Canadians warned about Liberal bill’s ‘serious threat to privacy rights’
by
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has submitted a parliamentary brief to a House of Commons committee addressing the ‘dystopian’ Bill C-22.
CALGARY, Alberta (LifeSiteNews) — A top constitutional freedom legal group warned that a “dystopian” Liberal bill before the House, which would give police extra powers to monitor and search Canadians’ online digital activity without a warrant, is a “serious threat” to Canadians’ privacy rights.
“Privacy is the shield of a free people,” proclaimed John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), in a recent news release sent to LifeSiteNews.
“Canadians deserve security without sacrificing privacy.”
The JCCF said that it has now submitted a parliamentary brief to Canada’s House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security over Bill C-22.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Bill C-22 was introduced by Canadian Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree, purportedly to address privacy concerns relating to another bill, Bill C-2, that would have permitted police and government officials to open and examine Canadians’ personal mail and would also ban cash donations over $10,000.
After backlash late last year about Bill C-2, Anandasangaree said he would rewrite portions of the bill. However, Bill C-22 contains concerning language largely taken from Bill C-2 regarding Canadians’ online privacy.
The JCCF said that Bill C-22 “poses a serious threat to Canadians’ privacy rights.”
The parliamentary brief, which was submitted to the Committee while it reviews the bill after its passing of second reading, looks at “two major privacy concerns within Bill C-22.”
“First, the bill would create a new production order allowing police to obtain detailed subscriber information, including names, addresses, account details, device identifiers, and information about the types of services a person receives, based on a standard of ‘reasonable suspicion’ rather than the higher constitutional standard of ‘reasonable grounds to believe’” the JCCF said.
This, according to the JCCF, could also apply to professionals such as “doctors, psychologists, lawyers, and counsellors, whose records may contain highly sensitive personal information.”