View as Webpage

International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group

Coalition pour la surveillance internationale des libertés civiles

December 7, 2024 - 7 décembre 2024

ICLMG testifies on Bill C-63: The Online Harms Act is still harmful

ICLMG 05/12/2014 - Today, ICLMG’s National Coordinator Tim McSorley, testified at the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights for their study of Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act.

As part of this study, we also submitted a brief to the committee detailing our concerns as well as our recommendations to address them:

In 2021, the federal government published a proposal for online harms regulations. The International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG) joined many other organizations and experts in opposing significant parts of that proposal. The government responded by engaging in further consultation, resulting in the introduction of Bill C-63, An Act to enact the Online Harms Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act and An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts, in March 2024.

Bill C-63 responds in many ways to the critiques that ICLMG and others leveled regarding the first proposal:

• While still including seven different categories of harms, it proposes more severe rules around content moderation for the sharing of “content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor” as well as “intimate content communicated without consent,” as opposed to one approach for all seven harms.
• There is no explicit requirement that would require platforms to monitor all content in order to identify and remove harmful posts.
• The main focus is on the regulation of platforms, in the form of obligations to create and follow online safety plans, and not on policing all users.
• Except for content that sexually victimizes a child, there is no requirement for mandatory reporting of content or users to the RCMP or CSIS.
• There are no proposals to create new CSIS warrant powers.
• There are greater rules around platform accountability, transparency and reporting.

However, there remain serious areas of concern:

Part 1 of the Act:

• The harm of “content that incites violent extremism or terrorism” is overly broad and vague, and encompasses kinds of activities that are not defined in law, opening the likely possibility of excessive censorship. Further, given the inclusion of the online harm of “content that incites violence,” it is redundant and unnecessary.
• The definition of “content that incites violence” is also overly broad, allowing for the possibility of content advocating for protest and civil disobedience to be made inaccessible on social media platforms.
• While not explicitly requiring platforms to proactively monitor content, the Act does not disallow such actions either.
• Lack of clarity in the definition of what is considered a regulated service could lead to platforms being required to monitor, and likely “break”, encryption tools that protect online privacy.
• Platforms would be required to preserve certain data relating to posts alleged to incite violence or to incite violent extremism or terrorism for one year; this is likely to ensure that the data is available if law enforcement receive judicial authorization to request it. However, the current wording leaves the breadth of the requirement uncertain and in need of clarification/narrowing.
• While the Act lays out transparency requirements for online platforms, it fails to include algorithmic transparency in regard to how content is recommended.

Part 2 of the Act:

• This section amends Canada’s existing hate crime offences and creates a new stand-alone hate crime offence, and is only tangentially related to Part 1. It has raised serious concerns among human rights and civil liberties advocates in regard to the breadth of the offences and the associated penalties. As it does not touch explicitly on counter-terrorism concerns, it falls outside of ICLMG’s mandate so we will be limiting our comments. However, this does not signal that there is not a significant need for amendments and for consideration of splitting Parts 2 and 3 from the bill to be considered separately. [The brief was sent before the government’s announcement that they would be splitting the bill as we advocated for.]

You can watch his short testimony, the full panel, read his remarks or read the full brief for detailed proposals to address some of our specific concerns here: Source

ICLMG testifies: Bill C-353 is unnecessary, and would have broad negative consequences

ICLMG 28/11/2014 - ICLMG’s National Coordinator, Tim McSorley, testified at the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development meeting on November 28, 2024 for their study of Bill C-353, the Foreign Hostage Takers Accountability Act.

Although we agree with the intent of the bill to support survivors of hostage-taking and arbitrary detention as well as their families, this bill is unnecessary, and would have very broad, negative, and unintended consequences.

1. We are overall skeptical of attempts to establish new sanctions regimes in general, as they have not been effective in protecting rights internationally.
2. We are concerned about low thresholds in this bill, such as levying sanctions on the basis of “opinion”.
3. The definition of “arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations” will exclude some of the gravest cases of state-sanctioned arbitrary detention.
4. The very broad application of sanctions within this legislation, including to anyone who makes available any property to a sanctioned state, entity or individual working on their behalf, would prohibit the provision of aid.
5. We agree completely that more must be done to support survivors of these horrendous acts and their families and loved ones. However, this support should not be tied to a sanctions regime.

Watch his short testimony, the full panel or read his remarks here: Source

ICLMG reiterates its support for Hassan Diab, wrongfully convicted in unfair trial

ICLMG 04/12/2014 - As revealed on the November 20th episode of CBC’s Power & Politics, Dr. Hassan Diab – a Canadian citizen, husband, father and sociology professor – has recently been the target of a smear campaign, including calls for his dismissal from Carleton University, attacks on his reputation and, appallingly, death threats against him and his family.

It is in this context that the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG) reiterates its support for Dr. Hassan Diab, an innocent man who was wrongfully convicted in an unfair trial.

We have also sent a letter to the President of Carleton University, Jerry Tomberlin, and its Board of Governors asking them to issue a statement in support of Dr. Diab’s innocence, take measures to protect him and his family from harassment, and ensure his continued employment at Carleton University.

The ICLMG is a Canadian coalition of 44 national civil society organizations that came together to protect civil liberties in the context of the ‘War on Terror.’ As such, we have been closely following the case of Dr. Diab since the beginning: since reviewing the facts of his case early on, we have advocated for due process and a fair trial, against his extradition, for the end to his years-long detention in France, for Canada to protect Dr. Diab against a potential second extraction, and for the reform of Canadian extradition laws overall.

A summary of the facts demonstrates clearly that Dr. Diab has been the victim of a miscarriage of justice:

• Before France sent its 2008 request for the extradition of Hassan Diab, it secretly sent Canada the fingerprints they found on a hotel registration form filled out by the bomber for comparison with Dr. Diab’s: they did not match. France requested his extradition anyway, and that comparison was not divulged to the court, as sharing such evidence is not mandatory under extradition law.

• Canadian judge Robert Maranger felt forced by the extradition law to extradite Dr. Diab, even though he stated that the evidence was “illogical, convoluted, very confusing, with conclusions that were suspect” that “France presented a weak case,” and “the prospects of conviction in a fair trial seem unlikely.”

• The French investigative judges charged with Dr. Diab’s case, Jean-Marc Herbaut and Richard Foltzer, verified that he was not in France at the time of the 1980 attack, and he was finally released and return to Canada in 2018. The judges testified in support of Dr Diab in the April 2023 trial, pleading the court not to convict an innocent man – alas in vain.

• In 2018, following Hassan Diab’s return to Canada, Prime Minister Trudeau stated, “I think, for Hassan Diab, we have to recognize first of all that what happened to him never should have happened.”

• In 2019, in an unprecedented move, a French court of appeal reversed the decision of the two investigating judges to release Dr. Diab. The ruling contains multiple errors of fact, leans on unreliable evidence, misstates its own mandated handwriting report, and resorts to sheer speculation in an effort to explain away exculpatory fingerprint and consistent alibi evidence.

• In 2021, the Cour de Cassation (France’s supreme court) upheld the 2019 appellate court decision despite France’s own Advocate General asking the court to reject it, acknowledging that the decision relied upon contradictory reasoning and failed to address important issues raised by Dr. Diab’s defence.

• In April 2023 the Assize Court in Paris, France, declared Dr. Diab guilty following a rushed and unfair trial held in absentia:
• No new evidence was presented.
• Anonymous and unsourced secret intelligence were reintroduced.
• Handwriting reports by prosecution ‘evidence’, originally rejected and withdrawn as totally unreliable, were allowed back (sometimes with ‘new’ conclusions).
• Journalists who were not witnesses to the events were called to give their ‘opinions’.
• There are no official transcripts or recordings of the proceedings.
• A verdict was given in less than a day following the end of the trial.
• No appeal is possible following an in absentia
• The evidence that Dr. Diab was in Lebanon at the moment of the attack was inexplicably ignored.

The victims of the 1980 Rue Copernic bombing and their families deserve justice. But justice cannot be achieved by scapegoating an innocent man.

We invite you to share this statement publicly and with anyone misinformed about – or misrepresenting – the facts of Dr. Hassan Diab’s case: Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

Finally, please take action below for Canada to protect him from a potential second extradition request. Thank you! Source

ACTION Canada must take immediate action to end the injustice against Dr. Hassan Diab

CUPE 4600: Solidarity with Dr. Hassan Diab

ICLMG reiterates its call for Canada to abolish the rights-violating terrorist entities list

ICLMG 06/12/2014 - On Monday December 2, 2024, the Canadian government has listed the Yemeni militant group Ansarallah, commonly known as the Houthis, as a terrorist group.

The decision to list Ansarallah now comes amidst substantial political pressure, both domestically and internationally, and raises more concerns about the discretionary and arbitrary nature of the list.

Listing Ansarallah, which controls large regions of Yemen, will also likely have negative impacts on the provision of humanitarian aid and international assistance to the Yemeni population. While Canada’s counter terrorist financing laws to were amended to create an exemption for humanitarian assistance and an authorization regime for other forms of supporting basic human needs, in reality the process has been mired in confusion and delays.

The Terrorist Entities List is a blunt tool that does not allow for the flexibility needed to ensure innocent civilians do not bear the brunt of Canada’s political decisions.

In the context of yet another listing, the ICLMG reiterates our call for the abolition of the terror listing regime for the following reasons:

• The terrorist entities list is an arbitrary political tool that undermines freedom of association, freedom of expression and due process in the courts.

• The list’s effectiveness as a national security tool has never been demonstrated in a manner that justifies its use.

• The listing places the burden on the listed entity to challenge the supporting information, much of which is kept secret under the guise of protecting national security.

• There is no coherent process in place to challenge a listing. The result is an effective violation of due process and the presumption of innocence.

• The consequences of listing are severe. Assets are frozen, any use of property owned or controlled by the listed organization is a crime, as is providing any form of financial or in-kind support. Moreover, there is the stigmatization of being listed, tagging the organization, and anyone accused of being associated with it as being a “terrorist,” regardless of their personal actions, without ever laying criminal charges or proving guilt in court.

