SHARE:  
Facebook  Instagram  Twitter  Web  YouTube

View as Webpage

Logo_ICLMG_HR NEWS DIGEST.jpg

International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group

Coalition pour la surveillance internationale des libertés civiles

May 11, 2024 - 11 mai 2024

Provisions of new foreign interference bill will have much broader consequences on rights and freedoms in Canada

csis-image-e1715108989804 image

ICLMG 07/05/2024 - While diaspora groups have made it abundantly clear that more needs to be done to address foreign interference, especially when it involves threats or leads to violence, many of the proposals in the newly-introduced An Act respecting countering foreign interference go far beyond addressing foreign interference and will have wide-ranging impacts on the rights and liberties of people in Canada, the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG) is warning.


Areas of concern for the ICLMG include significant changes to CSIS’ powers to secretly collect and analyse troves of information about people both inside and outside of Canada; what information CSIS can disclose and to whom, including foreign entities; as well as new rules around what evidence can be disclosed in open court, and the ability of defendants to challenge those decisions.


“These are concerns we raised during the federal government’s consultation on new foreign interference measures, but they have decided to charge ahead,” said Tim McSorley, national Coordinator of the ICLMG. “These and other changes deserve their own specific scrutiny but instead are being lumped in with another omnibus bill.”


The areas of the bill specifically addressing foreign interference will also require a great deal of scrutiny to ensure they do not infringe on Charter rights of freedom of expression and association, and the ability to participate fully and freely in democratic processes in Canada, while addressing threats to Canadians and people in Canada, says the coalition. Some items that raise immediate questions are new stand-alone offences regarding interference with very broadly defined “essential infrastructure” and provisions of the proposed Foreign Influence Transparency and Accountability Act. Source


Version française: Le nouveau projet de loi sur l’ingérence étrangère aura des conséquences beaucoup plus vastes sur les droits et libertés au Canada


Some media coverage of ICLMG on foreign interference

Data privacy as a human right must be recognized by privacy and AI bill, say advocates

568A0244_20 image

The Hill Times 06/05/2024 - Proposed legislation intended to strengthen consumer privacy protections and establish accountability frameworks for artificial intelligence (AI) requires an overhaul, according to some groups arguing acts within the bill don’t go far enough to protect human rights.


“Overall, the [Artificial Intelligence and Data] Act treats human rights and human rights impacts of artificial intelligence as a secondary issue, and actually fails to establish adequate protections for—and take into account—human rights impacts when assessing and developing AI tools,” said Tim McSorley, national co-ordinator of the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group. “It fails to do that by failing to mention human rights in the legislation itself whatsoever.”


On April 24, an open letter was sent to Innovation Minister François-Philippe Champagne (Saint-Maurice-Champlain, Que.) calling for the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA) to be split from the rest of Bill C-27, the Digital Charter Implementation Act, and given a full public consultation. The International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group was among the nearly 60 civil society organizations, corporations, and academics who signed the letter arguing the MPs’ study of AIDA was “hasty, confusing and rushed,” which resulted in a “gravely and fundamentally flawed bill that lacks democratic legitimacy.” [...]


“The legislation focuses on the risks posed to individuals, and particularly individuals as consumers,” he said. “Without mentioning human rights as a factor, it means that, eventually, if there are concerns and problems about the impacts of the [AI] tools and somebody files a complaint based on the fact that it violates human rights, it wouldn’t fall under the purview of the regulations being put in place, because it’s not explicitly mentioned.” As an example, McSorley talked about how AI tools, such as for facial recognition programs, may be used by law enforcement agencies.


“If those [facial recognition tools] aren’t assessed for specific human rights impacts before they’re released, and used by law enforcement, then it could have a discriminatory impact on racialized communities, on marginalized communities, that already face over-policing,” he said. “We could see people who already face heightened levels of surveillance, or heightened levels of false accusation, face even greater repercussions because of artificial intelligence tools that haven’t been properly assessed for their impacts on those Canadians and impacts on fundamental human rights.”


How well AIDA addresses human rights is not the only concern with the bill, according to McSorley. Another issue is its lack of independence for the AI and data commissioner, who would have the responsibility of monitoring compliance and intervening if necessary to ensure that AI systems are safe and non-discriminatory.


“Under the proposed rules, [the commissioner] would be a part of [Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada], whose mandate is the promotion of Canada’s AI sector. Our concerns with how the rules established under AIDA would be enforced would be significantly addressed if the government agreed to make the proposed commissioner an independent officer of parliament, similar to the Privacy Commissioner,” said McSorley in an emailed statement to The Hill Times on April 30. The open letter calls for Ottawa to initiate an “in-depth and meaningful” consultation process so AIDA can be revised and reintroduced.


The International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group, along with OpenMedia and the Privacy and Access Council of Canada, also released a list in March of recommended “bare minimum” changes to AIDA in the event the federal government moves forward with Bill C-27 without additional public consultation. Among the recommendations is a call for the inclusion of the “fundamental right” to individual privacy, and “human rights” pertaining to privacy and data protection in the bill’s preamble. Read more - Lire plus


ACTION: Canada: Remove the national security exemptions from Bill C-27!


ACTION: Protect our rights from facial recognition


AI Goes to War - online event, May 22 at 7PM ET


What Will Police Use of AI Mean for Justice in Canada? (webinar)

Canadian coalition calls for urgent action to uphold civil liberties and Charter rights at protests and encampments across the country

AA1nT3ls image

ICLMG 03/05/2024 - As people across Canada come together to voice their concerns over the crisis in Gaza, the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG), representing 46 Canadian civil society organizations, is urgently calling on government, university, law enforcement and other officials to uphold the Charter-protected rights of freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association.


“Recent rhetoric by some officials and commentators, which conflates criticism of the Israeli government with support for terrorism, not only undermines the principles of free expression, assembly, and association but also threatens the civil liberties of those engaged in peaceful protests,” said Tim McSorley, national coordinator of the ICLMG. “Such unfounded allegations serve to mischaracterize legitimate political expression as dangerous extremism, creating a chilling effect on open dialogue and perpetuating discrimination against Muslim and Arab communities. It is imperative that all levels of government uphold the Charter’s protections and resist any attempts to erode the legitimate exercise of these rights through misrepresentation or over-policing.”


This is a continuation of the vague, unfounded allegations of support for “terrorism” that have for decades been used to justify surveillance, over-policing and significant rights abuses directed particularly at Muslim and Arab communities.


For example, over the past several days, peaceful protest camps on the campuses of McGill University, the University of British Columbia, the University of Toronto and the University of Ottawa have been wrongly attacked by politicians and officials as being “antisemitic,” “dangerous,” “pro-Hamas,” and in support of “terrorism.” Calls by student protesters to discuss their demands for divestment and a just peace have been answered by university administrations with unwarranted requests for police intervention to remove protesters. The involvement of police, as seen with recent efforts to clear encampments on university and college campuses in the United States, has often been the cause of escalating tension and violence, as opposed to the encampments themselves.


Attempts to vilify and discredit protest camps as expressing support for “terrorism” and posing a threat to public safety comes after months of the same accusations being directed at marches and protests that have swept the streets of Canadian cities, resulting in unfounded arrests, unwarranted ticketing, and the curtailment of free expression.


The coalition is also expressing its deep concern with the recent ban on the keffiyeh in the Ontario legislature. The keffiyeh is a common and culturally important piece of clothing for Arab, and particularly Palestinian, communities. Whatever one may think of banning political props from legislatures, applying such a rule to clothing of cultural significance is misplaced, reductive, and discriminatory. Banning the keffiyeh inhibits Palestinians and Arabs the legally protected ability to engage in democratic processes, and propagates racism.


The ban also sends a dangerous message that the keffiyeh is an unacceptable piece of clothing that should be excluded from public venues. This was recently demonstrated at an Oakville, ON, high school where a student was asked to remove his keffiyeh because it reminded a staff person of terrorists. The keffiyeh ban is part of a disturbing trend of students and workers facing repercussions again for simply supporting Palestinian human rights, and must be overturned.


As the toll from Israel’s attack on Gaza continues to mount, reaching 34,000 people killed and 77,143 injured as of April 29, 2024, and the International Court of Justice‘s interim measures to protect Palestinians in Gaza from acts of genocide are being ignored, the ICLMG is also reiterating its Fall 2023 appeal for Canada to not only call for a permanent ceasefire, but to halt all arms sales, transfers and military aid to Israel. To refuse to do so is a violation of Canada’s obligation under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to do all in its power to prevent genocide.


In summary, the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group urges:

  • Officials to stop equating Charter-protected expression and dissent with “support for terrorism,” and refrain from calling for law enforcement to forcibly end or prevent protest activities.
  • Law enforcement agencies to refrain from acting against protesters exercising their Charter-protected rights, including at encampments.
  • The Ontario legislature to immediately reverse the keffiyeh ban.
  • Canada to call for a permanent ceasefire and to halt all arms sales, transfers and military aid to Israel. Source


NEW ACTION: Uphold rights and liberties at protests and encampments across Canada!


Version française: Une coalition canadienne appelle au respect des libertés civiles et des droits garantis par la Charte dans les manifestations et les campements partout au pays


NOUVELLE ACTION : Demandez le respect des droits et libertés dans les manifestations et les campements partout au Canada!


