Research Program

National Security and Human Rights

Introduction

This report examines eight critical issue areas where there is some overlap between national security imperatives and human rights concerns in Canada, post-9/11. These issue areas are wide-ranging and were chosen for their potential for stimulating a wide range of useful observations. The report, rather than consisting in in-depth research, is a systematic survey, thus reflecting the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s (CHRC) desire to identify key problems and challenges in the post-9/11 security environment in Canada and to consider the value of engaging in further targeted research consistent with the mandate of the Commission.

The September 11 terrorist attacks on targets in the United States gave rise to a new security environment, dominated by a new sense of threats, principally from transnational terrorism and so-called rogue states, and new challenges to the global order. Canada, like other nations, has been forced to consider afresh the language of domestic and international security and to worry about the extent to which new realities might profoundly alter the established norms of a democratic society. In Canada many of these norms are enshrined in the Charter of Human Rights and the Canadian Human Rights Act .

In Canada since September 11, one powerful metaphor has emerged from public and political debate concerning the issues of national security and human rights. This metaphor encourages us to view national security imperatives on one side of a set of scales, with measures to protect human rights on the other, recalling the famous "scales of justice" statuary, with its deep roots in Greek and Roman mythology (Themis, the goddess of Justice and Law). In its crudest form the metaphor suggests a zero-sum game: more rights means less security; more security means less rights. It seems incontestable that there might have to be individual trade-offs between particular national security practices and measures to protect human rights. For a society to design its national security policy and its human rights mechanisms as part of a perpetual and sometimes impossible balancing act is much more problematic. In our understandable search for a new language and a new conception of national security and rights in a post-9/11 world, we may have been badly misled by the convenience and reassurance of the "scales of justice" metaphor.

The following study does not conceptualize the problem in terms of finding a "balance" between national security and human rights. Rather, it examines the nature of the national security responses that have occurred in Canada since 2001 and, where necessary, attempts to set them in a historical context. The study explores some of the human rights implications of these national security responses. Implicitly, it assumes that a democratic, pluralist society requires both national security and human rights in equal measures and hesitates to sacrifice either, except in extraordinary circumstances and in the face of demonstrable need.¹ The objective is to try to identify current and potential points of friction between national security practices and human rights protection in Canada. As a fear of the future is the defining characteristic of the national security and human rights environment in Canada, it is particularly important that we understand the historical context and present circumstances in order to ready ourselves to face this future. New security institutions, policies and practices are, in many respects, too new to allow us to fully gauge their impact at this stage. When it comes to human rights concerns, Canadians wrestle with the implications of new laws and new practices, without the benefit of a clear sense of how far they have already shaped, or will shape, our rights environment. In other words, the dilemma does not concern a clearly established pattern of human rights abuses or discriminatory practices that can be documented in the present; the dilemma lies in what the future might hold.

The eight issue areas examined include:

• The evolution of national security policy in Canada since September 11, 2001
• New legislative measures
• The application of pre-September 11 powers
• Key federal government agencies in the national security domain
• Measures of accountability and review of national security agencies
• Federal government responsibility and capacity to protect Canadians abroad
• International liaisons in national security work
• The role of the Canadian Human Rights Commission in fostering knowledge

Each issue is dealt with in a separate section of the report. At the end of each section there are recommendations respecting further study to be carried out by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. These recommendations are also consolidated in Appendix A.

The author of this study strongly believes that, for a democratic society to function, its citizens must have a clear understanding of both national security practices and human rights concerns. So far, Canadians have failed to come up with any adequate synthesis of these intertwined themes. The Canadian Human Rights Commission sees public education as an important facet of its mandate and the author believes that the CHRC can make an important and unique contribution through a targeted research program, similar to the one advocated by the federal Privacy Commissioner. Such a research program should focus, in particular, on issues that might help the CHRC to prepare a "human rights report card" and to monitor important federal legislation in a proactive fashion.

The report calls attention to several key areas of concern that warrant ongoing research. These areas include:

Border security. The practice of border security, including the construction of anti-terrorist "watch lists," is a potential generator of important human rights concerns.

The Anti-Terrorism Act. This Act (Bill C-36) will have significant long-term implications. Forthcoming court trials, potential Charter challenges and the mandatory Parliamentary review are all important elements of any study of the Act’s implications.

Security certificates. Immigration security certificates under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act are a key point of friction between national security and human rights prerogatives, despite the fact that they have not been widely used since 9/11.

The case of Maher Arar. The O’Connor Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials with Regard to the Treatment of Maher Arar (Arar Commission) has provided, and will continue to provide, important insights into national security policy and the protection of human rights in a post-9/11 environment.

The author’s recommendations for future study attempt to align these issues with the CHRC’s mandate. Recommendations (see the individual recommendations following each section of the report and the consolidated list in Appendix A) are in keeping with the CHRC’s desire to keep a watching brief on all important federal legislation that affects human rights and to construct a planned annual "report card" on human rights in Canada.

Previous Page

Table of Contents

Next Page