• Because it is illegal to support a listed entity in any way, including financially, it means that the organization cannot fundraise or pay a lawyer to mount a defense and challenge the terrorist listing in court. This renders it incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to be removed from the list, once again violating the right to a fair trial.

• The list is often used in discretionary ways to further the geopolitical interests of Canada and its allies. Historically, it has served to deflect from state-enacted violence by governments on their own populations, and on people in other countries, through military action and repression by national security forces and police, as has been the recurring experience during the long “War on Terror.” The list reinforces a double standard of allowing violence and the repression of civil liberties, in the name of fighting terrorism, on the part of Canada and its allies, while criminalizing reaction to that violence, or even peaceful criticism of that violence.

Due to these deep flaws, and more, the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG) has consistently called for the regime to be abolished since the Canadian coalition’s founding in 2002.

Please join us in urging Canada to abolish this rights-violating listing regime once and for all. Source

ACTION Canada: Abolish rights-violating terrorist entities list!

Unpacking Samidoun’s Terrorism Designation

It’s Time for the US to Ditch ‘Terrorism’ Designations Altogether

Monia Mazigh: Islamophobia and the ‘War on Terror’

We launched our 20th anniversary publication "Defending Civil Liberties in an Age of Counter-terrorism and National Security" on Sept 11, 2024. You can read the full PDF or get a physical copy here. Over the next few months, we will be sharing two texts from the publication per News Digest to make sure they all get the attention they deserve.

ICLMG 2024 - Immediately after 9/11, in December 2001, Canada passed its first anti-terrorism legislation despite the fact that it wasn’t affected by any terrorist attacks at that time.

Never was legislation adopted as quickly as the Anti‑terrorism Act (ATA) of 2001.

Seen from the outside, the legislation was written to tackle and prevent ‘terrorism.’ In reality, the ATA targeted mainly Muslim individuals and groups, but also other groups considered by Canadian intelligence agencies to pose a threat to the political, social or economic interests of Canada. Financial and human resources were diverted and increased to spy on Muslims at work, in their places of worship, and on university campuses.

Muslims came to represent the ‘Other’ who Canadians should fear or suspect to be violent or prone to violence because of their religious beliefs. This was not the result of any empirical or scientific studies. Rather, because the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were Muslims, all Muslims became guilty by ‘association.’

In 2002, three Canadian Muslim men – Maher Arar, Abdullah Almalki and Ahmad Elmaati – were either rendered or arrested upon their arrival in Syria and Egypt, and later detained and tortured at the request and with the complicity of the Canadian government. A few years later, another Canadian man – Muayyed Nureddin – shared the same tragic fate of being detained, tortured and imprisoned at Canada’s request. It took almost a decade before the Canadian government acknowledged its wrongdoing. However, this didn’t stop Canada from enforcing the anti-terrorism legislation nor from continuing to arrest and convict Muslims under this legislation. So far, even though there have been several non-Muslim perpetrators of acts that meet the Canadian legal definition of terrorism and have often resulted in many more casualties – such as the Quebec city mosque shooting – Muslim individuals make up nearly all those charged and convicted under anti-terrorism legislation for which the threshold of guilt is lower than for any other criminal acts.

In the last two decades, several Muslim Canadians were detained abroad by oppressive regimes that used anti- terrorism legislation or the so-called “global War on Terror” to justify arresting, imprisoning and silencing political opponents, or individuals opposed to the regime. Canada kept its head in the sand and barely lifted a finger to help these individuals until public campaigns were organized by family, friends and human rights activists to release them.

That was the case of the Canadian citizen Abousfian Abdelrazik who spent about six years in Sudan, both in prison and eventually in the Canadian Embassy in Khartoum. Upon his return, he declared that CSIS had told him, “Sudan will be your Guantanamo.” The Canadian government refused to deliver him a Canadian passport. They put up many obstacles for his return home, including threatening to charge anyone who contributed to his plane ticket with financial support of an individual on the UN 1267 terrorist sanctions list (even though Canada had urged the UN to remove Abdelrazik from it). In the end, a group of Canadian citizens defied the government and paid for Abdelrazik’s plane ticket. Luckily, no one was charged.

Benamar Benatta is an Algerian refugee who arrived in Canada from the US in 2001 after his visa expired. He claimed refugee status in Canada but because he had been a pilot in the Algerian military, he was racially and religiously profiled. Canadian authorities turned him over to American officials who imprisoned him for five years even after he was cleared of any suspicion of terrorism.

Following the Arab Spring of 2011, Khalid Al Qazzaz, a Muslim permanent resident studying in Toronto, travelled to Egypt to work for the newly-elected Egyptian president. He was arrested and detained by the military following a coup in 2013. His Canadian wife and their four children were barred from travelling back to Canada, their assets were frozen by the Egyptian authorities and Canada did little to press the Egyptian authorities for his safe return. Eventually, he was able to return to Canada following a campaign by family members and civil society groups.

The Canadian businessman, Salim Alaradi, was kidnapped, tortured and arbitrarily detained by the United Arab Emirates in 2014 on account of his trade ties with Libya, and the influence and political interference of the UAE in that country. He was eventually freed and returned to Canada in 2016.

In 2019, Yasser Albaz, another Canadian businessman, was arrested in Egypt and imprisoned without charges until a campaign by his family and friends helped to release him and bring him home in July 2020.

If these men weren’t Muslims, would they have been arrested, imprisoned and tortured? If these men weren’t Muslims, would Canada have remained silent and reluctant in defending their rights, or worse, been complicit in the abuse of their rights? Just think of the Canadian government’s outcry at the arrest of the two Michaels by China in 2018.

Meanwhile in Canada, in 2006, Muslim men were arrested and charged for planning to detonate truck bombs and attack the Canadian Parliament, the CBC headquarters and CSIS offices. The Toronto 18 was a group of eighteen Muslim Canadian men who were arrested and charged under the Anti‑terrorism Act. Seven pleaded guilty, three adults and one youth were convicted and released after a few years, four adults and two youths were released after the charges against them were stayed, and one youth had his charges dismissed. Despite public knowledge that the group had been infiltrated and enticed to plan those attacks by an informant working for and paid by a CSIS agent, these individuals were portrayed in the media as homegrown terrorists and harshly convicted accordingly.

Then, using and stoking the fresh fear-mongering around Daesh, the former Harper government passed the Anti‑ terrorist Act of 2015, formerly known as the infamous Bill C-51. Once again, this bill violated fundamental rights, especially of Muslim Canadians, particularly through secretive new powers for CSIS, expanding and codifying the No Fly List, and creating vast new information sharing powers.

Over the following years, Muslim Canadians who travelled to military zones controlled by Daesh were automatically labelled terrorists. They have been denied due process and are now being held in indefinite detention, in conditions akin to torture and with little prospect of release, including many children born there.

This is what Islamophobia looked like to me during the past 20 years. We must unite in our resistance and opposition to these unjust and discriminatory laws so we can build a society free of Islamophobia.

Monia Mazigh is an academic, award-winning author and human rights activist. She was the ICLMG National Coordinator in 2015 and 2016. moniamazigh.wordpress.com Source

Version française : Islamophobie et « guerre contre le terrorisme »

Sophie Lamarche Harkat: What 20 Years of Injustice has Meant for Us

Next week, December 10, 2024 marks 22 years of injustice for Moe Harkat. Enough is enough. Please take action at iclmg.ca/stop‑harkat‑deportation and justiceforharkat.com. The following piece recounts the lives of Mohamed (Moe) Harkat and Sophie Lamarche Harkat in a nutshell for the past twenty years.

ICLMG 2024 - December 10, 2002. International Human Rights Day. A sudden arrest outside our apartment building in broad daylight under some bogus law no one knew about or understood. In the dark about the allegations and secret evidence. A call at my work announcing Moe’s arrest and detention. Being on the verge of passing out when I find out it is related to terrorism. My mother remembering the sound of fear and panic in my voice since that day. Being on the front page of every national newspaper, on every radio station and TV channel. Being portrayed as the most evil person on the planet. Being worried I might never see him again. Afraid he could be deported at any time.

The stress of having to find a lawyer, when everyone refuses to take on any case related to terrorism, and having to pay a huge retainer before anything even happens. Detention without charge for 3.5 years. One year in solitary confinement, hundreds of hours waiting to see hubby in isolation, no access to fresh air or the outdoors for six months. No Quran or anything to read for the first few months, one shower a week, no access to a razor. Feeling like a terrorist before your first court appearance because you look like Bin Laden since you are unable to shave. Constant struggles with the prison guards to have our rights respected. Inhuman conditions of detention. Being humiliated, degraded and targeted by the staff, as well as by the media and the court. Never knowing what’s coming next. Always in the dark about everything. Never being charged with a crime. Only allegations you cannot defend against. An informant that fails a lie detector test and another that has an affair with the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) agent. Countless hours in court and reading thousands of legal documents. Losing all confidence in the justice system.

Years of our lives going to waste. Having to leave my good government job because they are uncomfortable with my becoming a public figure speaking out against my own government and security certificates. Having to move in with my mother again because I’m jobless and broke. Having to pay and borrow thousands of dollars to pay legal fees. Husband kidnapped from the detention centre with some of the worst conditions in Canadian history only to be moved secretly in a private plane accompanied by Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) agents to Guantanamo North, a prison built in Kitchener specifically for Security Certificate detainees, who were never charged. Portraying it as Fantasy Island because they got to wear their own clothing – no more orange jumpsuits – but they are hours away from their families, denied visits, and forced to endlessly ask for their basic rights to be respected. Their own private jail but with no benefits. No one gave a damn!