Campement pro Gaza à McGill | La LDL préoccupée par le traitement réservé aux manifestant-e-s


Alex Neve: Open letter to Jacques Frémont, President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Ottawa: U of O encampment is legitimate protest


Why Police Crackdowns on Student Protesters Are So Dangerous


US: On campus, inside the Capitol, and in court, there’s an all-out assault on American democracy in the name of Israel


Warrantless Spying on Pro-Palestine Protesters Is Easier Than Ever


UK: Cops arrest four people for terrorism offences – for carrying a painting with a peace dove on it

Arms Embargo on Israel Now

ICLMG is one of the numerous organizational and individual signatories of this call to action

4 image

Arms Embargo Now 07/05/2024 - As the catastrophe wrought by Israel’s continued assault on Gaza grows, Canadian civil society organizations across multiple sectors are calling on the Canadian government to immediately suspend all trade in arms and military technology with Israel.


United Nations human rights experts warn that sending Israel weapons, ammunition or components that it would use in Gaza likely violates international humanitarian law, and the United Nations Human Rights Council has called on all states to immediately “cease the sale, transfer and diversion of arms, munitions and other military equipment to Israel.”


Canada’s own laws, based on the Arms Trade Treaty, require that it stop permitting the export of military technology when there’s a substantial risk those exports could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights law, or commit serious acts of violence against women and children.


The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that there is a “plausible” case that Israel is committing acts of genocide in Gaza, and that Palestinians there face a “real and imminent risk” of genocide. By reiterating that States have an obligation to prevent genocide, the ICJ ruling puts Canada on notice that, as a party to the Genocide Convention, it must do everything within its power to prevent genocide in Gaza. That is not what Canada is currently doing.


Canadian companies export weapons, components, and military technology to Israel, including via the United States. These military exports, whether directly or by way of intermediaries, put Canada at risk of complicity in Israel’s grave human rights violations in Gaza and the West Bank.


Canada also buys and permits the import of military technology from Israel. It is Israel’s sixth largest arms buyer. Gaza and the West Bank function as a laboratory for Israeli arms manufacturers. The weapons deployed against Palestinians, including during Israel’s wars on Gaza, are marketed to international customers like the Government of Canada as “battle-tested” and “combat-proven.” Canadian tax-dollars pay for these Israeli-made weapons, providing profits to the Israeli arms industry and giving Israel moral cover for using those weapons against Palestinians. 


While the Minister of Foreign Affairs has verbally committed to pausing approvals of future arms export permits to Israel, Canada must go further. It must cancel existing export permits, close all export loopholes, and implement an Arms Embargo under Canada’s Special Economic Measures Act, which recognizes the necessity of a two-way prohibition.


The Government of Canada defines an arms embargo as a sanction that “aims to prevent weapons and military equipment from leaving or reaching a targeted country. It prohibits exporting and importing arms and related materials to and from the targeted country, and may also prohibit communicating technical data or financial transactions related to military activities.”


Under the Special Economic Measures Act, Canada can and should also ban the export to and import from Israel of surveillance, security, and intelligence technologies, as well as a broad range of dual use items (electronics, computers, sensors, lasers, avionics, etc.) that may not be considered strictly “military” in nature but are integral to Israel’s siege and assault on Gaza and its continual annexation of the occupied Palestinian territories.


Ending Canadian arms exports to Israel may impact some workers in the arms and technology industries. We urge the government to work with trade unions representing these workers to develop short and long term plans for a just transition that will secure their livelihoods and enable them to work without the fear of being complicit with Israel's war crimes and possible genocide in Gaza.


Israel’s actions in Gaza have made clear that the time for vague promises and half-measures is long over. We call on the Canadian government to uphold its moral and legal responsibilities and impose a full and immediate arms embargo on Israel. Sign on - Signez


How Canada Helps Build Israel’s Fighter Jets (video)


The Canadian government doesn’t know how many Palestinians who were accepted under its emergency family reunification program have arrived


Charges dropped against man accused of waving Palestinian group’s flag


Journalistes en état d’arrestation : la police hors la loi (vidéo)


Israeli NSO Group, which makes Pegasus spyware, keeps trying to extract information from Toronto-based Citizen Lab researchers — and a judge keeps swatting it down


NEW Ottawa rally on May 11 at 2pm - All Eyes on Rafah


NEW Ottawa Defend the Right to Dissent Rally on May 22 at 6:30PM

Lawyer seeks Immediate Repatriation for Canadian Detainee on Imminent Flight out of Northeast Syria; Canada Issues Fourth Forcible Child Separation Ultimatum to Mothers Detained in NE Syria Prison Camps

sally-lane-1-6869877-1714606509297 image

Homes Not Bombs 01/05/2024 - In an urgent letter to Global Affairs Minister Melanie Joly and Public Safety Minister Dominic Leblanc, renowned Canadian lawyer Barbara Jackman called for the repatriation of her client, Jack Letts, who is set to mark 7 years of unlawful, arbitrary detention on May 3 in a northeast Syrian prison. The letter was delivered during the same week that a number of non-Canadian mothers of Canadian children also illegally detained in northeast Syria for over 5 years were once again told the price of their children’s freedom was giving them up permanently to Canadian officials.

 

“I have learned that a flight to repatriate a number of Canadian children from Northeast Syria is imminent,” Jackman wrote. “I urgently request that my client be placed on that same aircraft and brought back to his family in Canada.”

 

Jackman continued, “There is clearly no reason for you to deny this urgent request for repatriation, one which would finally put an end to the arbitrary detention of Jack Letts. This would be the 8th such repatriation flight since they began in 2020, which shows Canada can engage seriously and constructively with this issue…. Clearly, it is unreasonable to not place Mr. Letts on the next Canada-bound flight and, upon his arrival, place him under terms and conditions (such as a peace bond) if borne out by credible evidence and a competent judicial authority believes it is necessary to do so. Jack has indicated time and again his willingness to cooperate with any such judicial process.”

 

Jackman’s extensive letter pointed out that the Federal Court of Canada criticized the current repatriation framework employed by Global Affairs Canada that allegedly determines whether or not Canadian citizens can return to Canada. She also referenced the publication of a blockbuster Amnesty International report 10 days ago that condemned the system of camps and prisons that hold Letts and 56,000 other men, women and children, dozens of whom are Canadian. All of them, Amnesty points out, “are facing systematic violations and dying in large numbers due to inhumane conditions.”

 

Although the Federal Court of Appeal denied the request to repatriate Letts and three other men in May, 2023, Justice Stratas pointed out: “In a number of other cases the Government of Canada has surmounted the practical and legal obstacles and has successfully repatriated Canadian citizens from camps in northeastern Syria… these reasons should not be taken to discourage the Government of Canada from making efforts on its own to bring about that result.”

 

Following up on that point, Jackman reminded the Ministers: “Unfortunately, the record clearly shows that almost a full year on from that decision, no steps have been taken by your government to advance Jack’s repatriation. If that glaring human rights failure is due to application of the Policy Framework, it simply underscores how flawed that framework is. It should be abandoned and the government should instead proceed with life-saving repatriation for Jack, all other Canadian citizens held in Northeast Syria, and the non-Canadian mothers of Canadian children who remain detained there.”

 

Those mothers and their children, represented by lawyer Asiya Hirji, were re-traumatized both by the early April decision denying them temporary resident permits to accompany their children, as well as by the ultimatum to give up their children, one to which they were required to respond in less than 30 hours. Both released statements through their lawyer Ms Hirji.

 

“I reiterate my confirmation back in March and in June [2023], that I'm not declining any travel assistance for my children whatsoever,” said one of the moms. “I’m rather earnestly requesting that I, as their mother, accompany them. I'm only confirming that I'm a mother. Requesting to forcibly separate my underaged and already-distressed children from their mother is primitive and uncivil in my opinion. Raising the issue with my children has not been an easy one. It was a harrowing experience and often left them overwrought for weeks. A country that cares about its citizens shouldn't repeatedly and unnecessarily put them through this torment.”

 

The other mother shared with her lawyer this statement: "My kids cried when I told them the news for two reasons: first, when they pictured themselves away from me in a foster care or whatever. Second, that Canada will do it for the third time, that they come to the camp and intentionally rescue more people but not them. İt hurts them the most that they see there is an opportunity, but it’s not for them for some reason, and they don't understand. We have seen so many countries (i.e Spain, France, Ireland) did rescue their own citizen children including their mothers, as it's their right to not be separated from their mothers, but this is what Canada is denying for these small kids unmercifully. They are so disappointed and feel their life doesn't count at all. My kids are dying slowly. What is the Canadian government plan for these kids? To just die in the desert? There should be a solution based on human rights.”

 

Sally Lane, Jack Letts’ Canadian mother, hand delivered a copy of the letter to Global Affairs Canada on April 29. “This letter also reminds Ms. Joly that the Federal Court concluded there is absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of my son or any of the other detainees whose cases were before the Federal Court. Last week we were astounded to learn that Canada had refused return for a disabled, traumatized Canadian mother of 6 children simply because they didn’t have anything to charge her with. I am concerned that this is the same Orwellian nonsense being used to prevent Jack’s return.”

 

Lane, who authored a book about her struggle to free her son, recently returned from a 9-city speaking tour. “Everywhere I spoke, Canadians were horrified to learn about the atrocious misbehaviour of their government officials, their so-called intelligence agencies, and some of their courts, all of whom have given a seal of approval to the arbitrary detention and torture of their citizens even as they spout their alleged respect for rule of law and human rights. I honestly feel like we’ve been dropped into a Kafkaesque rabbit hole.”

