Thoughts on Bill C-30

Much has been made the last week of bill C-30, or its more formal title: Investigating and preventing Criminal Electronic Communications Act.  I had a look at the summary page of it and I don't really find anything wrong with the first part of it.  Part 1 looks like an attempt to  formalize relations between police and Internet Service Providers (I.S.P.) as it comes to gathering information for criminal investigations.  It's at least the start of reigning in the so-called lawless Internet.

Part two of the bill goes way too far.  Our system is built on checks and balances; the judges check the police for example. Bill C-30 gives police too much power, and judges not enough to check them.  According to the charter of rights and freedoms, Canadians have the right to a fair trial; to be seen as equal before and under the law.  Part 2 of the legislation violates that.  It gets rid  of the fairness angle of it because it allows a warrant to be valid for up to a year.  In addition clause C requires the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to report on the interceptions of private communications made without authorizations.  Assuming the Minister the ultimate authority on Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, who checks his authority?

Canadians have a right to privacy as well under the charter.  The Minister of Public Safety; whomever that is shouldn't get the right to read my private email or check whatever websites I'm looking at. I'd imagine this legislation could be brought bear on journalists in a professional setting as well.  Hypothetically speaking, let's say I'm investigating a government scandal that could bring down a politician , and I'm emailing a source.  And using this legislation the government gets a hold of that email.  Does this mean that under Bill C-30 the government could find a way to kill my story?  When last I checked freedom of  the press was included in the charter as well. 

 Section 2 also provides for an amendment to the Criminal Code as it deals with hate speech.  The definition of hate speech is extremely vague... how about a discussion on that, and how it applies to regular law, before we apply it to the Internet?

Overall as it is now this bill gives me the chills. I'm glad it's been sent back to committee for further study and possible rewrites.  Members of Parliament looking at the legislation should have learned two things from the controversy about the bill.  One is that Canadians aren't stupid, we know when our rights and freedoms are being threatened.  Second is a quick reminder to read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms before proposing to change it in such a fundamental way as this legislation would.  People who forget these two lessons will be as thoroughly mocked as Vic Towes.