After 3.5 years of detention, the best news comes along. Moe is released on bail to his family. One hour after his release, we all regret making that decision while we are sitting around the table discussing our new reality with the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) supervisor. Toughest conditions in Canadian history. A GPS bracelet around his ankle that didn’t come off for 7.5 years. A huge monitor tied to his belt that complements the bracelet. Surveillance cameras inside the home. Court appointed sureties with him at all times, seven days a week, 24 hours a day. I became a full-time jailer for my own husband. Prisoners of our own home. Not allowed to pass the property line. Reporters jumping the fence to take photos. Moe panicking because they are not ‘’pre-approved’’ to be in contact with him. Curfew on the property, cannot cook on the BBQ alone, must always be tied to a surety’s hip. CBSA calling in the middle of the night to check up on him. Reporting by phone to the CBSA. Phone intercepted and mail always monitored. Every visitor and family member (including my 80-year-old grandmother and newborn nephew) must be approved in advance before visiting. Several CBSA vehicles and officers parked in front of our home or in our own private driveway to monitor us.

We get two to three pre-approved outings per week for up to four hours, you know… to buy toilet paper, medication, and stuff like that. Every location, street, road needs to be pre-approved in advance, often only to be rejected. Denied a birthday outing because we’ll have speeches and that’s too political. On a good day, only half a dozen CBSA officers follow us at the grocery store, restaurant, and while we are doing everyday mundane things. Officers sitting in a car for hours in front of my sister’s house while we visit the new baby. Nonstop communications on their walkie talkies describing our every move. Surrounded by more security than the Prime Minister. Always dressed up in uniforms with bullet proof vests and carrying weapons… you know in case some senior comes over to say “Hi.” This happened and Moe sweated his life away, afraid he was breaching his conditions. CBSA taking notes of every purchase. Attending a pap test with Moe sitting in the corner because he can never be left alone. We must share a public washroom or change room because he can never be left alone.

Being described as ‘’feisty’’ (over a hundred times) during court appearances because I turned back to give them the evil look or was breathing harder than usual. Can’t point in their direction as it “jeopardizes their security.” Wanting to yell at them so many times but can’t take that chance since I’m his main surety and his ‘’freedom’’ depends on it. Unexpected raid at our house, while I’m in the shower, that lasted over six hours with 13 or more CBSA, two Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), three RCMP officers, sniffing dogs (for narcotics, currency, and explosives). House and lives turned upside down just because CBSA could ‘’lose their powers’’ any day. Computer, texts and emails monitored, and the list goes on. Passing on a yellow light is considered a breach as it violates ‘good behavior.’ Simple U-turns considered suspicious because we are not allowed to use non-approved roads. CBSA officers following us to shows at the National Art Centre or to the movies, and simply enjoying themselves. Impossible for Moe to get a decent job to this day because CBSA agents like to park close by or monitor his every move. Still reporting in person 16 years later. At times, Moe wishes he was back in jail because it would be so much easier on everyone. Three Supreme Court challenges that were a complete let down. Several governments and ministers doing absolutely nothing, putting the file on the back burner or letting the process drag on. So many sleepless nights, we stopped counting.

Putting on hold buying a home because we have so many legal debts and both of us cannot get decent jobs after being demonized in the news for two decades. Putting on hold travelling and discovering the world. Not able to visit or see his mother and brothers for over 35 years. Starting a family late because we do not want them to live under jail-like conditions. Having multiple miscarriages and health scares because we’re both getting too old. Never-ending health issues because of the constant stress. Cloud of deportation over our heads that never goes away. Losing family and friends because they prefer to believe the government even if the evidence does not exist or is kept secret. Gaining thousands more supporters and new friends who believe in social justice and in a fair trial. Having doubts in the justice system but continuing to hope. That has been our lives for the past 20 years.

Take action at iclmg.ca/stop‑harkat‑deportation and justiceforharkat.com

Sophie Lamarche Harkat turned human rights activist overnight on December 10th, 2002. She has been fighting to save her husband from detention, deportation, to obtain justice and to protect human rights from Canada’s security certificate regime and national security apparatus since. They have and continue to live under a cloud of secrecy and deportation for the past 22 years. Source

Version française : Qu’ont signifié pour nous 20 ans d’injustice?

Alex Neve on watching CTV documentary on Jack Letts' parents fight to bring him back home

Facebook 04/12/2024 - To understand what is at stake for Canadians unlawfully locked up for 7+ years in NE Syria, and the callow injustice of Canada's refusal to intervene to uphold their basic human rights, take the time to watch Avery Haines' important documentary for CTV's W5, and her powerful interview with Jack Letts, imprisoned in Raqqa.

Our civil society delegation met with Jack, held in a different prison at that time, 15 months ago in August 2023, when we were in NE Syria. It is beyond outrageous that Canada has done absolutely nothing to bring this travesty to an end since then.

When we spoke with Jack he asked whether we thought he would still be there in 10 years. It was a tough question to answer, not wanting to give false hope, not wanting to crush hope. I said he was not going to be going home imminently, but that I was confident it would not be another 10 years. I told him I hoped it might only be another year. I said that because I truly believed that Canada's commitment to justice would come through. How could it not? I can see now that I was naive and wrong to hold that belief. I am haunted by that.

Jack is not alone. 8 other Canadian men, and 7 Canadian children (and their non-Canadian mums & siblings) have also been abandoned there. Utterly abandoned, to what?

In a media scrum Minister of Foreign Affairs Melanie Joly asserts that "when you decide to join ISIS and you leave the country and you go to the other side of the world, well then you have to bear responsibility for your decisions." And thus the rule of law, the fundamental tenets of justice and the entire international human rights system which Canada purports to champion are jettisoned. This disgraceful position shames us as a nation.

"Bear responsibility" meaning indefinite, cruel, harrowing, life-threatening detention for 7 years? Apparently yes. For 10 years? 20 years? Forever? Never charged? Never given an opportunity to respond to allegations and see the evidence? Never allowed a lawyer? Never brought in front of a judge? Where, and how, does it end? Is that our conception of justice now?

As Jack's mum, Sally Lane, says, it is ironic that families are calling for trials, not governments. Indeed, it is the families who still believe in, count on and demand that justice prevail.

Instead Canadian policy is to prop up and buy into a cesspool of illegality and insecurity that will only serve to breed alienation, resentment, anger and violence.

The US government & local Syrian Kurdish authorities have implored Canada to repatriate its citizens. Human rights obligations require Canada to repatriate its citizens. Basic humanity calls on Canada to repatriate its citizens. Justice beseeches Canada to repatriate its citizens: to face charges & trial if there is evidence, to be freed if there is not.

Watch and then write your MP, write Minister Joly, write the Prime Minister. Let them know that your Canada believes in human rights and stands up for justice, and that your Canada must and will repatriate all Canadians imprisoned in NE Syria. Source

UPDATED Canada must repatriate all Canadians detained in NE Syria + Initiate an independent investigation into the death of Canadian citizen FJ now!

ACTION “Canadians are dying": Free Jack Letts & 19 Canadian Kids, Women & Men in Syria

Spy service pushed for Abdelrazik's inclusion on Canadian no-fly list, court hears

The Canadian Press 02/12/2024 - A former senior Canadian Security Intelligence Service official has acknowledged the spy service wanted Abousfian Abdelrazik's name on Canada's no-fly list.

David Vigneault struggled to recall other details as he testified Monday in Federal Court in Abdelrazik's civil lawsuit against Ottawa over his detention and alleged torture in Sudan two decades ago.

The Sudanese-born Abdelrazik became a Canadian citizen in the 1990s and was arrested during a 2003 visit to his native country to see his ailing mother. CSIS officers travelled to Khartoum to interrogate him in October 2003 about suspected extremist links.

Abdelrazik, who denies involvement in terrorism, says he was tortured by Sudanese authorities during two periods of detention. Federal lawyers argue Abdelrazik is an author of his own misfortune, saying Canada did not urge Sudan to keep him in detention or mistreat him, or create a risk that these things might happen.

The court has heard about the contrasting concerns of CSIS, which considered Abdelrazik a security threat, and Canada's foreign ministry, which had a duty to provide consular assistance to him. American officials were also concerned that Abdelrazik posed a danger in the tense post 9-11 era.

Following Abdelrazik's first release from Sudanese detention in 2004, his inclusion on a U.S. no-fly list prevented his return to Canada, says a document presented in court. Abdelrazik's second release from Sudanese custody came in summer 2006. However, his presence on a United Nations security watch list, at the request of the U.S., further complicated his efforts to fly home to Canada.

In mid-2007, CSIS "was the originating agency" in getting Abdelrazik added to Canada's no-fly list, the document says. Vigneault, who testified in French, accepted the notion that CSIS was behind the move. But he did not remember any role he might have played. Vigneault was a senior CSIS official from December 2006 to June 2009, became the spy service's director in 2017 and left the service earlier this year. He now works in the private sector.

Paul Champ, a lawyer for Abdelrazik, asked him about the findings of the inspector general's office, a watchdog over CSIS who examined the case. The report found a gap in operational policies regarding the "quasi-consular role" that CSIS employees were called upon to play in Abdelrazik's file, citing an apparent conflict of interest.

Canada's foreign ministry provides impartial consular assistance to Canadians in distress abroad, the report said. "On the other hand, the role of CSIS employees involves gathering security intelligence on threats." Vigneault indicated he had limited recollection of the inspector general's findings. "I don't recall the details of this report," he said.

However, Vigneault suggested that scrutiny of CSIS by review bodies and the courts during this period generally spurred change within the intelligence service. "There was an important acknowledgment that our practices should evolve, given the expectations of the government and of Canadians." Source

Lawyer Paul Champ: CSIS David Vigneault was the 20th witness of Abdelrazik trial as we start 7th week. His notes say he briefed a Minister on the risk of torture to Abdelrazik but he claimed he had no memory of it at all.

Lawyer Paul Champ: In shocking testimony, former Canadian Ambassador to Sudan said today that Sudanese told them that if Canada didn’t immediately repatriate Abdelrazik then they would find a “permanent solution”. Ambassador testified that meant he would be “disappeared”. Still Canada did nothing.

IJV Condemns Police Repression Against Palestine Solidarity Movement

IJV 02/12/2024 - Across Canada and internationally, we are seeing a marked rise in violent repression of the Palestine solidarity movement. Independent Jewish Voices condemns the mounting criminalization of Palestine solidarity activism, and the use of excessive force by police to intimidate and harass activists. 