 

Currently, the Supreme Court of Canada, which refused to even hear an appeal from Letts and three other men last November, is deciding whether it will accept a rare reconsideration appeal given the grave human rights abuses faced by the male detainees as well as the important unresolved legal issues about the obligations Canada has to its endangered citizens abroad. 

 

In addition, a judicial review is planned for the refusal of Temporary Resident Permits for the mothers of Canadian children.

 

“We are extremely disappointed that Canada refuses to honour the integrity of these family units, and continues to insist on a policy of forced child separation, which in practice means the children could come here, go into foster care, become separated from their siblings, and likely never again see the only adult who has cared for them since birth,” says one of the lawyers for the mothers, Asiya Hirji. “Telling mothers arbitrarily detained for five years that the price of freedom for your children is for you to remain forever jailed 9,000 kilometres away from them is cruel, inhumane, and not at all in keeping with Canada’s domestic and international human rights obligations towards women, children, and the right to family.” Source


Canada repatriates 6 Canadian children from northeastern Syria


CTV National News: Calls for repatriation (video)


ACTION: Canada must repatriate all Canadians detained in NE Syria now!


His stepfather took him to Syria in 2014 when he was 12. His ordeal had just begun.

'The world is too messy for bureaucratic hurdles': Canada still bars Afghanistan aid

Screenshot-2024-05-09-at-8 image

The Canadian Press 27/04/2024 - Ottawa has plans to finally stop blocking Canadian development aid to Afghanistan this year. But by the time its new system is fully up and running, the Taliban will have been in control of the country for about three years.


Humanitarian organizations say that’s an interminable delay for those who need help, especially since other countries moved more quickly to unblock aid flows. "It’s extremely frustrating, if I can put it as nicely as I can," said Asma Faizi, head of the Afghan Women’s Organization.


Her group supports Afghan newcomers to Canada as well as women living in Afghanistan and in exile in nearby countries. It also runs an all−girls orphanage in Kabul, which has been blocked from Canadian aid since the Taliban takeover. "Canadian organizations that want to work inside Afghanistan are ready, willing and able to work. But they are prohibited," said Faizi. As the law is written, aid workers are vulnerable to criminal prosecution if they pay taxes on labour or goods to Afghanistan’s Taliban government. Doing so would amount to providing financial support to an entity that Canada lists as a terrorist organization.


The United States, Australia, the European Union and the United Kingdom all created carve−outs to their own terrorism laws by February 2022 to allow aid to flow — about six months after the Taliban took full control. In June of that year, a multi−party committee of members of Parliament called on Ottawa to follow suit. Since then, Afghanistan has faced a deteriorating humanitarian crisis caused by natural disasters, widespread food insecurity and an economic collapse as the international community largely shuns the current government. The United Nations has determined that 23.7 million people in the country currently need humanitarian aid.


Last June, Parliament passed a bill that enacted a blanket exemption to terrorism financing laws for humanitarian workers providing life−saving aid in response to emergencies. It also committed Ottawa to eventually create a permit process for development workers, such as those building schools, to apply for exemptions to terror laws. For World Vision Canada, the delay in getting that process set up has meant proceeding with health and nutrition work in Afghanistan on a humanitarian basis but pausing development projects aimed at advancing women’s rights. The blanket exemption just isn’t enough for some aid groups, said the group’s policy director Martin Fischer.


Ottawa has yet to provide a clarity on what it defines as humanitarian versus development work. The exemption that is already in place only applies to the former. "There’s still this passing of responsibility," he said, that requires aid organizations to determine for themselves what they need to do to protect themselves from prosecution. He lamented that the government is not using long−standing definitions issued by Global Affairs Canada or the United Nations, which lay out the difference in terminology. Faizi said groups are trying to address a wide spectrum of issues — from hunger and disease to political repression — and remain confused about which projects should fit into either category.


For example, she said, vaccinations could be considered long−term preventative aid. But their provision could also be seen as a response to a short−term emergency as the health system buckles and deadly illnesses spread. Mental−health programs are normally categorized as development work, but Faizi argued there’s a strong case that stopping a trend of youth suicide in Afghanistan could be considered a humanitarian endeavour. Faizi also said that in failing to take swift action to allow permits for what it defines as development work, Ottawa seems to be going against its own feminist international assistance guidelines. That policy called for flexibility in delivering aid and for the acceptance of more risks in order to help women and girls in unstable countries.


"The problem arose when they decided that Canada was going to take this unprecedented route of creating a very complex and bureaucratic process," she said. A more flexible approach is needed, said Faizi, and one that recognizes "some of the money" could fall into the wrong hands even as aid organizations try to save lives. A report from Public Safety Canada published last week says "efforts are ongoing to operationalize the authorization regime." It says the process requires sorting out privacy rules and ensuring the permit process passes an equity analysis. Ottawa "intends to launch this regime by spring 2024 and will work towards achieving full operational capacity by late 2024," the report reads. Read more - Lire plus

Court concludes curbing parliamentary immunity of spy watchdog members is constitutional

Law professor who challenged Section 12 of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act says regular legislation’s ability to restrict an inherent privilege sets ‘disturbing’ precedent

gloomy-parliament image

CBA National Magazine 02/05/2024 - The law professor who challenged legislation restricting the free speech of parliamentarians on a committee that oversees national security and intelligence issues says he will likely seek leave from the Supreme Court to appeal a recent court decision upholding the restriction.


Ryan Alford of Lakehead University says he is “deeply concerned” by how the decision affirms that Parliament can not only legislate limits to fundamental parliamentary privileges, but also that its authority to do so is absolute. “By that logic, they could eliminate parliamentary privilege entirely,” he says.


Alford launched a constitutional challenge to Section 12 of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act in 2017. He’s argued that barring a constitutional amendment, MPs and senators on the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) cannot be stripped of the legal immunity that shields them from lawsuits and prosecutions for what they say during parliamentary proceedings. Rather, they must be free to act as whistleblowers who can reveal state secrets in the event the agencies they oversee abuse their powers.


The Ontario Court of Appeal did not agree, stating that any member who improperly discloses classified information cannot claim parliamentary immunity and could face criminal prosecution. “Put bluntly,” they “can go to jail,” Justice David H. Doherty wrote in the April 24 decision. The unanimous ruling overturned a lower-court decision that found it was unconstitutional to strip members of the NSICOP of their immunity. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice found that doing so would require a constitutional amendment.


The legal immunity at issue in this case — the parliamentary privilege of freedom of speech and debate — is the “cornerstone of the constitution of Canada and its parliamentary system,” says Steven Chaplin, former senior parliamentary counsel at the House of Commons. “It is basically the fundamental principle upon which the independence of Parliament is built.” The privilege is meant to empower parliamentarians to speak out fearlessly when debating laws and grilling the government. It is considered an “inherent privilege,” meaning that it has constitutional status because it is necessary for Parliament’s proper functioning. The question at play here was whether regular legislation could be used to curtail this bedrock immunity that allows parliamentarians to fulfill their constitutional role of legislating and holding the government to account within Canada’s system of democracy.


The appeal court found that Parliament can limit this privilege without formally amending the Constitution because Section 18 of the Constitution Act, 1867 allows Parliament to “define” all its privileges, immunities, and powers through legislation, subject to limitation on the extent to which it can expand them. When “defining” its privileges, Parliament can curtail them. “The court got it right,” says Chaplin, who thinks the restriction is very limited and carefully crafted. Alexander Gay, counsel for the Attorney General of Canada, the appellant in the case, says the decision “makes clear that Section 18 says what it says, which is crystal clear." Parliament can “define its own privileges, full stop.”


Alford says the decision’s finding that regular legislation can restrict an inherent privilege sets a “disturbing” precedent. Green Party of Canada leader Elizabeth May agrees. She says the notion that legislation can change such “a critical principle for parliamentary democracy” is “dangerous.” “The idea that a Parliament can legislate in ways that change [the] architecture of our democracy … is deeply troubling.”


In 2017, May put forward an unsuccessful motion to remove Section 12 from the bill that would establish the NSICOP. Her opposition to it prompted Alford to ask May if she wanted to be the applicant on the constitutional challenge. “I wish I hadn’t declined to be involved,” she says. “I really hope that the Supreme Court of Canada will look at this.” Supporting Alford in the case as interveners were the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA). “Any abrogation of those basic rights is concerning,” says Michael Fenrick from Paliare Roland, who represented the BCCLA. “It does set up the possibility, certainly, that a majority government could take away more.” Read more - Lire plus

Report Reveals Serious Human Rights Violations as First Quantum Enters Annual Shareholder Meeting

Protests over the Canadian company’s Panamanian copper mine were met with violence

438792817_961777375954682_611578506428575823_n image

MiningWatch Canada 09/05/2024 - Today Panamanian organizations released a report documenting the rights violations and criminalization of activists during last year’s large-scale protests over First Quantum Minerals’ copper mine, Cobre Panamá.


The report, Human Rights Violations, Abuses, and Incidents Registered During the Protests Against the Mining Contract in Panamá, October-November 2023, was commissioned by the Foundation for Integral Community Development and the Conservation of Ecosystems in Panama (FUNDICCEP) and the Panamanian National Network in Defense of Water, and was conducted by journalists Rekha Chandiramani and Ana Teresa Benjamín M.


