportune and urgent. It is opportune because an opening such as the present one, a wide-ranging review of our national security framework, comes along infrequently. It's an opportunity that should not be squandered.
It is opportune as well because a range of lessons have been learned in Canada over the past 15 years through individual cases, court rulings, and UN recommendations that highlight the human cost of national security practices that violate rights and point to the needed reforms.
The urgency is threefold.
First, as we highlight in our submission—you've heard from many others as well—numerous Canadian security laws, policies, and practices contravene our country's international human rights obligations. Those shortcomings must be addressed.
Second, Amnesty International continues to document extensive, serious, and, in many cases, mounting human rights violations associated with national security practices around the world. In that context, it is so crucial that Canada set a different course and example.
Third, of course, the urgency has increased dramatically with the election of U.S. President Donald Trump. President Trump has made it clear that he does not agree with, for instance, the ban on torture when it comes to national security operations. Faced with that prospect of disregard for human rights by our closest national security partner, it is absolutely crucial that our own national security framework be strengthened as never before in its clear regard for human rights.
Amnesty International has recommended a human rights-based approach to national security for Canada with three main elements.
I'm now going to turn to my colleague Béatrice Vaugrante, who will speak about the first two elements, and then I'll come back to the third.