SENATE MOVING TOWARD ON TERRORISM LEGISLATION

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000217 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/12/2018 TAGS: PGOV PTER CA SUBJECT: SENATE MOVING TOWARD ON TERRORISM LEGISLATION REF: 07 OTTAWA 1924 Classified By: PolMinCouns Scott Bellard, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (C) In a meeting with PolMinCouns on February 12, Senator David Smith, chairman of the Special Senate Committee on Anti-Terrorism, and committee member Senator Joyce Fairbairn (one-time leader of the Government in the Senate under the Liberals) expressed optimism on the future of two key pieces of legislation now under committee scrutiny. Most immediate are the revisions to the security certificate legislation mandated by a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, which had set a deadline of February 23, 2008 to fix or face the lapsing of the overall legislation. The revised legislation will create special advocates, who would have access to classified information, to act on behalf of individuals whom the government wishes to detain on terrorism-related grounds. (Six individuals are currently subject to security certificates, although five of them are under house arrest.) Following passage of the bill in the House of Commons on February 6, Senator Smith predicted that the Senate committee would approve the bill later on February 12, even though a long string of witnesses had testified almost unanimously against the legislation. Senator Fairbairn noted that Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day had indeed been the only one of 30 witnesses to testify in favor. If the committee acts as expected, the full Senate could pass the bill on February 13 or 14, before an expected week-long recess, and easily meet the Court's deadline, according to the Senators. Senator Smith added that he would attempt to ensure no amendments in order to avoid sending the legislation back to the lower House, as long as the government agrees that the special committee will continue to have oversight over the bill's implementation, and could offer substantive changes to the legislation at a later date. ¶2. (SBU) The other key legislation, which the Commons has not yet considered, would revive certain provisions of the 2001 Anti-Terrorism Act that had been subject to sunset provisions and had expired on March 1, 2007, when the Liberals refused to support their continuation. The new draft explicitly incorporates some (but not all) of the recommendations from the Special Senate Committee on Anti-Terrorism and of a House subcommittee. Key provisions would enable a peace officer to compel an individual to testify when there are reasonable grounds to believe that a terrorism offense has been or will be committed, or if an individual may have information on the whereabouts of someone involved in such an offense. A court order will be necessary, and the court must ensure that "reasonable" attempts have been made to obtain the information by other means. The individual must answer questions and bring all required items, and may not invoke self-incrimination as an excuse for not doing so. In certain cases, a peace officer may even arrest an individual without a warrant if it appears "impracticable' to go through the usual processes, or if detention is necessary "to prevent a terrorist activity." Such an individual must necessarily nonetheless go before a judge within 24 hours or "as soon as feasible." The judge will order the release of such an individual unless there is a likelihood that a terrorist activity will take place if released or if there is a "substantial likelihood" that such an individual will interfere with the administration of justice. A judge may also order an individual into "recognizance to keep the peace and be of good behavior" for Q"recognizance to keep the peace and be of good behavior" for up to 12 months. These provisions will lapse five years after passage, unless Parliament again extends them. ¶3. (C) Senators Smith and Fairbairn emphasized how diligently the Special Committee had worked on this legislation not just in recent weeks but over the past two years, as it had struggled to come up with some of the refinements included in the new version. In recent weeks, the Committee had worked longer hours and extra days in order to gain consensus on the bill to enable passage soon and send it to the Commons. Committee members take their post-9/11 anti-terrorism responsibilities very seriously, they underscored, and indicated that their ongoing work had not suffered in the wake of the current motion in the House of Commons insisting that the Senate complete its deliberations on the comprehensive crime bill by March 1 or provoke a confidence vote in the government, nor over the current Commons consideration of legislation providing for term limits for Senators (who currently may serve until age 75). "We look at the bigger picture," Senator Fairbairn noted. ¶4. (C) Comment: Progress on these bills could also depend on whether or not the government remains in office. The security certificate bill likely will pass before any confidence motions come to a vote, as both the Conservatives and the Liberals have their eye on the Supreme Court OTTAWA 00000217 002 OF 002 deadline. However, should the government fall in March, the anti-terrorism bill would likely have to begin the legislative process all over again under a new government and Parliament following a federal election. While government officials and members of Parliament admit that the government has never actually had to invoke these provisions, there is a growing consensus that, with the new built-in safeguards in the legislation, any government -- whether Conservative or Liberal -- ought to have these tools at its disposal eventually. Visit Canada,s Economy and Environment Forum at http://www.intelink.gov/communities/state/can ada WILKINS