The report details:

  • Over 20 interviews and first-hand accounts of the excessive use of force by the police against public university students, environmentalists, union members, and Indigenous people, among others; 
  • Hundreds of reported injuries and four deaths during the protests; 
  • More than 1,500 cases of arbitrary detentions; 
  • The ongoing criminalization and legal charges facing 23 activists, protesters, and community leaders for exercising their right to protest; and
  • Punitive measures and acts of retaliation towards groups, such as teachers and other unions, that participated in nationwide strikes.


According to Olmedo Carrasquilla Aguilar of the Ecological Voices Collective, which is a member of the Panamanian National Network in Defense of Water, “The 2023 national strike is the product of a collapsed system and socio-environmental ungovernability. This report must become a cornerstone of justice so that no people in the world are repressed or killed just for aspiring to better models of life.” [...]


“The Panamanian people have repeatedly and firmly said that they do not approve of metallic mining because of the negative impacts on biodiversity and for the quality of water for hundreds of communities,” said Damaris Sanchez Samudio of FUNDICCEP. “We denounce and reject all forms of aggression against environmental defenders who are protecting life, forests, rivers, coasts, and mangroves.”


“First Quantum Minerals and the Panamanian government must refrain from further criminalizing protesters, present a plan to safely close the mine, and uphold the mining moratorium,” said Paulina Personius of Earthworks.


Despite the human rights abuses documented in the report, the Canadian Government announced that First Quantum’s Panama operations have its full support and First Quantum has announced that it hopes to reach an agreement to reopen the mine with Panama’s newly elected administration. 


“The Canadian government has said it will go to bat for First Quantum Minerals, even as Panamanians have been violently repressed for their legitimate opposition,” said Viviana Herrera, Latin America Program Coordinator for MiningWatch Canada. “This contradiction should be top of mind for shareholders today and should raise serious alarms about what’s in store if First Quantum persists in trying to reopen this mine.” Read more - Lire plus


Online event: Report Launch: Criminalization during First Quantum Protests in Panama, May 14, 2PM ET


Da’naxda’xw-Awaetlala land defender Rainbow Eyes sentenced to 60 days in jail


Indigenous Bolivians flee homes as backlash to mining protest turns explosive

Special Toronto screening of Manufacturing the Threat

438700763_350745844654711_7168021376364586372_n image

If you are in Toronto, check out this award-winning, must-see documentary on May 26 at 4 PM. Grab tickets here.


As part of the ICLMG community, you get an exclusive discount code for $10 tickets: MTT10


The special screening followed by an incredible panel with:


1. Azeezah Kanji, a legal academic and journalist, whose work focuses on anti-colonial and anti-racist perspectives on international law, constitutional law and the "war on terror".


2. Pamela Palmater, a Mi’kmaw lawyer, professor, author, and social justice activist and member of Eel River Bar First Nation in New Brunswick.


3. John Kingman Phillips, a barrister and member of the Law Societies of Alberta, Ontario and Nunavut.


4. Amy Miller, an award-winning director, producer and writer.


Watch the trailer here. Source

Watchdog calls out 'gaps' in how Canada conducted online intelligence operations

Screenshot-2024-05-09-at-11 image

CBC News 30/04/2024 - Canada's electronic spies have overlooked "several gaps" in how they conducted their activities online, according to a recently released review from one of the country's intelligence watchdogs.


The National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) released a report Tuesday following its investigation into how the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) — using relatively new powers bestowed on it in 2019 — runs active and defensive cyber operations.


Defensive operations are meant to stop foreign cyber threats from harming federal government networks or other important Canadian systems, like power grids. Active operations allow CSE to limit an adversary's ability to affect Canada's international relations, defence or security. As an example of an active operation, the agency cites preventing a foreign terrorist group from communicating or planning attacks by disabling their communication devices.


NSIRA, the watchdog set up to monitor the activities of Canada's national security and intelligence sector, says in its latest report that it wanted to assess whether CSE was appropriately considering its legal obligations and the foreign policy impacts of its first operations. It also reviewed Global Affairs Canada's (GAC) role in consenting to operations.


The review body applauded CSE for setting up a comprehensive structure to administer the new powers but concluded that "CSE and GAC have not sufficiently considered several gaps."

"The gaps observed by NSIRA are those that, if left unaddressed, could carry risks," says the heavily redacted report. 


In order to run a cyber operation, CSE needs the minister of defence to issue a ministerial authorization. That requires consultation with, or consent from, the minister of foreign affairs, depending on the nature of the operation. NSIRA, made up of people with expertise in national security, policy, technology, law, civil liberties and human rights, found CSE's applications don't offer enough detail to give the ministers a sense of the scope of their plans. "It is important that CSE does not conduct activities that were not envisioned or authorized by either the Minister of National Defence or the Minister of Foreign Affairs," says the report.


The review body also questioned how CSE justifies some of its applications. The report says operations are meant to "align with Canada's foreign policy and respond to national security, foreign, and defence policy priorities as articulated by the government of Canada." But NSIRA said that, as it dug into its review, "it emerged that CSE confirms compliance with these requirements with a statement that the ministerial authorization meets broader government of Canada priorities, with no elaboration of how these priorities are met."


The review body also raised concerns about how CSE and GAC consider Canada's international obligations when approving online operations. The review found the two departments have not come up with a way to assess whether such operations comply with Canada's obligations under international law. "NSIRA notes that international law in cyberspace is a developing area, and recognizes that Canada and other states are continuing to develop and refine their legal analysis in this field," says the report.


"[Active and defensive] activities conducted without a thorough and documented assessment of an operation's compliance with international law would create significant legal risks for Canada if an operation violates international law." The intelligence watchdog says it will follow up on some of it concerns as it continues to review CSE's online operations. In a statement, CSE said it has implemented all the agreed upon recommendations. Read more - Lire plus

Nigeria has gotten billions in U.S. security assistance even as its counterterrorism campaign has a massive civilian death toll

GettyImages-1248028898-e1714169198901 image

The Intercept 29/04/2024 - A Nigerian airstrike this month on a village in the country’s northwest killed 33 people, according to four residents and a local traditional leader. It is the latest in a long-running series of attacks on civilians by the government of Nigeria, one of the United States’ closest allies in Africa and the recipient of billions of dollars in U.S. weapons and military assistance.


The April 10 attack, the latest errant strike in a Nigerian counterterrorism campaign against militants and “bandits,” came as villagers prepared for Eid prayers marking the end of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan. “Arriving at the scene, I saw children, men and women … were killed and trapped inside the collapsed buildings that were hit by a bomb,” Lawali Ango, the traditional leader of Dogon Daji village, told Reuters. (A Nigerian military spokesperson, Maj. Gen. Edward Buba, denied that civilians were killed in the April 10 strike.)


“The pattern of Nigeria’s military operations resulting in civilian casualties is deeply troubling,” Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., told The Intercept. “One of the biggest factors contributing to violent extremism is security sector violence against you or someone you know — so we’ll likely see the reverberations of this civilian harm for years to come unless there’s justice and accountability.”


Between 2000 and 2022, the U.S. provided, facilitated, or approved more than $2 billion in security aid, including weapons and equipment sales, to Nigeria, according to report by Brown University’s Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Studies and the Security Assistance Monitor at the Center for International Policy, a Washington think tank. Over that time, the U.S. also carried out more than 41,000 training courses for Nigerian military personnel.


The U.S. has repeatedly raised the subject of civilian casualties with Nigeria’s government. Earlier this year, in the wake of an attack that killed more than 120 civilians, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken reportedly discussed the issue with Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu. When pressed by The Intercept following Blinken’s visit on what actions the State Department would take if Nigeria’s military continued to kill civilians, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Molly Phee said, at the time, “I’m not going to get into hypotheticals.”


Since the April 10 attack that killed more than 30 civilians, requests for comment from or to speak with Phee, while acknowledged, have gone unanswered, and the State Department failed to respond to questions on the record. “Of course, as we always do when we meet with our Nigerian partners, we talk about how to minimize harm to civilians,” Phee told The Intercept in January, asserting that the U.S. seeks “to support Nigeria’s wish to make sure that the country is safe and secure for all of its citizens.” Since it ramped up its U.S.-backed counterterror campaign in 2017, however, Nigeria has regularly attacked its own people. Read more - Lire plus

Strapped down, blindfolded, held in diapers: Israeli whistleblowers detail of Palestinians in shadowy detention center

f_webp image

CNN 10/05/2024 - At a military base that now doubles as a detention center in Israel’s Negev desert, an Israeli working at the facility snapped two photographs of a scene that he says continues to haunt him. Rows of men in gray tracksuits are seen sitting on paper-thin mattresses, ringfenced by barbed wire. All appear blindfolded, their heads hanging heavy under the glare of floodlights.


A putrid stench filled the air and the room hummed with the men’s murmurs, the Israeli who was at the facility told CNN. Forbidden from speaking to each other, the detainees mumbled to themselves. “We were told they were not allowed to move. They should sit upright. They’re not allowed to talk. Not allowed to peek under their blindfold.” Guards were instructed “to scream uskot” – shut up in Arabic – and told to “pick people out that were problematic and punish them,” the source added.


CNN spoke to three Israeli whistleblowers who worked at the Sde Teiman desert camp, which holds Palestinians detained during Israel’s invasion of Gaza. All spoke out at risk of legal repercussions and reprisals from groups supportive of Israel’s hardline policies in Gaza. They paint a picture of a facility where doctors sometimes amputated prisoners’ limbs due to injuries sustained from constant handcuffing; of medical procedures sometimes performed by underqualified medics earning it a reputation for being “a paradise for interns”; and where the air is filled with the smell of neglected wounds left to rot.