On October 15, 2024, the Canadian government listed the group Samidoun, also known as the Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network, as a “terrorist entity” under the Criminal Code, in response to months of pressure by pro-Israel lobby groups, a few Liberal MPs and the opposition Conservatives. On November 14, 2024, a Vancouver Police Department Emergency Response Team raided the home of Charlotte Kates, international coordinator of that organization, using flash-bang grenades and armoured vehicles in a residential area. These latest actions taken by Canadian authorities constitute a gross violation of several fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter. Regardless of differences one might have with Kates and Samidoun, this repression is clearly meant to intimidate the entire Palestine solidarity movement with threat of criminalization.

We are seeing more and more of this authoritarian overreach connected with grassroots efforts to support the Palestinian cause. In November 2023, demonstrators who had sprayed washable red paint on an Indigo books storefront woke up to police violently raiding their homes, tossing their belongings and knocking doors off their hinges. In September 2024, Toronto police dragged Jewish activists out of an event and shoved and assaulted a group of peaceful protestors outside. In the same week, police in Calgary used excessive force against a group of peaceful protestors at a weekly rally against the ongoing genocide in Gaza. In Montréal, police forces tear-gassed and used excessive force against protestors, fracturing a demonstrator’s arm, and injuring four others, who had to be rushed to hospital. On November 25th, Ottawa police violently arrested peaceful protestors at a weekly rally in solidarity with Gaza. These events demonstrate an unacceptable use of violence by police departments against Canadians who are calling out for justice and peace. 

This ongoing repression is not about protecting national security or public safety—it is about silencing dissent, intimidating activists, and stifling critical conversations about Canada’s complicity in Israeli genocide and apartheid.

The process for designating an organization as a terrorist entity has been widely criticized by civil liberties and human rights groups due to its low bar and discretionary nature that allows authorities to add a group to the list, the lack of transparency and basic procedural safeguards in the law, and the serious consequences faced by groups added to the list wrongfully or in error. In this light, the public should not be prepared to accept the government’s designation as fact, or as a measure that will necessarily keep the public any safer.

The recent publication of the Canadian Handbook on the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism threatens to legitimize this kind of overreaching police violence and government repression even further. The handbook is designed to inform police departments, judges, workplaces, universities and other Canadian institutions on how to implement the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, which dangerously conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism. If heeded, this handbook could be utilized to justify increasingly militarized police raids such as we have witnessed in Toronto and Vancouver, under the premise that denouncing Israeli genocide or calling Zionism a settler colonial project is considered a hate crime. 

Canada’s attacks on activists are part of a rising international trend that seriously threatens fundamental civil liberties. In the US, House Resolutions have recently passed which further empower the government to silence and repress pro-Palestine advocacy. The situation in the US is likely to only get worse should Trump pursue an initiative known as Project Esther, which weaponizes accusations of antisemitism in an attempt to undermine and eventually criminalize pro-Palestine solidarity activism. In the UK, a journalist’s home was raided and his property confiscated. Germany’s lower house of parliament passed a bill adopting IHRA amidst ongoing criticism of the government’s violent crackdown on and censorship of Palestine advocacy. 

By broadly labelling the Palestine solidarity movement as antisemitic or supporting terrorism, Western governments are effectively criminalizing the moral imperative to speak out against injustice. As IJV and other members of civil society around the world demand a full arms embargo, sanctions against Israeli officials, an end to international complicity in Israel’s war crimes, and for their governments to abide by international law and its courts, Western governments have instead chosen to escalate their repression of dissent.

This is not just a matter of defending Palestinian rights—it’s a matter of defending the fundamental freedoms that protect all of us. If we allow the state to strip away these rights in the name of protecting Israel, we are all at risk. The struggle for Palestinian liberation is inseparable from the struggle for justice here in Turtle Island. It is imperative that we stand in solidarity with Palestine solidarity activists and resist the government’s criminalization of dissent, or we will all suffer the consequences of living in a society where political repression is the norm, and governments – regardless of their political colour – determine what political speech is acceptable and what political speech must be silenced. Source

NEW Join 95,000+ people in saying: DROP THE CHARGES NOW - STOP VIOLENT POLICE REPRESSION AGAINST PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTORS!

Ottawa police forced organizers and protestors to sign problematic release conditions under threat of prolonged detention, told if they broke any condition they could be jailed for 2 years

Activists say Montreal pro-Palestinian protests have been over-policed

Jewish Anti-Zionist Activist Describes His Arrest Under UK’s Anti-Terror Law

Refugees welcome? Comparing Canadian policy on Palestinian and Ukrainian refugees

CCPA 20/11/2024 - Canada’s response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 was an incredible show of compassion towards a nation facing an extraordinary threat to its livelihood and safety. Less than a month after the invasion, parliament approved a recommendation by the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration and launched the Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel (CUAET) on March 17. It allowed any Ukrainian national, regardless of ties to Canada, to enter the country for up to three years as a temporary resident.

The program provided financial support, health care, and job opportunities to Ukrainians seeking refuge. On May 11, the government announced that it would provide three charter flights, free of charge, for holders of the CUAET visa. Under a separate program introduced on May 22, the Canada-Ukraine Transitional Assistance Initiative further supported Ukrainian refugees by providing each adult $3,000 and each child $1,500. Provinces such as British Columbia and Ontario waived health insurance plan requirements, and Manitoba covered the cost of medical examinations upon arrival.

For two years, Canada accepted an unlimited number of applications from Ukrainian citizens who were seeking temporary refuge from the war. From March 2022 to April 2024, 962,612 applications were approved, with a total of 298,128 Ukrainians arriving in Canada. These refugees were provided with a clear pathway to employment, access to health care, and, in many cases, a sense of immediate belonging. This swift action is commendable and speaks to Canada’s potential to act decisively when faced with humanitarian crises.

My mom, who was raised in Odesa, Ukraine, personally knows several people who have greatly benefited from the CUAET program and Canada’s humanitarian assistance. For many, it was an immense sigh of relief after months of relentless Russian attacks, finally being able to find peace in a country that not only welcomed them but provided the resources needed to rebuild their lives.

Canada’s swift and compassionate response to their struggles offered them a future they thought had been lost in the chaos of war. For these families, the transition to Canada wasn’t just about escaping the violence but about finding hope and stability in the face of their unimaginable hardships. This sense of urgency and compassion has been visibly absent when it comes to Palestinian refugees fleeing the Israeli genocide in Gaza. Despite facing decades of displacement, ongoing conflict, and severe humanitarian crises, Palestinian refugees encounter significant barriers when seeking refuge in Canada.

I grew up in Nazareth. Khirbet Tana in the Nablus governorate is around an hour and a half drive from where I used to live. On November 9, 2023, at around midnight, 15 cars filled with Israeli settlers arrived at the village with a bulldozer. According to B’Tselem, the settlers assaulted the residents, tied their hands, beat and humiliated them, and injured several, including one man who suffered cracked ribs. The following day, the Israeli military blocked access to the village, trapping the already devastated community.

This kind of violence is not an isolated incident—it is a part of the daily reality for many Palestinians. Canada could have responded swiftly. It could have offered the resident of Khirbet Tana a chartered flight and emergency assistance. Yet, unlike the swift and welcoming response extended to Ukrainians, Palestinians fleeing similar or even worse conditions must navigate a complex and restrictive system when seeking safety in Canada. For those escaping Gaza, the situation is even more dire. Even when basic necessities like water, electricity, and medical care are impossible to find due to ongoing blockades and airstrikes, the chance of finding refuge in Canada is far from guaranteed. The differences are genuinely striking.

Unlike Ukrainians, who were granted unconditional access to Canada, Palestinians must demonstrate a clear connection to the country before they are even considered for entry. While Ukrainian refugees saw unlimited applications accepted, Canada initially capped Palestinian refugee admissions at just 1,000 people, which was later increased to 5,000. Most striking is the approval rate: 81 per cent of Ukrainian applications were accepted, but only 16 per cent of Palestinian applicants have been approved. As of October 5th, 2024, only 300 Palestinians have found refuge in Canada.

The conditions Palestinians face in Gaza are nothing short of catastrophic. With blockades cutting off access to essential supplies, frequent airstrikes, and never-ending threats of violence, Palestinians are living in an unprecedented state of crisis. Yet, Canada’s response has been slow, limited, and bureaucratic. While Ukrainians were able to enter Canada almost immediately, Palestinians endure a maze of documentation, delays, and uncertainty.

Even the differences in the application processes are telling. Ukrainian applicants are not asked detailed security questions and have a swift experience. But for Palestinians, the process takes an average of six hours, and this is without considering the challenges of disrupted cell service and constant bombings. Palestinians must provide a full employment history since the age of 16, indicate their social media accounts, and are even obligated to identify and explain any scars or injuries that required medical attention. These invasive and excessive requirements reflect a profoundly unequal system.

This disparity in treatment raises serious questions about Canada’s commitment to universal human rights and its responsibility on the world stage. How can a country that acted so swiftly to help one group of people fleeing violence be so hesitant when it comes to another? The answer lies in anti-Palestinian racism, which the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association has defined as a form of racism that “silences, excludes, erases, stereotypes, defames or dehumanizes Palestinians or their narratives.” This deeply entrenched bias impacts not only how Canada responds to refugees but also how Palestinian suffering is viewed globally.

While Ukrainians were met with empathy and immediate support, Palestinians have often been looked at through a lens of suspicion, seen as inherently dangerous. This perception has been driven by decades of misinformation and prejudice, and it shapes the same policy decisions that leave Palestinians trapped in war zones with little hope for sanctuary. For Canada to uphold its values of justice and equality, it must confront this racism and extend the same compassion to Palestinians that it has to others in need. The contrast between the two responses reflects not only a failure of policy but a failure of moral courage.

The government of Canada has demonstrated its capacity for swift and compassionate action in times of crisis, as seen in its response to the Russian war on Ukraine. The country’s open-door policy, generous financial support, and expedited pathways for resettlement show what is possible when political will align with humanitarian values. But when it comes to Palestinians who are fleeing Israeli violence, Canada’s actions have been disappointingly slow and limited.

