New transparency rules lack explicit safeguards for lawyers: Canadian Civil Liberties Association
According to the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), the country’s new foreign influence transparency regime may encompass low-risk and even completely transparent activity, with significant impacts on lawyers, academics, the media, and the operation of Canada’s international human rights framework.
“In what has since become an all too common practice, this regime was forced through the legislative process at breakneck speed and with little opportunity to consider its negative implications,” said Howard Sapers, the CCLA’s executive director, in a press release. “Journalists, universities, civil society and others are now left to grapple with the consequences.”
The CCLA explained that Canada’s new public registry of foreign influence activities might undermine the democratic institutions it means to protect.
Call to foreign influence commissioner
In correspondence with the Office of the Foreign Influence Commissioner, the CCLA highlighted problematic situations in which the new registry could result in the disclosure of confidential information with minimal risk of foreign interference.
The CCLA encouraged the foreign influence commissioner to:
- Clarify the new regime’s limitations
- Confirm that the reporting obligations would not cover the problematic scenarios that the CCLA identified, especially given the hefty penalties for breaches
- Address concerns of overbreadth by pointing to possible changes to the regime’s general legal framework
Context and aims of new regime
Amid increasing foreign interference in Canada’s democratic processes, the CCLA acknowledged that the country’s new regime seeks to promote transparency by requiring people in Canada to register covert arrangements to conduct Canadian-related political advocacy at the direction or under the authority of a foreign state.
However, the CCLA saw minimal effort to tailor the regime to its aims.
Comparison with other foreign influence regimes
The CCLA noted that the Canadian foreign influence transparency regime includes broad features based on similar regimes in the US, the UK, and Australia.
However, according to the CCLA, Canada’s regime ignores certain limitations and protections, including express safeguards for journalists, lawyers, and inherently transparent activity.
“Our experience with foreign influence registries in other countries shows that casting too wide a net is both counterproductive and creates a significant chilling effect on activity that is essential to any democracy,” said Tamir Israel, director of the CCLA’s Privacy, Surveillance, and Technology Program.
The CCLA pointed to criticism against other foreign influence regimes for being overbroad and for mostly capturing innocuous activity.
“Canada’s regime seems to have learned none of these lessons, adopting the sweeping breadth of these regimes and none of their explicit safeguards,” Israel said in the CCLA’s press release.
More news on foreign influence transparency regime
Here are some other recent news stories on Canada’s new foreign influence transparency regime.
On Aug. 4, Gary Anandasangaree, federal public safety minister, announced that the Foreign Influence Transparency and Accountability Act (FITAA) and the related regulations had come into force, thus establishing a publicly accessible registry of foreign influence activities and appointing an independent commissioner.
On Aug. 6, the Federation of Law Societies of Canada shared information to help legal professionals understand the application of the new foreign influence transparency regime and continue fulfilling their professional responsibilities.
Enjoy this story? Read the latest Canadian legal news on the main page!