According to the accounts, the facility some 18 miles from the Gaza frontier is split into two parts: enclosures where around 70 Palestinian detainees from Gaza are placed under extreme physical restraint, and a field hospital where wounded detainees are strapped to their beds, wearing diapers and fed through straws. “They stripped them down of anything that resembles human beings,” said one whistleblower, who worked as a medic at the facility’s field hospital. “(The beatings) were not done to gather intelligence. They were done out of revenge,” said another whistleblower. “It was punishment for what they (the Palestinians) did on October 7 and punishment for behavior in the camp.”


The IDF did not directly deny accounts of people being stripped of their clothing or held in diapers. Instead, the Israeli military said that the detainees are given back their clothing once the IDF has determined that they pose no security risk. Reports of abuse at Sde Teiman have already surfaced in Israeli and Arab media after an outcry from Israeli and Palestinian rights groups over conditions there. But this rare testimony from Israelis working at the facility sheds further light on Israel’s conduct as it wages war in Gaza, with fresh allegations of mistreatment. It also casts more doubt on the Israeli government’s repeated assertions that it acts in accordance with accepted international practices and law.


CNN has requested permission from the Israeli military to access the Sde Teiman base. Last month, a CNN team covered a small protest outside its main gate staged by Israeli activists demanding the closure of the facility. Israeli security forces questioned the team for around 30 minutes there, demanding to see the footage taken by CNN’s photojournalist. Israel often subjects reporters, even foreign journalists, to military censorship on security issues. [...]


The camps are part of the infrastructure of Israel’s Unlawful Combatants Law, an amended legislation passed by the Knesset last December that expanded the military’s authority to detain suspected militants. The law permits the military to detain people for 45 days without an arrest warrant, after which they must be transferred to Israel’s formal prison system (IPS), where over 9,000 Palestinians are being held in conditions that rights groups say have drastically deteriorated since October 7. Two Palestinian prisoners associations said last week that 18 Palestinians – including leading Gaza surgeon Dr. Adnan al-Bursh – had died in Israeli custody over the course of the war. The military detention camps – where the number of inmates is unknown – serve as a filtration point during the arrest period mandated by the Unlawful Combatants Law. After their detention in the camps, those with suspected Hamas links are transferred to the IPS, while those whose militant ties have been ruled out are released back to Gaza. Read more - Lire plus


Israel's Armed Quadcopters in Gaza [Using Recordings of Crying Children and Women as Lure] Mark a Dangerous New Era in Drone Warfare


Artificial Genocidal Intelligence: how Israel is automating human rights abuses and war crimes


“Criminal Act”: Israel Bans Al Jazeera, Largest Int’l News Org. in Gaza, Ahead of Rafah Invasion


600,000 Palestinian kids in Rafah can't "evacuate" safely, UNICEF official says


U.S. still sending some weapons to Israel despite holding up bomb shipment over Rafah assault plans


Biden administration acknowledges possible Israeli weapons misuse in report to Congress


Amnesty Int’l: Biden Must Halt Weapon Sales to Israel After U.S. Arms Used to Kill Civilians in Gaza


EXCLUSIVE: “You Have Been Warned”: Republican Senators Threaten the ICC Prosecutor over Possible Israel Arrest Warrants


From Gaza to Guantanamo: The Horrors of Western Imperialism

ACLU: A disturbing national security bill could silence nonprofits and college protests

college_protest_israel_gaza_george_washington_05072024_GettyImages-2151428264 image

The Hill 08/05/2024 - This week, the Senate may pass a bill granting the executive branch extraordinary power to investigate and strip nonprofits of tax-exempt status based on a unilateral accusation of wrongdoing. 


The potential for abuse under H.R. 6408 is staggering. If it were to become law, the executive branch would be handed a tool perfectly designed to stifle free speech, target political opponents and punish disfavored groups.



The bill would empower the Treasury secretary with the authority to effectively dismantle any nonprofit organization they deem to have provided “material support” to terrorist groups. Adding this authority to the tax code would also allow the IRS to investigate and harass nonprofits. 


This legislation is completely unnecessary. Under current law, nonprofits are already prohibited from providing material support to terrorist organizations. In fact, it’s a federal crime. But even though it’s not needed, it is extremely dangerous. It allows the Treasury secretary to act as prosecutor, judge and jury of accused nonprofits and shifts the burden of proof from the government to the nonprofit. 


While there is a 90-day “cure” period in which an accused nonprofit can mount a defense, it is a mere illusion of due process. The government may deny organizations its reasons and evidence against them, leaving the nonprofit unable to rebut allegations. This means that a nonprofit could be left entirely in the dark about what conduct the government believes qualifies as material support, making it virtually impossible to clear its name.


This new power is perfectly suited to an authoritarian-leaning administration that wants to cow civil society. In “How Democracies Die,” Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky persuasively explain that one of the biggest dangers in backsliding democracies is selective investigations and prosecutions. The executive branch can target opponents and the fear of crippling legal fees, the stigma of the designation and donors fleeing the controversy can stifle dissent and break opposition. In the wrong hands, it could easily be used to silence dissenting voices under the guise of national security. And that’s what some of the sponsors of this bill want. 


Several members of Congress have repeatedly, without evidence, conflated students involved in the protests regarding the conflict in Gaza with Hamas and other foreign terrorist organizations. If this law were to pass, it stands to reason that the executive branch could threaten to strip a university of its tax-exempt status on the grounds that allowing student groups exercising protest rights to operate on campus qualifies as providing material support to terrorist organizations. And make no mistake, a wide range of nonprofits could be targeted with this power. 


Indeed, former President Jimmy Carter once criticized the federal material support law saying it “threatens The Carter Center’s work and the work of many other peacemaking organizations that must interact directly with groups that have engaged in violence.” President Carter noted, “The vague language of the law leaves us wondering if we will be prosecuted for our work to promote peace and freedom.”


It is also not hard to imagine a future administration using this power in far broader circumstances that have nothing to do with the conflict in Gaza. We know this because the U.S. government has a long history of abusive and discriminatory material support investigations and prosecutions in the post-9/11 era — disproportionately against Muslims, charities and civil society organizations.


The broadest applications of this legislation may or may not ultimately hold up in court, but the potential reputational and financial cost of fending off an investigation and litigating wrongful designation could functionally mean the end of a targeted nonprofit before it ever sees its day in court. How many will risk that outcome? Even if they may never be designated as “terrorist-supporting,” let alone charged with a crime, nonprofits will curtail their activities as a precaution. And that, of course, is the point: to chill speech and advocacy. Read more - Lire plus


Israel lied about UNRWA. US and UK must end their dehumanising defunding of Palestinian aid


Gaza en France : une police de la pensée pour blanchir le génocide

Former Guantánamo Bay detainee faces re-victimisation in Algeria, UN experts say

OHCHR 09/05/2024 - UN experts* warned today that former Guantánamo Bay detainee Saeed Bakhouche, now facing terrorism charges in Algeria, would not get a fair trial and risked renewed arbitrary detention.


In April 2022, the United States cleared Bakhouche for release from U.S. Naval Station Guantánamo Bay and transferred him to Algeria in April 2023, under assurances that he would be humanely treated.


“Mr. Bakhouche was arbitrarily detained at the U.S. Naval Station Guantánamo Bay for over 20 years and tortured in U.S. custody,” the experts said. “He was immediately arrested on arrival in Algeria, detained incommunicado and de facto outside the protection of the law, threatened in interrogation and denied legal representation.”


Algeria released Bakhouche in October 2023, but he has been charged with terrorism offences under article 87bis of Algeria’s Penal Code and is due to be tried this month. “Mr. Bakhouche’s detention and prosecution violate his rights to humane treatment and physical and mental health rehabilitation as a survivor of prolonged arbitrary detention and torture,” the experts said. “Such treatment severely aggravates his tenuous mental and physical state, including post-traumatic stress disorder and depression, and re-traumatises him as a torture victim.”


“His unjustified prosecution, detention on arrival, and imminent likely detention on the basis of these charges contradicts express guarantees by the U.S. and Algeria that he would be humanely treated on return to Algeria”, the experts said. “The U.S. itself has called for repeal of article 87 for its excessive definition of terrorism”.


“Mr. Bakhouche’s prosecution would violate his fundamental right to fair trial”, the experts said. “After 20 years of arbitrary detention and as a victim of torture, Mr. Bakhouche could not receive a fair and public trial in a national security case in an Algerian court, where there is a lack of independent and adequate legal representation. Broader fair trial concerns include the overly broad definition of terrorism offences and the threat that he will be arbitrarily detained in prisons with documented risks of torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment,” they said.


The experts called for the immediate reconsideration of the charges against Bakhouche, an end to the harmful cycle of re-victimisation and threats of further arbitrary detention, and the prompt protection of his rights, including adequate and tailored healthcare as promised by Algeria and the U.S. when he was repatriated.