The contrast in these responses is stark and deeply troubling. Palestinians, facing an even more dire situation than Ukrainians are facing under Russia, have not been met with the same level of empathy or urgency. Instead, they encounter roadblocks, and a refugee policy designed to exclude rather than welcome. Canada’s response to Palestinian refugees has been marked by hesitation, excessive scrutiny, and a blatant lack of compassion.

If Canada wishes to maintain its image as a global leader in human rights, it must reconcile these contradictions. Palestinians deserve the same dignity and protection as other refugees. Anything less perpetuates a cycle of discrimination that denies their humanity and further entrenches global inequities in the response to suffering. Source

ACTION Tell Miller and Joly: Save Families from Gaza Now!

NEW Help us fix the Gaza Visa Program: Use our automated tool to call your MP!

Amnesty International Investigation Concludes That Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza

Amnesty International 04/12/2024 - Amnesty International’s research has found sufficient basis to conclude that the government of Israel has committed and is continuing to commit genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip.

In the landmark report, ‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza, Amnesty International documents how, during its military offensive launched in the wake of the deadly Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on October 7, 2023, Israeli forces have carried out acts prohibited under the Genocide Convention, with the specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza.

Israeli forces have caused unprecedented destruction, at a level and speed not seen in any other conflict in the 21st century, leveling entire cities and destroying critical infrastructure, agricultural land and cultural and religious sites, rendering large swathes of Gaza uninhabitable.

42,000 Palestinians have been killed, including over 13,300 children, and injured over 97,000 more, many of them in direct or deliberately indiscriminate attacks, often wiping out entire multigenerational families.

The government of Israel imposed conditions of life in Gaza that created a deadly mixture of malnutrition, hunger and diseases, and exposed Palestinians to a slow, calculated death.

The government of Israel also subjected hundreds of Palestinians from Gaza to incommunicado detention, torture and other ill treatment.

In isolation, these are serious violations of international humanitarian law or international human rights law. But looking at the broader picture of Israel’s military campaign and the cumulative impact of its policies and acts, the conclusion we came to is genocidal intent.

Amnesty International’s research report is based on interviews with more than 200 people, including Palestinian victims and witnesses, local authorities in Gaza, healthcare workers, extensive fieldwork, analysis of extensive visual and digital evidence, including satellite imagery, and analysis of statements by senior Israeli government and military officials, and official Israeli bodies.

Our findings must serve as a wake-up call to the international community: this is genocide, and it must stop now.

We are releasing this report to help stop the ongoing genocide, prevent further acts of genocide against Palestinians, and reiterate the urgency of a ceasefire. Read more - Lire plus

Video How Amnesty International arrived at the conclusion that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza

NEW Call on Canada to stop fueling Israel's Genocide in Gaza and end arms sales!

NEW Canada Post Solidarity Picket with CUPW & PPSWU, Saturday, December 7, 10 AM, 1424 Sandford Fleming, Ottawa

NEW Ottawa protest: Free the people, free the land! Sat Dec 14, 2PM, Human Rights Monument

Gaza Bombing: Canada Is Breaking Its Own Laws

100 jews and allies occupy Parliamentary builidng, demand an arms embargo now

Protests at Weapons Companies Across Canada Expose Canada’s Involvement in F-35 Supply Chain, Demand Arms Embargo on Israel

Plus de 82 000 étudiant·es en grève pour la libération de la Palestine

UK legal challenge against arms exports to Israel

No to UN Cybercrime Convention: When “cybercrime” laws infringe human rights: lessons from the Arab region

AcceessNow 27/11/2024 - Next month, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) looks set to adopt a new convention on cybercrime; despite myriad warnings from civil society that, as it stands, the convention poses serious threats to digital rights worldwide. [...]

Access Now has been actively working to help ensure that the first legally binding, UN-led cybercrime convention upholds, rather than undermines, human rights. However, we are deeply concerned that, in its current draft, the treaty’s lack of sufficient human rights safeguards will facilitate violations of international human rights law. In particular, the treaty’s broad scope means it encompasses activities that should be protected under international human rights law or that are unrelated to cybercrime.  



For instance, it will allow governments to cooperate with each other in collecting electronic evidence for “serious crimes,” defined as any offense punishable by a sentence of at least four years’ imprisonment. But this vague definition could encompass national offenses such as defamation of officials (e.g.Tunisia’s Cybercrime Decree), blasphemy (e.g. Saudi Arabia’s Cybercrime Law), or other protected activities, including online expressions of sexual orientation or LGBTQ+ identity, which, as outlined above, all carry severe penalties in their respective countries. Consequently, such provisions could activate sweeping surveillance powers and enable data sharing between countries with poor track records of protecting human rights.

In addition, the UN cybercrime convention stipulates that countries must ensure that criminal offenses outlined in other UN conventions are also considered offenses under this convention, when the former are committed using technology. For instance, inciting hatred against certain racial or religious groups, which is already prohibited by the ICCPR, would also be a crime under the UN cybercrime convention when expressed online. This could open the door to even greater cooperation on content-based offenses, further undermining freedom of expression in the Arab region in particular.

Finally, it’s important to note that the cybercrime convention does not prevent countries from sharing or using electronic evidence obtained in violation of human rights, leaving this decision for individual countries to make based on their respective, and varying, human rights commitments. But if governments can exchange and use all electronic evidence for criminal investigations, no matter how it was obtained and who from, this could create a digital equivalent of the Guantanamo Bay detention center, whereby evidence collected with minimal regard for the rule of law is used to undermine established national legal frameworks. This would set a troubling precedent, eroding trust in judicial integrity and threatening the founding principles of democracy. 

Our recommendations

In light of the above, we strongly urge UN member states reconsider their support for this treaty, and to:

• Call a vote, and vote against or, at the very least, abstain from voting on the adoption of the convention at next month’s UNGA meeting; 
• Resist its ratification at a national level, and ensure robust deliberation on its human rights impacts; 
• Decline to participate in the signing ceremony held in Vietnam; and 
• Emphasize the need for further improvements to the convention’s human rights, procedural law, and other safeguards during upcoming negotiations that will elaborate and potentially expand its definition of “serious crimes” (the Optional Protocol negotiations). Read more - Lire plus

India’s new cyber rules for telecoms come with big privacy risks, experts say

UN: Renew a Standing Application of the Humanitarian Carve-out as Applied to the 1267 ISIL/al-Qaida Regime

Charity & Security Network 05/12/2024 - Humanitarians need legal protections from sanctions to deliver life-saving aid to the more than 100 million people currently living in regions with al-Qaida and ISIL affiliate presence.

UN Security Council Resolution 2664 provides a humanitarian carve-out to asset freeze measures across UN sanctions regimes. But the application of the humanitarian carve-out to the 1267 ISIL/al-Qaida sanctions regime will expire on Dec. 9, 2024 unless renewed by the UN Security Council. This application remains the most consequential aspect of UNSCR 2664. There is no evidence that UNSCR 2664 has led to aid diversion with sanctioned groups.

Positive Impacts of UNSCR 2664: The Resolution has already improved humanitarian action in sanctioned contexts, particularly where 1267-designated entities operate; reduced tensions between humanitarian assistance, IHL, and sanctions; and been implemented domestically.

Recommendation: The UN Security Council should renew the application of the humanitarian carve-out to the 1267 sanctions regime as a standing application, which is recommended by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Saul.

Findings: Key findings from Charity & Security Network’s 2024 study on financial institutions and donors:

● 43.75% of financial institutions report that a standing application of UNSCR 2664 as applied to 1267 would provide legal certainty to engage humanitarian actors and process transactions.

● 72.72% of donors and 62.50% of financial institutions report that UNSCR 2664 has not been sufficiently socialized within their sectors.

● 43.75% of financial institutions report that a standing application of UNSCR 2664 as applied to 1267 would provide needed legal certainty as it brings harmonization across UN sanctions regimes.

“Resolution 2664 is a tremendously important waiver that has addressed one of the major pain points in getting funds into parts of the world where 1267-designated actors operate.” Read more - Lire plus

It’s Time for the US to Ditch ‘Terrorism’ Designations Altogether

Inkstick 04/12/2024 - The US House of Representatives recently advanced a measure that, if finalized into law, would greatly expand the president’s ability to designate nonprofit organizations as supporters of “terrorism” and strip their tax-exempt status as punishment. Civil liberties advocates are rightly bemoaning the bill’s advancement, as it would be a dangerous tool for suppressing dissent and crushing peace and justice organizing — an especially worrying prospect as Donald Trump again prepares to take office. 

Still, it is critical at this moment to recognize that, egregious as this bill is, it would merely be the logical extension of massive powers that already exist. Indeed, there are already several mechanisms by which the executive branch holds enormous discretionary power to label individuals, organizations, and states as “terrorists” and enact severe penalties on them as a result. These “terrorist” designation lists rarely receive mass scrutiny similar to what the recent bill received, but they do just as much harm.

Lists and their Consequences

There is the “Foreign Terrorist Organizations” (FTO) list, which affords the Secretary of State wide discretion to label foreign organizations as engaging in “terrorist activity,” defined broadly. There is also the “Specially Designated Global Terrorists” list (SDGTs), which can include both organizations and individuals who have “committed” or “pose a significant risk of committing” terrorism, again defined broadly. The “State Sponsors of Terrorism” list (SSTs) allows the Secretary of State to add just about any country so long as they determine its government has “repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism,” with “support” and “terrorism” left undefined. 

There are also numerous expansive “terrorist” designation lists that have been added into immigration law in the post-9/11 era to determine when foreign nationals are inadmissible or removable from the country. There is the “Terrorist Exclusion List” (TEL), in which foreign groups are designated by the Secretary of State under criteria that is even more broad than that used to compile the FTO list. There is also the so-called “Tier III” mechanism, which is uniquely unwieldy in that it does not involve actually maintaining a list, but instead gives immigration judges and officials ad hoc, case-by-case authority to designate groups as “terrorist” entities for purposes of adjudicating immigration claims, and uses the broadest definition of them all. Anyone finding themselves in even a loose association with a designated group will be denied the immigration relief they are seeking.

