News

Bill C-51: Security vs. Privacy

Note: This article is hosted here for archival purposes only. It does not necessarily represent the values of the Iron Warrior or Waterloo Engineering Society in the present day.

Bill C-51, proposed at the federal scope of parliament possesses the potential to drastically revolutionize Canadian investigative process, but at a potential cost to personal privacy. Seeking to reform and modernize current practice of criminal investigation, the bill features legislative adaptations in response to contemporary technology and communication. If passed, Bill C-51 will grant more power to law enforcement agencies regarding online investigation.

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to correct several of the perceived shortcomings associated with current criminal investigation. Should the bill be passed, police will be able to identify all online networks linked with the transmission of data, and the communication traced to a suspect. This access would include information on routing, but not private content. Telecommunications servers would also be required to store data temporarily so that it is not lost or deleted prior to the need of law enforcement. Bill C-51 will also increase international co-operation with respect to online crime outside Canadian borders.
Bill C-51 aims to achieve these purposes through several amendments to Canadian criminal law. Under the bill, it will be recognized that hate propaganda initiated by an identifiable group can be spread via any means of communication. These issues are addressed in clause four, which recognizes national origin as an identifiable group, and clause five, which addresses more technically advanced means of promoting hate propaganda. Under current legislation, it is illegal to possess, manufacture, or sell a device for the theft of telecommunication services; clause eight of Bill C-51 seeks to also illegalize importing or promoting the availability of such a device. Possession of a computer virus for the purpose of committing mischief will be made an offence, addressed in clause ten. According to clause eleven, offences involving harassment and false or indecent communication will be extended to include all forms of telecommunication, from the current limitation which specify means.

Bill C-51 will also introduce new methods of obtaining specified information in the process of a criminal investigation. It will become possible for law enforcement to demand the preservation of electronic evidence, or obtain a production order to this effect. According to clause thirteen, this action will involve a preservation demand, which is attained from a judge, for a telecommunications service provider to preserve computer data for a period of up to 21 days allowing time for a proper warrant to be obtained. Warrants will be required to obtain transmitted data in real time, as opposed to historical data available through a production order. The data seized will be descriptive of the communication, but not private or privileged content.

Under clause seventeen, police will also have increased ability in administering tracking and recording devices for transmitted data. At the present, warrants permit tracking devices may be secretly installed on objects such as vehicles, allowing police to predict a suspect’s location. However, the bill proposes that similar devices might also be installed on an object that is more likely to be carried or worn, such as cell phone. Furthermore, the bill indicates that such pre-existing technology may be remotely accessed by police. In addition, the bill aims to allow law enforcement access and track to online communications in a manner similar to that of tracing telephone lines.

This proposed legislation was originally introduced to parliament in 2009 as part of Bill C-46. While the bill is intended to assist law enforcement in managing crime involving modern technology, it would also grant police access to private citizen information and communication that is unprecedented in Canadian criminal investigation.

Leave a Reply