“While we welcome the U.S.’ genuine efforts to end detention at Guantánamo Bay, resettling former detainees to their home countries or third countries is only the first step in ensuring long-term safe, humane, and rights respecting futures. Repatriation must not re-traumatise and deprive individuals like Mr. Bakhouche of their fundamental rights,” the experts said. Source


Gitmo Detainee Urges Appeals Court to Nix Case Over Torture Use


Judge in Sept. 11 Case Visits Former C.I.A. Black Site


A Former Guantánamo Prisoner’s New Life


Amnesty international: Free detainees, close Guantánamo

Lawsuit by Abu Ghraib Torture Survivors Ends in Mistrial Even as CACI’s Role Made Clear in U.S. Court

ScreenShot2024-05-06at11 image

DemocracyNow! 06/05/2024 - In Virginia, a historic case against U.S. military contractor CACI brought by three Iraqi survivors of torture at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq has ended in mistrial after the jury on Thursday failed to reach a unanimous verdict. The lawsuit against CACI — which was hired to provide interrogation services at Abu Ghraib — was first filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights in 2008. Since then, CACI repeatedly attempted to have the case dismissed. Plaintiffs Suhail Al Shimari, Asa’ad Zuba’e and Salah Al-Ejaili had accused CACI of conspiring to commit war crimes at Abu Ghraib.


The three were subjected to sexual abuse and other forms of torture by interrogators, including electric shocks, exposure to extreme temperatures and death threats by their interrogators. We feature a 2014 Democracy Now! interview with Al-Ejaili and speak with Baher Azmy, attorney in the case and legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Azmy notes the men were able to tell their story in a U.S. court even though the jury was ultimately confused by a complicated legal question in the case. “We got historical testimony that makes clear, I think, CACI’s responsibility for these clients’ harms,” says Azmy.


This is a historic human rights case. Say it’s among the many dozens, maybe even hundreds, of cases brought trying to challenge U.S. torture practices in U.S. courts. This is the first and only time torture survivors have come to United States court and been able to actually testify about what happened to them. And all three did and provided just heartbreaking and powerful testimony, that is a credit to their remarkable courage and resilience over these 15 years facing every obstacle that these powerful interests have put before them. But they were able to tell their story.


And even though the jury ultimately was not unanimous, what became clear is — you know, the jury would send out questions to the court periodically after the testimony was finished. That gave us pretty strong clues about what was holding them up. And what was very clear is, first, nobody seemed to question the reliability of their testimony or the fact that they in fact suffered torture or mistreatment.


And nobody seemed to question the fact that CACI interrogators, CACI interrogators, were in a conspiracy with the military police, many of whom we know were court-martialed for the abuses at Abu Ghraib, and that that conspiracy existed between CACI interrogators and military police that produced the exact same harms that our clients suffered. The mistrial ultimately turned on a legal question that was very, very confusing for the jurors. They asked about it three times in court, and ultimately revealed they can’t figure out what the meaning of this legal question is. [...]


So, the mistrial follows because even after eight days of deliberation, this jury of eight eventually told the court, “We have tried, but we cannot agree.” And so the court let them go and said that for this trial, it is a mistrial, but that we are allowed to retry the case — and have every intention of doing so. Our clients were, you know, deeply disappointed, of course, but I think they feel really proud of what they accomplished and the partnership we’ve had with them and the support that we brought, and this remarkable law firm Patterson Belknap brought, to tell their story in court. And, you know, as we say in trial law, they’ll have another opportunity to do so and get the judgment they’ve been pursuing for 15 years. Read more - Lire plus

Met police to pay ‘five-figure sum’ to French publisher arrested under anti-terror laws

3600 image

The Guardian 29/04/2024 - A French publisher who was arrested in London by counter-terror officers has been awarded “substantial” damages by the Metropolitan police, as new figures reveal thousands of foreign nationals have been stopped at UK ports under anti-terror laws.


Ernest Moret, 29, a foreign rights manager for Éditions la Fabrique, was detained at St Pancras station in April last year on his way to the London book fair. He was held under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and questioned by counter-terrorist officers about whether he had taken part in anti-government demonstrations in France and if he backed the French president, Emmanuel Macron.


Moret’s mobile phone and laptop were also confiscated for several weeks, before being returned to him after police decided to take no further action. The police also admitted downloading Moret’s sim card before returning his phone.


Moret and his lawyer, Richard Parry of Saunders Solicitors, pursued a claim for misfeasance in a public office and false imprisonment. To settle the claim without recourse to litigation, the Met has now agreed to pay Moret a five-figure sum plus his legal fees. Parry has also written to the Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, demanding an apology for Moret. Parry said: “In our view the stop was neither necessary nor proportionate. With the financial compensation settled it is now time for a full apology from the Metropolitan police.”


The move comes after an inquiry by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, which said the Met’s treatment of Moret was “exaggerated and overbearing”. Hall said the police should not be using counter-terrorism powers in public order policing. “The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests that have turned violent,” Hall’s report said.


Moret was one of at least 4,525 foreign nationals to be stopped at UK ports from 2020 to 2023, under schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, according to daily logs released under freedom of information laws.

Of these, 1,432 citizens were from the UK’s allies in EU member states, including 334 Irish, 192 Dutch, 175 French, 99 Swedes and 94 Germans.


Countries with more fraught relations with the UK had fewer of their citizens stopped. For example, 72 Russians and 32 Chinese citizens were recorded being stopped under the Terrorism Act in the three-year period, the logs reveal. Of the 8,001 people stopped from 2020 to 2023 whose nationality was recorded, 3,476 or 43.4% were British with the remaining 56.5% coming from almost 100 different countries.


The figures, released by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, are likely to be an underestimate of the foreign nationals stopped under the terrorism act because recording nationality is not a mandatory requirement under the logging system. The figures have deepened concerns that police are using counter-terrorism powers to target political activists.


Kevin Blowe, campaigns coordinator at the police monitoring group Netpol, said the figures were “genuinely alarming”. He said: “We know these powers are used for purposes other than investigating terrorism, including the targeting of political activists visiting Britain. “The data does suggest that EU states are seeking the active help of British police to target their own citizens too, although state surveillance is so lacking in transparency and accountability that this is almost impossible to confirm.


“Schedule 7 is discriminatory and draconian, it undermines civil rights and criminalises communities and political dissent. Like so many other counter-terrorism powers put in place a decade ago by the last Labour government, it is something that we would all be better off without.”


Chris Jones, from the European civil liberties group Statewatch, said the figures demonstrate the working links between UK police, their counterparts in Europe and Europol. He added: “While Europol obviously are responsible for dealing with some seriously harmful activities such as murder and human trafficking, their monitoring of peaceful protest groups is not the kind of thing that the police should be doing in an ostensibly liberal democratic system. “How they draw the lines between those things is a mystery, but arguably they don’t do a great job of it.” Read more - Lire plus


UK Islamophobia: Why Schedule 7 must be immediately repealed

European Court gives notification to Türkiye of second batch of 1,000 applications concerning convictions for terrorism offences based on use of ByLock messaging application

entete image

ECHR 29/04/2024 - The European Court of Human Rights has today given notice1 to the Government of Türkiye of another five cases covering 1,000 applications concerning convictions for membership of an armed terrorist organisation, based on the alleged use of the encrypted messaging application called “ByLock”. The background to these applications, and 1,000 others notified in December 2023, was set out by the Court’s Grand Chamber case Yüksel Yalçınkaya v. Türkiye (application no. 15669/20). The core issues raised by the applicants under Article 7 (no punishment without law) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights have already been judged in Yüksel Yalçınkaya. In that judgment the Court highlighted that there were over 8,000 applications on the Court’s docket involving similar complaints. These 1,000 apparently comparable applications are the second batch to be notified to the Turkish Government.


The applicants are 1,000 Turkish nationals. They lodged their applications with the European Court of Human Rights between 2019 and 2023. The applications mainly concern their convictions for membership of an armed terrorist organisation described by the Turkish authorities as the Fetullahçı Terör Örgütü / Paralel Devlet Yapılanması (FETÖ/PDY). The authorities consider FETÖ/PDY to be behind the attempted coup d’état of 15 July 2016. According to the applicants, their convictions were based on their alleged use of the encrypted messaging application called “ByLock”, which the Turkish courts held had been designed for the exclusive use of FETÖ/PDY members under the guise of a global application. That meant that anyone who had used Bylock could, in principle, be convicted on that basis alone of membership of an armed terrorist organisation. The applicants mainly complain that their trial and conviction for membership of the FETÖ/PDY violated the principle of no punishment without law under Article 7 of the European Convention and/or the right to a fair trial under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. Source

Russia: UN Human Rights Chief troubled by increasing crackdown on journalists

OHCHR 07/05/2024 - UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk on Tuesday said he was concerned by the increasing number of journalists charged, convicted and jailed in Russia for their independent reporting, in what appears to be an intensification of a crackdown on dissenting voices.


“The continuous attacks on free speech and the criminalization of independent journalism in Russia are very troubling,” said Türk. “The intensification of the crackdown on journalists’ independent work must immediately cease and the right to inform – a key component of the right to freedom of expression – needs to be upheld,” he added. Since the start of the invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, the number of imprisoned journalists in Russia has reached an all-time high.


At least 30 journalists are currently detained in Russia under a variety of criminal charges, including terrorism, extremism, disseminating knowingly false information about the armed forces, spying, treason, extortion, infringing upon people’s rights, violating the provisions of the law on foreign agents, inciting mass disturbances, illegal possession of explosives, and illegal possession of drugs. Out of the 30 reporters deprived of liberty, 12 are serving prison sentences ranging from five-and-a-half to 22 years in prison.