The consequences of these “terrorist” lists are eye-popping. Economic sanctions freeze the US assets of those who are even investigated for potential inclusion on the FTO and SDGT lists, and US transactions with the designees are prohibited. SSTs are subject to crushing, embargo-like sanctions. Members of FTOs, TELs, and “Tier III” groups, as well as those who give them “material support” as minimal as “even a glass of water” are barred from the United States, often even if that support was given under duress. SSTs and FTO “supporters” can be sued in US courts by individuals alleging harm by terrorism. Anyone engaging in any level of support to an FTO — even if the support is non-monetary and even if specifically for peaceful and lawful purposes — can be criminally prosecuted or sued privately. 

What is “Terrorism”?

Of course, the fundamental problem here is that there is no agreement on what “terrorism” actually is. The legal scholar Ileana M. Porras once wrote,“Everyone uses the word ‘terrorism’ to mean a kind of violence of which he or she does not approve.” Indeed, “terrorism” is not a universal legal term that can be objectively relied upon to make defensible lists of people to be impoverished, deported, jailed, or otherwise punished. Neither can it ever be universally defined so long as there are varying perspectives on struggles of power and justice in which those involved may resort to violence. Questions of imperialism, colonialism, and race underscore these perspectives. 

Ultimately, “terrorist” designations are political tools that serve US geopolitical goals. This is clear with even a cursory glance at the history of such designations. Iraq was listed in 1979, then removed in 1982 not because of changes in Iraq’s sponsorship of acts of political violence, but because the US government wanted to remove barriers to arming Iraq in its war with Iran. Cuba’s designation is broadly acknowledged to be unconnected to actual support for terrorism and instead stems primarily from a US desire to weaken its communist government. And despite growing public documentation that the Saudi government gave significant support to al-Qaeda to perpetrate the attacks of Sept.11, 2001, Saudi Arabia has never even been a contender to be designated, and in fact is a major recipient of US arms and has been contemplated to receive a NATO-like defense guarantee. These choices are clearly less about which entities did or did not meet the applicable “terrorist” definitions than the fact that the US government had foreign policy interests in each case that guided decisions accordingly.

Gaza as a Case Study

Along those lines, the Center for Constitutional Rights and Palestine Legal have conducted analysis demonstrating that the terrorist designation lists’ very origins lie in US efforts to nurture its exceptional relationship with Israel and hamper Palestinian liberation efforts. We can see that dynamic in the current moment, as Israel’s post-Oct. 7 destruction of Gaza and the reverberating violence in the region offers a striking case study in the lopsided application and devastating consequences of “terrorist” designations.

Setting aside what does and does not actually constitute “terrorism,” including if any of the Israeli government’s actions that the International Court of Justice that has found to plausibly constitute genocide could be classified as such, the point is how the decision of the US government to designate Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Iran as “terrorist” has significant effects on real people, including those not involved in the violence.

Consider that while it is relatively easy for Americans to send money to Israel, even to intentionally help paramilitary units or violent settler activities or block humanitarian aid, US persons hoping to make a donation to alleviate creeping famine in Gaza must navigate byzantine sanctions and risk criminal prosecution or a private lawsuit accusing them of material support for terrorism if their donation is processed or received by a listed person or entity, or an entity that may be under control of a listed entity. These restrictions further squeeze the already narrow pathways for getting help into Gaza. 

Similarly, US individuals and organizations involved in political activism to express their opinions about their government’s policies are met with completely different consequences depending upon which opinions they espouse. Those protesting to encourage the United States to stop supporting Israel’s military campaign could face investigation or prosecution for materially supporting terrorism or lose their visas if they are foreign nationals. (Many members of Congress, state attorneys general, and the Anti-Defamation League have urged exactly these consequences.)

What’s more, a major study found that terrorist designations have an “unclear at best” track record in achieving their stated goals. Instead, the designation lists have actually perpetuated violence and suffering. Before Gaza, the designations helped pave the way for a military coup in Sudan, sabotaged the peace process in Colombia, aided the US government in targeting pro-Palestine activists for deportation based on their political activities, closed down the largest Muslim charity in the United States, and prevented innocent people seeking asylum from sheltering in the United States, including Iraqi interpreters for US troops, those who were forced into labor by armed groups, and respected Syrian dissidents.

Some have argued that the inherent flaws in terrorist designations lists can be mitigated by adding procedural due process reforms or by expanding the lists to include more white nationalists. But until the underlying political forces driving designations change, which include the implicit pull of white supremacy and the US goal of maintaining global primacy, discretionary designation lists will continue to be available to be politicized in the service of those same goals. 

As a case study, what is happening in Gaza and across the Middle East, with consequences for protestors and peacebuilders inside the United States, simply makes more urgent what has always been true: not only should policymakers decline to expand US terrorist designation lists, they should fully dismantle what already exists, too. Source

Democrats Must Do Everything They Can to Block the Dangerous Nonprofit Bill

The Facebook Apostate: She Joined Facebook to Fight Terror. Now She’s Convinced We Need to Fight Facebook.

Defense Secretary strips Guantánamo official of power to reach settlements, after 9/11 plotter controversy

Independent 29/11/2024 - Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin revoked the authority of the official running the war court at Guantánamo Bay to reach settlements, the latest legal twist tied to a long-running drama over the fate of the alleged 9/11 plotters who are detained there.

In a memo dated Monday, obtained by The New York Times, Austin removed Susan K. Escallier’s ability to reach settlements in two separate cases, the U.S.S. Cole and Bali bombings, “effective immediately.”

The move was meant to ensure “we aren’t surprised by anything for the remainder of the term,” a senior Defense Department official told the paper.

The controversy dates back to July 31, when military prosecutors  reached an agreement with alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and two alleged accomplices ahead of their capital trial. The men would plead guilty in exchange for receiving a life sentence. Two days later, Austin sought to revoke the agreements.

By November, a military judge ruled that the Defense Secretary had acted too late and the deals were valid. Military prosecutors have suggested they will appeal the decision.

Two-thirds of the 30 remaining detainees in the controversial prison have not been convicted or charged with a crime, while 16 among this group have been approved for transfer to other countries pending security arrangements.

The 9/11 case has been in pre-trial status since 2012, as attorneys wrestle with issues tied to CIA’s torture of the alleged plotters.

As The Independent has reported, decades after the beginning of the War on Terror, the CIA still has not disclosed the full extent of its influence and activities at Guantánamo, prompting a lawsuit from Ammar al-Baluchi, a separate 9/11 detainee not included in the original plea deal.

His lawyers argue the CIA wrongly dodged a records requests about Guantánamo’s mysterious Camp 7, where detainees who had been held in secret CIA “black site” prisons and torture sites around the world were deposited ahead of further interrogations.

The Trump administration hasn’t publicly signalled its stance on the 9/11 plotter plea deals. Source

From Trump To Harris, Political Silence on a Normalized Guantanamo

Podcast: Guantánamo Bay and the Art of Resistance

Video: Europe's killing machine must be stopped

Jacobin 01/12/2024 - “Europe is a garden. Most of the rest of the world is a jungle, and the jungle could invade the garden.” That was the warning of the European Union’s Foreign Policy Chief in 2022.

For decades, the European Union has policed the border between the “garden” and the “jungle” with deadly force, raising the drawbridge to those fleeing Western wars, famine, and climate breakdown.

This hostile environment has a name: Fortress Europe. For the latest episode of “The International,” a world-spanning video series brought to you by Jacobin and Progress International, former Irish MEP Clare Daly lays bare its consequences at home and around the world. Watch - Visionner

'The border guards beat migrants': How EU border pushbacks are becoming banalized

Kurdish community demand answers after raids on members' homes and Kurdish Community Centre

Morning Star 28/11/2024 - Britain's Kurdish community is demanding the release of its members and a full explanation after the homes of six individuals in north London were raided by counter-terrorism police on Wednesday.

As reported in the Morning Star, the Metropolitan Police also raided and shut down the Kurdish Community Centre (KCC) on Green Lanes.

Several people were staying at the centre at the time and, along with those who were arrested in their homes, have reported physical violence during the raids.

A 15-year-old boy was “jumped” by police while his father was being arrested. His mother said: “Police jumped on him and started beating him. He and I screamed telling them that he was a child and then they stopped. “In my more than 23 years living in Britain, I have never experienced anything like this. “The police won't even allow us to go home to retrieve his school uniform.”

In a press conference today, testimonies were also heard from Abdul Kadir Bugdayci and Eyup Ozer, among those staying at the KCC. The pair described being violently forced outside and held in the rain for over five hours without adequate clothing or socks.

Mr Bugdayci said: “We are asking for justice. One of our friends was severely ill and he was beaten up really badly.”

Kevin Blowe of Netpol, which monitors policing in Britain, raised concerns about the escalation of state repression, particularly the targeting of political dissent and protest.

He said it was “really disturbing” that the Labour government was continuing the repressive crackdown kicked off by the Tories. “Over the last year, we've seen a toxic discourse against people involved in campaigning, particularly protesters; attacks on the legitimacy of political demands; a growing police intolerance towards dissent; and an increasing use of both hate crime and counter terrorism powers,” he said.

The Kurdish People’s Assembly co-chairman Ishak Milani said the raids are “a painful reminder of the systemic oppression faced by Kurdish people for generations.” “We sought safety [in Britain], freedom and the opportunity to rebuild our lives and yet we now find ourselves targeted once again,” he said.

A march was planned through Green Lanes in the evening to demand the KKC be reopened, for an end to the community’s criminalisation, the delisting of the PKK as a terrorist organisation and a meaningful contribution from the British government to a democratic peace process in Turkey.

Jeremy Corbyn issued a statement in solidarity with the centre."I am deeply alarmed by the raid on the Kurdish Community Centre by large numbers of riot police. The Centre is an important cultural space for the diverse and inclusive communities of North London. It provides support for refugees who have fled war and persecution, and a space for the Kurdish community to come together. Its services and classes are a lifeline for many.