Since March, at least seven journalists have faced administrative or criminal charges, particularly for criticism of Russia’s actions in Ukraine or for alleged links to the late opposition politician Alexey Navalny, and his Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK), which was labelled as ‘extremist’ in 2021. “The Russian authorities appear to be attempting to further strengthen control of the narrative, both around domestic issues and the conduct of hostilities in Ukraine. As a result, people in Russia have increasingly restricted access to non-State information and viewpoints, which hampers their ability to benefit from diverse sources and make fully informed decisions on matters of vital public interest,” said the UN Human Rights Chief.


“I am also concerned about the frequent use of the broad legislative framework to combat terrorism and extremism,” said the High Commissioner, calling on the authorities to amend the legislation to comply fully with the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality under international human rights law.

“Journalists should be able to work in a safe environment without fear of reprisals – in line with Russia’s international human rights obligations. I call on the authorities to immediately drop charges against journalists detained solely for doing their jobs, and to release them,” Türk said. Read more - Lire plus


Russian Anti-War Activist Gets 15-Year Prison Term


It Is Our Moral Calling to Stand With Wrongly Imprisoned Russian Playwright and Director


Russia: Shameful Pride in Torture of Terrorism Suspects

Makabayan officer, activists push back vs anti-terror law complaint filed by military

resized image

rappler 03/05/2024 - An officer of the progressive Makabayan coalition, along with other activists, pushed back on the anti-terror law complaint filed against them by members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).


Represented by their counsels, the activists filed their counter-affidavits with the Nueva Ecija prosecutor’s office on Friday, May 3. The respondents are:

  • Nathanael Santiago, secretary general of Bayan Muna and Makabayan coalition;
  • Servillano Luna Jr., campaign director and former secretary general of Anakpawis;
  • Rosario Brenda Gonzalez, development worker and convenor of ASCENT, an organization involved in developmental work;
  • Anasusa San Gabriel, a church lay worker who volunteers at the Bulacan Ecumenical Forum, and is engaged in human rights and environmental advocacies


The Makabayan coalition said soldiers from the 84th Infantry Battalion, 7th Infantry Division of the Philippine Army filed the complaint for alleged violation of section 4(a) [causing death or bodily injury] and (d) [possession of weapons of mass destruction] of Republic Act (RA) No. 11478 or the anti-terror law. The petitioners accused the respondents of participating in an encounter between military and rebel forces in Nueva Ecija.


On October 8, 2023, military forces and alleged members of so-called “Kilusang Larangan Gerilya-Sierra Madre” had an alleged encounter in Barangay San Fernando, in the Central Luzon province. The identity of individuals were allegedly confirmed by so-called rebel-returnees. In their counter-affidavits, the activists belied the allegations and pointed out supposed loopholes on the manner they were identified by the witnesses.


“The complaint filed by the Armed Forces of the Philippines through its 84th Infantry Battalion, 7th Infantry Division of the Philippine Army, is a clear example of state harassment and intimidation against legitimate dissent and opposition,” the Makabayan bloc said in a statement. “The use of supposed ‘rebel returnees’ to identify the accused is a dubious tactic that raises serious questions about the integrity of the investigation.”


The soldiers also filed complaints for attempted murder, murder, and section 4 (c)(5) [attacks on civilians] of RA No. 9851 or the domestic law on International Humanitarian Law (IHL), but those were junked by the prosecution in January. Only the anti-terror law complaint remained, resulting in the activists’ indictment.


Why this matters


Progressive groups were part of the long list of petitioners who challenged the draconian law passed during Rodrigo Duterte’s time as president. Activists feared the law for many reasons, including the arbitrary power of the anti-terror council to designate individuals as terrorists without going to trial, based only on their own determination during proceedings held in secret.


The measure is now being used against progressive individuals, like in the case of Cordillera Peoples Alliance leaders Windel Bolinget, Sarah Abellon-Alikes, Jennifer Awingan-Taggaoa, and Stephen Tauli, who were designated terrorists in 2023. Most recently, the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) ordered the freezing of five bank accounts of an Eastern Visayas-based development organization that helped communities hit by natural disasters, for allegedly making funds available to the Communist Party of the Philippines. Read more - Lire plus

Saudi Arabia activist sentenced to 11 years in prison for ‘support’ of women’s rights

1465 image

The Guardian 01/05/2024 - A young women’s rights activist in Saudi Arabia was secretly sentenced to 11 years in prison by an anti-terrorism court after being arrested for “her choice of clothing and support for women’s rights”.


Saudi officials confirmed in a statement to the United Nations high commissioner for human rights that Manahel al-Otaibi was sentenced on 9 January for what the Saudi government called “terrorist offences”.


Al-Otaibi, who was sentenced in a secret hearing before the counter-terrorism court, was found guilty of charges related to a Saudi anti-terror law that criminalises the use of websites to “broadcasts or publishes news, statements, false or malicious rumors, or the like for committing a terrorist crime”.


Al-Otaibi, a certified fitness instructor and artist who frequently promoted female empowerment on her social media accounts, was arrested in November 2022. Among other charges, Otaibi was accused by Saudi authorities of using a hashtag – translated to #societyisready – to call for an end to male guardianship rules. Her sister, Fouz al-Otaibi was also accused of not wearing decent clothing but was able to flee Saudi Arabia before her arrest.


Another sister, Maryam, is a known women’s rights advocate who was detained, held, and eventually released in 2017 for protesting guardianship rules. Amnesty International and ALQST, a rights group, called on Saudi authorities to immediately and unconditionally release al-Otaibi and said her imprisonment “directly contradicts authorities’ narrative of reform and women’s empowerment”. “With this sentence the Saudi authorities have exposed the hollowness of their much-touted women’s rights reforms in recent years and demonstrated their chilling commitment to silencing peaceful dissent,” said Bissan Fakih, Amnesty International’s campaigner on Saudi Arabia.


Amnesty and ALQST pointed to an irony in Al-Otaibi’s case: the activist had been a vocal supporter of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s “radical changes”, including the alleged relaxation of dress code for women, and said in a 2019 interview that she felt free to express her views and wear what she likes thanks to the prince’s declarations. She was arrested a few years later.


Otaibi’s social media accounts on X and Snapchat portrayed her as a young and progressive woman who loves fitness, art, yoga, and travel, while also promoting women’s rights. Rights groups say al-Otaibi has been subjected to severe abuse, beginning with her forcible disappearance for five months from November 2023 to April 2024. Once she was back in contact with her family, she said she was held in solitary confinement and had broken a leg after being subjected to physical abuse. Saudi officials denied the claims.


Her case follows a slew of similar cases in which Saudi women, in particular, have been subjected to draconian sentences for using social media accounts to express themselves. They include women such as Salma al-Shehab, sentenced to 27 years, Fatima al-Shawarbi, sentenced to 30 years, Sukaynah al-Aithan, sentenced to 40 years, and Nourah al-Qahtani, sentenced to 45 years. Source


ACTION: Saudi Arabia: Saudi Woman Imprisoned for Women’s Rights Tweets: Manahel al-Otaibi

LinkedIn Share This Email

OTHER NEWS - AUTRES NOUVELLES

Accountability & redress

Reddition de compte et réparations


For Another Year, DoD Fails to Make Condolence Payments to Civilian Harm Victims

Attacks on dissent

Attaques contre la dissidence


Human Rights Organizations Sound Alarm as Canada-Ecuador Trade Talks Get Underway


ACTION: Canada: No Ecuador trade deal without human rights, consultation and consent


Indian envoy: ‘national security threats’ coming from Canada a ‘red line’

Freedom of expression

Liberté d'expression


Iranian director Mohammad Rasoulof sentenced to eight years in prison and flogging


Loi 21: Museler la critique? En tant que démocratie, le Québec doit faire mieux!


TikTok lawsuit tees up novel court fight over US ban

Freedom of the press

Liberté de la presse


Terrorism investigation into Catalan journalist raises concerns ahead of elections


2024 World Press Freedom Index: Attacks on press freedom around the world are intensifying


Explainer: Hong Kong’s national security crackdown – month 46

Islamophobia & racism

Islamophobie et racisme


CMPAC’s Assessment of Canada’s Federal 2024 Budget


ACLA: Anti-Palestinian Racism: Naming, Framing and Manifestations


CCLA: Leave to Appeal Filed at the Supreme Court of Canada on Bill 21 Case


A new Florida law prohibits many Chinese citizens from buying homes because of "national security concerns"

Migrant and refugee rights

Droits des migrant.es et des réfugié.es


ACTION: Immigration detention: Stop jailing people for seeking safety or a better life in Canada


US: Digital Metering System Exposes Migrants to Harm


Stop Surveilling People Because of Their Immigration Status


Finland and Italy want more military involvement in migration control


Europol migrant smuggling proposal torn to shreds by the Council


New project to provide systematic monitoring of EU externalisation policy

Privacy and surveillance

Vie privée et surveillance


Documents Reveal How DC Police Surveil Social Media Profiles and Protest Activity


Amnesty international: TikTok ban won’t solve harms of Big Tech’s invasive surveillance


Global: A Web of Surveillance – Unravelling a murky network of spyware exports to Indonesia


FCC fines AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon nearly $200 million for illegally sharing access to customers' location data

Transparency

Transparence


Department of National Defence wins the federal 2023 Code of Silence Award for Outstanding Achievement in Government Secrecy

Miscellaneous

Divers


Children ‘piled up and shot’: new details emerge of ethnic cleansing in Darfur


The brutal conflict in Sudan is not a civil war. It’s a war on civilians


'Violation': CSIS had officer investigated after she reported a superior raped her


PL 57 – Des organisations tirent la sonnette d’alarme pour la démocratie


Security theater instead of safety: New York’s militarized subway checkpoints are a political scam


Mapping Militarism


USA’s Military Empire: A Visual Database

ICLMG ACTIONS DE LA CSILC

Screenshot-2024-01-05-at-2 image

Canada Must Oppose Genocide in Gaza and Defend Free Expression at Home

The UN Genocide Convention – which Canada has ratified – stipulates that “states that have the capacity to influence others have a duty to employ all means reasonably available to them to prevent genocide.” Canada therefore has the obligation to not only call for a permanent and immediate ceasefire, but to immediately halt any arm sales, transfers and military aid to Israel.

ACTION

Share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

narrow-horizontal-AI-image image

Canada: Remove the national security exemptions from Bill C-27!

Bill C-27, the Digital Charter Implementation Act, has been introduced by the federal government with the promise that it would enhance privacy protections, adequately regulate artificial intelligence (AI) and protect human rights. The bill, however, is not up to the task. Please join us in denouncing the dangerous national security related exemptions in the bill.

ACTION
Screenshot-2023-06-23-at-4 image

Canada: Do not purchase armed drones

The ICLMG is a member of the No Armed Drones campaign

In the government's proposal seeking bids for its drone program it laid out disturbing scenarios for Canadian military drone use: One scenario described drones being used to surveil activists protesting a (theoretical) G20 Summit in Quebec, helping the security team intercept and identify the occupants of a vehicle, who are “anti-capitalist radicals” intending to “hang a banner concerning global warming.” Another scenario modeled after US drone strike programs features a drone bombing “Fighting Age Males” in the Middle East after spotting one of them “holding a small radio or cell phone." The initial cost estimate is $5 billion with billions more to operate the drones over their 25-year lifespan.

ACTION
CSIS-ABOVE-THE-LAW-2_1 image

CSIS isn't above the law!

In recent years, at least three court decisions revealed the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) engaged in potentially illegal activities and lied to the courts. This is utterly unacceptable, especially given that this is not the first time these serious problems have been raised. CSIS cannot be allowed to act as though they are above the law.



Send a message to Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino demanding that he take immediate action to put an end to this abuse of power and hold those CSIS officers involved accountable, and for parliament to support Bill C-331, An Act to amend the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act (duty of candour). Your message will also be sent to your MP and to Minister of Justice David Lametti.

ACTION

Canada must protect Hassan Diab!

Send an email using ICLMG’s one-click tool and share widely!

Letter in English + Lettre en français


Sign and share the LeadNow petitions to protect Hassan from further injustice

Petition in EnglishPétition en français


For more information on the case of Hassan Diab, read our webcomic, watch our animated version of the comic, or visit justiceforhassandiab.org.

Canada must repatriate all Canadians detained in NE Syria now!

On January 20, 2023, Federal Court Justice Henry Brown ruled that Canada must repatriate Canadians illegally and arbitrarily detained in northeast Syria. On February 6, 2023, the Canadian government filed an appeal and asked that the Brown ruling be set aside and placed on hold while the appeal plays out. This is unacceptable. 


Every day the government fails to bring these Canadians home, it places their lives at risk from disease, malnutrition, violence, and ongoing military conflicts, including bombing by Turkey’s military. United Nations officials have even found that the conditions faced by Canadians in prison are akin to torture. Please click below to urge the federal government to repatriate all Canadians illegally & arbitrarily detained in northeast Syria without delay.

ACTION

Please share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

20 years of fighting deportation to torture: Justice for Mohamed Harkat Now!

December 10, 2022 - ironically Human Rights Day - marked the 20th "anniversary" of the arrest of Mohamed Harkat under Canada's rights-violating security certificate regime. For Mr. Harkat, it's been two decades of fighting deportation to torture, 16 years of harassment and intrusive surveillance, arbitrary detention, solitary confinement, secret trials, PTSD: enough is enough! We call for justice for Moe Harkat now! Watch - Visionnez


TAKE ACTION: Stop Moe Harkat's deportation to torture!


ACTION: Arrêtez la déportation vers la torture de Mohamed Harkat!

Screen Shot 2021-08-26 at 5.55.05 PM.png

Reform Canada's extradition law now!

Canada’s extradition system is broken. One leading legal expert calls it “the least fair law in Canada.” It has led to grave harms and rights violations, as we’ve seen in the case of Canadian citizen Dr Hassan Diab. It needs to be reformed now.



Click below to send a message to urge Prime Minister Trudeau, the Minister of Justice and your Member of Parliament to reform the extradition system before it makes more victims. And share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram. Thank you!


Version française: Le Canada doit réformer la loi sur l'extradition! + Partagez sur Facebook + Twitter + Instagram


Phone PM Justin Trudeau


TAKE ACTION: Justice for Hassan Diab!


Just Peace Advocates' action: Write a letter to Prime Minister Trudeau: Say “No" to a second extradition of Hassan Diab

ACTION

Canada must protect encryption!

Canada’s extradition system is broken. One leading legal expert calls it “the least fair law in Canada.” It has led to grave harms and rights violations, as we’ve seen in the case of Canadian citizen Dr Hassan Diab. It needs to be reformed now.



Click below to send a message to urge Prime Minister Trudeau, the Minister of Justice and your Member of Parliament to reform the extradition system before it makes more victims. And share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram. Thank you!


Regardez la vidéo avec les sous-titres en français + Agir

ACTION
FR_frontpage_slider.png

Protect our rights from facial recognition!

Facial recognition surveillance is invasive and inaccurate. This unregulated tech poses a threat to the fundamental rights of people across Canada. Federal intelligence agencies refuse to disclose whether they use facial recognition technology. The RCMP has admitted (after lying about it) to using facial recognition for 18 years without regulation, let alone a public debate regarding whether it should have been allowed in the first place. Send a message to Prime Minister Trudeau and Public Safety Minister Bill Blair calling for a ban now.

ACTION

July to December 2023 - Juillet à décembre 2023

Thanks to your support, in the second half of 2023, we were able to work on the following issues or with the following entities:


  • Bill C-20, Public Complaints and Review Commission Act
  • Bill C-26, An Act respecting cybersecurity and amending the Telecommunications Act
  • Bill C-27, Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2022
  • Bill C-41: International assistance and anti-terrorism laws
  • Canadians detained in Northeastern Syria
  • Justice for Dr Hassan Diab & reform of the Extradition Act
  • Security certificates & inadmissibility
  • Combatting Islamophobia
  • National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA)
  • Prejudiced audits of Muslim charities
  • Federal anti-terrorist financing consultation
  • Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
  • Canada’s 4th Universal Periodic Review
  • Civil Society Coalition on Human Rights and Counter-terrorism
  • UN Counter-terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED) Canada assessment
  • UN Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights global study on counter-terrorism and civic space


For more details on each item and to see all the media articles we were mentioned in or were interviewed for, click here.


What we have planned for 2024!


Your support, will allow us to continue our work on these issues and much more in the next year:

  • Ensuring that the Canadian government’s proposals on “online harms” do not violate fundamental freedoms, or exacerbate the silencing of racialized and marginalized voices
  • Protecting our privacy from government surveillance, including facial recognition, and from attempts to weaken encryption, along with advocating for good privacy law reform
  • Addressing the lack of regulation on the use of AI in national security, including proposed exemptions for national security agencies
  • Fighting for Justice for Mohamed Harkat, an end to security certificates, and addressing problems in security inadmissibility
  • Ensuring Justice for Hassan Diab and reforming Canada’s extradition law
  • The return of the rest of the Canadian citizens and the non-Canadian mothers of Canadian children indefinitely detained in Syrian camps
  • The end to the CRA’s prejudiced audits of Muslim-led charities
  • Greater accountability and transparency for the Canada Border Services Agency
  • Greater accountability and transparency for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service
  • Advocating for the repeal of the Canadian No Fly List, and for putting a stop to the use of the US No Fly List by air carriers in Canada
  • Pressuring lawmakers to protect our civil liberties from the negative impact of national security and the “war on terror”, as well as keeping you and our member organizations informed via the News Digest
  • Publishing a collection of essays written by amazing partners on the work of the ICLMG for our 20th anniversary
  • And much more!
Help post it.png
Contribution post it.png
long border agent website.jpg
Archives.jpg

Les opinions exprimées ne reflètent pas nécessairement les positions de la CSILC - The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the positions of ICLMG.

THANK YOU

to our amazing supporters!


We would like to thank all our member organizations, and the hundreds of people who have supported us over the years, including on Patreon! As a reward, we are listing below our patrons who give $10 or more per month (and wanted to be listed) directly in the News Digest. Without all of you, our work wouldn't be possible!


James Deutsch

Bill Ewanick

Kevin Malseed

Brian Murphy

Colin Stuart

Bob Thomson

James Turk

John & Rosemary Williams

Jo Wood

The late Bob Stevenson


Nous tenons à remercier nos organisations membres ainsi que les centaines de personnes qui ont soutenu notre travail à travers les années, y compris sur Patreon! En récompense, nous nommons ci-dessus nos mécènes qui donnent 10$ ou plus par mois et voulaient être mentionné.es directement dans la Revue de l'actualité. Sans vous tous et toutes, notre travail ne serait pas possible!



Merci!