"Attacks on one community's institutions or its democratic freedoms is an attack on us all. I am proud to represent a constituency with a vibrant Kurdish community. They have changed our part of London for the better – and their resolve is an inspiration to millions of us seeking to build a more just and peaceful world." Source

Nov 27: Metropolitan Police Put Kurdish Community Centre Under ‘Siege’

Dec 1: Kurdish protest rages against repression in London

Dec 4: Kurdish resistance in London continues

Turkish woman convicted under anti-terror laws for sharing Guardian article

Pakistan: Amnesty urges halt to anti-terror bill

Amnesty International 04/12/2024 - Amnesty International calls on the Ministry and Standing Committees to halt plans to pass the Anti-Terrorism Act Amendment Bill 2024 as it does not comply with international human rights law and standards, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The amendment Bill seeks to reinstate the provision of ‘preventative detention’ introduced through the Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Act 2014 that was subject to a ‘sunset clause’ which expired in 2016. The proposed amendments similarly have a two-year validity period, potentially extending to the end of 2026 if passed this year.

If allowed to pass, the Bill will vest broad and discretionary powers to ‘armed forces’, including the military, naval and air forces of Pakistan, and ‘civil armed forces’, including the Frontier Constabulary, Frontier Corps, Pakistan Coast Guards, Pakistan Rangers or the police, to subject any individual to arbitrary detention, referred to as ‘preventive detention’, for up to three months.

These civil and military bodies would be able to issue detention orders against any person suspected of committing offenses related to the ‘security or defence of Pakistan,’ ‘public order,’ or ‘maintenance of supplies or services.’ Amnesty International is deeply concerned by the involvement of the military in law enforcement operations. In the exceptional circumstances that they are allowed to temporarily support the police, the authorities must remain under the command of civilian law enforcement and ensure that the deployed military officials have received appropriate instructions and training on policing in a human rights compliant way and follow the same international human rights law and standards as law enforcement officials. None of these safeguards are envisioned in the amendment.

Insufficient rights are provided to the detained individuals in the Bill. While Article 10(5) of the Constitution of Pakistan states that all those subjected to ‘preventive detention’ must be given reasons for their detention within 15 days of the detention and provided the ‘earliest opportunity’ to challenge the order, reasons for detention can be withheld if the detaining authority believes it is ‘against the public interest to disclose.’ These discretionary powers run in violation of Pakistan’s commitments under Article 9 and 14 of the ICCPR. Read more - Lire plus

Pakistan: Journalist arrested on false terrorism charges

Pakistani Forces in Islamabad Crush Protesters Demanding Freedom for Jailed Ex-PM Imran Khan

Pakistan's anti-terrorism court issues arrest warrants for Imran Khan, his wife and 94 others

How the militarisation of mining threatens Indigenous defenders in the Philippines

Global Witness 03/12/2024 - Demand for minerals used in green energy technologies – like nickel and copper – is soaring as countries shift to renewable energy in response to the climate crisis. 

To keep pace with demand, consumer countries including EU member states, the US and China – which controls the world’s mineral processing – are vying for control over these resources.

Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos Jr is re-positioning the country as a leading exporter of "transition minerals", following the lifting of a nine-year moratorium on open-pit mining by his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte.

But a new investigation by Global Witness and Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment (Kalikasan PNE) based on government data has found that Indigenous communities and biodiversity hotspots are already bearing the brunt of the Philippines’ mineral exploitation. Indigenous Peoples have lost an area of land greater than the size of Timor Leste to mining projects in the last 30 years – equivalent to a fifth of their delineated territory. On top of this, they have been disproportionately targeted with reprisals for speaking up against mining. 

In total, more than a quarter of mining territories clash with protected, key biodiversity areas or important wetlands known as "Ramsar Sites" – crucial to mitigating the impacts of climate breakdown – resulting in substantial forest loss.

Since 2012, the Philippines has been ranked as the deadliest country in Asia for people protecting land and the environment, with mining linked to a third of all killings documented by Global Witness. By boosting mining for transition minerals in the country, the global shift to renewable energy is already harming the lives and natural environment that communities rely on, placing them in increasing danger.

The military has been linked to the highest number of documented killings and detentions of land and environmental defenders in the Philippines over the past decade. These abuses have gone unchecked by President Marcos Jr as he oversees the militarisation of "green energy" infrastructure and increased targeting of human rights defenders and mining critics using anti-terror legislation.

Although the Philippines’ constitution guarantees the protection of Indigenous Peoples’ rights, and there are laws in place to guarantee their right to give "free, prior and informed consent" (FPIC), mining has led to major violations. 

Communities have been intimidated, harassed and displaced by the military across the country.

By mapping hotspots in risks to communities and the environment in the Philippines, this report shows that without stronger protections, the so-called "green" mineral rush is likely to fuel further Indigenous land grabs, destroy crucial biodiversity and cause an uptick in militarisation and state-driven violence against defenders.

Our findings follow a Global Witness analysis that showed emerging countries like the Philippines were disproportionately affected by violence and protests linked to mining, while profits were mostly captured by companies from wealthier economies. [...]

Military is single biggest threat to Indigenous defenders

Indigenous communities have long defended their lands against incursions by mining companies and the military. All too often, they’ve paid with their lives. Indigenous Peoples account for a staggering one-third of land and environmental defender killings in the Philippines in 2012-23. Neary half of these cases were linked to mining. The military is the single biggest perpetrator of defender killings in the Philippines, especially of Indigenous Peoples. It was responsible for 64 out of 117 killings of Indigenous defenders Global Witness has documented between 2012-23. Men with guns often guard the mines.

There are special military and paramilitary units mandated to protect state resources. They work closely with mining companies and have been linked to a spree of abuses, including sexual violence. The army justifies its presence on the grounds of a decades-old conflict with the Communist Party of the Philippines and its armed wing the New People’s Army (NPA), which is known to target mine sites. The NPA says mining companies exploit local, Indigenous communities and workers to advance neo-liberal and elite interests.

Our analysis shows that the four deadliest regions in the Philippines for Indigenous defenders and anti-mining activists all experience high levels of conflict. Counter-insurgency efforts have also seen troops move into resource-rich regions where communities oppose mining. Civil society groups have long accused the Filipino state of using military force to crush resistance to extractive projects and expel Indigenous people from their land to make way for developments. According to an October 2024 report by Altermidya, only 17% of military bombardments actually hit rebel targets, with the rest terrorising local communities and Indigenous Peoples.

“I have personally witnessed how military operations are employed to threaten Indigenous leaders and activists, labelling them as insurgents or terrorists simply for opposing mining incursions,” said Father Raymond Montero-Ambray, a Catholic priest and Indigenous rights supporter based in Mindanao. “This approach justifies the militarisation of their territories under the pretence of security, effectively silencing any resistance to the destructive practices associated with mining.” Anyone who speaks out against resource developments is vulnerable to reprisals.

In late 2018, the then President Rodrigo Duterte formed a new counter-insurgency outfit – the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) – mandated to crush the insurgency. The taskforce has representatives from across government departments, including the Indigenous rights agency NCIP, whose chair sits on the executive committee. NTF-ELCAC has taken a leading role in smearing human rights and environmental activists as communist rebels, a form of harassment known as "red-tagging".

The government of Marcos Jr has failed to curb military killings of land and environmental defenders. While killings have decreased since the end of Duterte’s presidency, the percentage of killings carried out by the military has surged over the past two years. In 2023, the military was responsible for 15 out of 17 defender killings. In 2022, eight out of 11 defenders were killed by the military.

Enforced disappearances have skyrocketed during Marcos Jr’s term in office, which campaigners say is having a chilling effect on communities. Global Witness recorded seven defender disappearances in 2023 alone. Most abductions reportedly happen in heavily militarised areas. “[Marcos Jr] is presenting a more diplomatic and presidential image, but underneath it’s different. He's just continuing the repressive policies of Duterte,” said Francisco "Eco" Dangla III, an activist from northern Philippines, who was grabbed from his tricycle earlier this year, likely by state agents according to reports. He was blindfolded and held in isolation for three days.

The growing scourge of "red-tagging"

Jennifer Awingan-Taggaoa, a researcher from the Indigenous rights organisation Cordillera Peoples’ Alliance, was at home one morning in January 2023, when her dogs started barking wildly. Before long, armed police had surrounded her house, terrifying her young children inside. The police handed her an arrest warrant for armed rebellion. An army officer had accused her and six other mostly Indigenous defenders of being insurgents. She was taken away by police as her family cried. “I asked if this was happening because I was an activist,” she recalled.

When their cases were dismissed by a regional court a few months later for a lack of evidence, the government responded by declaring four of them “terrorists”.  The move was backed by the NTF-ELCAC. All four had been harassed, threatened and smeared on social media or accused of other violent crimes in the past.“These attacks have taken a heavy toll, leaving me and my family traumatised and constantly under suspicion,” explained Stephen Tauli, one of the six defenders "red-tagged" alongside Jennifer. 

The year before, he was abducted by suspected state agents, blindfolded, threatened with violence and interrogated for hours, before being left on the side of a road. “I now have to restrict my movements, limit travel, and ensure I always have a companion when going out.” Jennifer is also stalked by the fear of reprisals. “Being branded a ‘terrorist’ … has deeply impacted my ability to work ... It isolates me, stripping away the legitimacy of my activities and casting doubt on my intentions,” she explained. “It paints me as a target.”

They are among a growing number of activists slapped with rebellion or terrorism charges for speaking out against resource projects. Indigenous defenders were targeted in nearly a third of all incidents of arrest documented by human rights organisation Forum-Asia since 2016. Half of the cases involved anti-mining activists. UN human rights experts have called on the Philippines to urgently end red-tagging. Read more - Lire plus

Sara Duterte cries foul as anti-terror law is turned against her

Human rights activists face reprisals for opposing extractive industries, says report

New documentary: Ronan Farrow on surveillance spyware: ‘It threatens democracy and freedom’

The Guardian 23/11/2024 - Surveilled, now on HBO, is, on one level, a visual accompaniment to Farrow’s bombshell April 2022 report on how governments – western democracies, autocratic regimes and many in between – secretly use commercial spyware to snoop on their citizens. The hour-long documentary, directed by Matthew O’Neill and Perri Peltz, records the emotional toll, scope and threat potential of a technology most people are neither aware of nor understand. It also serves as an argument for urgent journalistic and civic oversight of commercial spyware – its deliberately obscure manufacturers, its abuse by state clients and its silent erosion of privacy.

The film, like Farrow’s 2022 article and much of his subsequent reporting, primarily concerns a proprietary spyware technology called Pegasus that is produced by the Israeli company NSO Group. Pegasus, as the film chillingly demonstrates, can infiltrate a private device through one of its many third-party apps, sometimes with one click – via a spam or phishing link – or, for certain models, without any help of the device’s owner at all. Once activated, Pegasus can control your phone, turn on your microphone, use the camera, record voice or video, and disgorge any of its data – your texts, photos, location. It is very possible, and now documented, to be hacked by Pegasus and not even know it. [...]

NSO’s tentacles in surveillance beyond the scope of counter-terrorism, not to mention Israel’s longstanding use of Palestine as a laboratory for surveillance, evinces the need for more transparency. “These companies need to be subject to the same kind of international regulation and legal infrastructure that arms dealers are,” said Farrow. “That’s just the reality. It’s dangerous tech. It threatens democracy and freedom. It leads to violence. The data tells us this now. That doesn’t mean that there are no law enforcement applications for it, which also makes it very similar to weapons of mass destruction.”

Also like weapons of mass destruction – and generative AI, another nascent technology whose implications far outpace regulations – “we can’t be naive,” Farrow added. “You can’t put the genie back in the bottle. But we need restraints.”

The United States government has not yet, to public knowledge, used Pegasus on private citizens. The FBI bought the technology under the Trump administration purportedly to test it, though a New York Times investigation later found that the department was keen to operationalize it. In 2022, the Biden administration passed an executive order limiting the US government’s ability to purchase private spyware that has been abused elsewhere – though, as with any legal measure, there are loopholes. “It is an encouraging statement of principle,” said Farrow, as is the move to put NSO and other spyware companies on a blacklist that prevents them from doing business with US companies. “But these are pretty halting, limited measures.”

And the incoming administration of Donald Trump appears to have little interest in even that. Trump has appointed as his national security adviser Michael Waltz, who as a congressman advocated for the expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in an effort to deport illegal immigrants. In a piece for the New Yorker released the same day as the film, Farrow reported on the Department of Homeland Security’s new $2m contract with an Israeli firm called Paragon for their Graphite spyware, which can breach encrypted messaging services such as Signal or Telegram. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice), an agency within DHS, will almost certainly use the technology for Trump’s stated plans to deport illegal immigrants en masse.

Farrow characterized the purchase as an impending “digital panopticon” for not just the 3.7 million people awaiting immigration hearings, nor the millions more who have so far evaded immigration enforcement, but the US population at large. “There’s not transparency. There’s not accountability,” he said. “And it is very possible that with even thin types of law enforcement rationales, this could start to be deployed against people the administration just doesn’t like, as we’ve seen in a lot of these other democracies.

“All of the privacy law experts that I’m talking to are very, very afraid right now,” he added. “This tech is just increasingly everywhere, and I think we have to contend with the inevitability that this is not just going to be this path of private companies selling to governments.”

Though in part a film of journalistic process, Surveilled also advocates for a regulatory framework on commercial spyware and surveillance, as well as awareness – even if you are not a journalist, a dissident, an activist, you could be surveilled, with privacy writ large at stake. The new digital surveillance tools are “so cheap, and so accessible, and the legal protections are so porous”, said Farrow. “We all need to be invested in whether the space for political diversity of opinion, resistance, dissent, journalists getting information, shrinks or remains alive.

“This is not some side issue. This underpins all of the issues we care about,” he added. “This is one of the bellwethers of and catalysts of crackdowns and authoritarian tendencies.” Read more - Lire plus

Lawyer allegedly hacked with spyware names NSO founders in lawsuit

OTHER NEWS - AUTRES NOUVELLES

Academic freedom

Liberté académique

Canadian Association of University Teachers Says No to Academic Censorship on Palestine

Video Global Surge in Attacks on University Faculty & Students: What is to be done?

Artificial intelligence

Intelligence artificielle

Check To See What Apps Your iPhone Is Training AI On

Accountability

Reddition de comptes

Still no accountability for Soleiman Faqiri's jail death: brother

CBC documentary: Surveillance footage reveals the truth about Soleiman Faqiri's death in prison

EVENT Justice for Soli Virtual Vigil: Sun Dec 15, 6PM ET

Attacks on dissent

Attaques contre la dissidence

Manifestation contre l’OTAN : de quelles violences parle-t-on?

Biometrics

Biométrie

BCCLA on Air Canada launching facial recognition boarding technology

Countering terrorism financing

Contrer le financement du terrorisme

Australia: Concerns as Passage of Bill extends AML/CTF regime to legal practices

Criminalization of dissent

Criminalisation de la dissidence

Egypt: Lift punitive measures against EIPR staff

Jailed activist tests India's anti-terror law

Tunisia: No to the criminalisation of solidarity with migrants

Leonard Peltier: Amnesty International Calls on Biden to Free Indigenous Leader “Before It’s Too Late”

Criminalization of opposition

Criminalisation de l'opposition

Moussi faces death penalty as Tunisia’s political crackdown intensifies

Foreign interference

Ingérence étrangère

Digital Rights Review: ‘Foreign Agent’ Laws Target Online Media

Freedom of speech

Liberté d'expression

Sri Lanka arrests Tamil man under PTA for Facebook post

Franco-Algerian writer Sansal held in Algeria on state security charges

Indigo’s Copyright Victory Opens A New Front In BDS Struggle

Biden Makes His Own Attack on Nonprofit Over Palestine Climate Justice Alliance was the only program grantee to speak out on Palestine — and the only one whose funding is delayed.

How Universities Are Trying to Stop Another Year of Anti-War Activism

My sister is on hunger strike to free her son Alaa Abd el-Fattah from jail in Egypt. We don’t want her to die

Freedom of the press

Liberté de la presse

Trump tells Republicans to 'Kill' Reporter Shield Bill Passes Unanimously by House

Migrant and refugee rights

Droits des migrant.es et réfugié.es

Trump’s tariff threat is about borders, not trade

Eye in the sky: The feds have quietly built surveillance towers along the Canadian border in Vermont, New York

Automating the hostile environment: uncovering a secretive Home Office algorithm at the heart of immigration decision-making

Police

Deaths of 9 Indigenous people at hands of police in one month fuel renewed calls for justice

Privacy and surveillance

Vie privée et surveillance

Republicans Blocking Proposal to Narrow Part of a Surveillance Law

France, Germany and the Netherlands push for EU-wide "tracking and bugging of vehicles"

Miscellaneous

Divers

Trudeau directs key adviser to deliver renewed national security strategy in new mandate letter

Business Lobby Wants Austerity To Help Pay For Military Spending

Des groupes pacifistes appellent au retrait du Canada de l’OTAN

Trump has appointed Sebastian Gorka, who said that there was 'no such thing as Palestine' and made anti-Islam statements, as head of counterterrorism

Australia’s official definition of ‘terrorism’ to be reviewed for first time since September 11 attacks

Mass Protests Force South Korean President to Revoke Shocking Martial Law Declaration After 6 Hours

Tech firm Palantir spoke with MoJ about calculating prisoners’ ‘reoffending risks’

ICLMG ACTIONS DE LA CSILC

Canada: Abolish rights-violating terrorist entities list!

On October 15, 2024, the Canadian government placed the Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network on Canada’s terrorist entities list. While ostensibly a tool to protect the safety and security of people in Canada and internationally, the list is an arbitrary political tool that undermines freedom of association, of expression and due process in the courts. Its effectiveness as a national security tool has never been demonstrated in a manner that justifies its use.

Due to these deep flaws, and more, the ICLMG has consistently called for the list to be abolished since the Canadian coalition’s founding in 2002. Please join us in urging the Canadian government to abolish the rights-violating terrorist entities list once and for all. Thank you!

Share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

Le Canada doit abolir la liste des entités terroristes! & partagez sur Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

Uphold rights and liberties at protests and encampments across Canada!

Please join us in calling for the following:

• Officials must 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 must refrain from acting against protesters exercising their Charter-protected rights, including at encampments.
• The Ontario legislature must immediately reverse the keffiyeh ban.
• Canada must call for a permanent ceasefire and to halt all arms sales, transfers and military aid to Israel.

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.

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.

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.

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 English + Pétition 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.

Please share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

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

December 10, 2023 - ironically Human Rights Day - marked the 21st "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!

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

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

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.

December to June 2024 - Décembre à juin 2024

Thanks to the support of our members and donors, so far in 2024 we have been able to work on the following:

• Bill C-20, Public Complaints and Review Commission Act - which would FINALLY create an independent watchdog for CBSA
• Bill C-27, Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2022 - which includes the very problematic Artificial Intelligence and Data Act
• Advocating for the protection of international assistance from anti-terrorism laws after the adoption of Bill C-41
• Bill C-63: The very concerning Online Harms Act
• Bill C-70: The new and highly controversial Foreign Interference legislation
• Parliamentary study on Transparency of the Department of National Defence
• Biometrics guidance & other privacy issues with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
• Palestine and the right to dissent
• Combatting Racism & Islamophobia
• Repatriation of all Canadians detained in Northeastern Syria
• Justice for Dr Hassan Diab
• Mohamed Harkat & Security certificates
• Canada’s 4th Universal Periodic Review
• Work with the international Civil Society Coalition on Human Rights and Counter-terrorism
• The UN Counter-terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED) Canada assessment
• The UN Cybersecurity Treaty & the EU AI Convention

What we have planned for the rest of 2024!

• Pressuring lawmakers and officials to protect our civil liberties from the negative impact of national security as well as opposing the discourse of “countering terrorism” to repress dissent, such as protests and encampments in support of Palestinian rights and lives.
• Opposing the weaponization of concerns around foreign interference to unnecessarily increase national security powers, which will greatly affect rights and liberties of Canadians, and will most likely lead to more harassment and xenophobia
• 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
• 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! Read more - Lire plus

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