National Security Law and Anti-Terrorism Law

By Peter Boisseau / Illustration by Justin Renteria

As their government prepares to take the next step in the “war on terror,” Canadians are being loud and clear about what they want, but might get more than they wished for -- unintended consequences that make their society neither safer nor better.

In a commentary in the National Post, Prof. Kent Roach and the University of Ottawa's Prof. Craig Forcese argue that the Canadian government's proposed security legislation, Bill C-51, will undermine the already inadequate oversight of national security services ("A parliamentary review is not redundant red tape," March 9, 2015).

Read the full article on the National Post website, or below.

Prof. Kent Roach, with the University of Ottawa's Craig Forcese, spoke to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on Thursday, March 12, 2015 about the Canadian government's proposed new security legislation, Bill C-51. They also presented an extensive series of proposed amendments to the bill.

Their statement and proposed amendments are based on the over 200 pages of detailed analysis of the bill they have produced on their website, antiterrorlaw.ca.

In a commentary in the New York Times, Prof. Kent Roach and Prof. Craig Forcese of the University of Ottawa explain the issues with the Canadian government's proposed national security legislation, Bill C-51, noting in particular its implications for potential activity by CSIS in other nations ("Canada’s Antiterror Gamble," March 11, 2015).

Read the full commentary on the New York Times website, or below.

Canada’s Antiterror Gamble

By Kent Roach and Craig Forcese

March 11, 2015

In a commentary in the National Post, Prof. Kent Roach and Prof. Craig Forcese of the University of Ottawa argue that the judicial protections proposed to control the new powers being offered to CSIS in Bill C-51 are limited and problematic ("Judicial warrants are designed to prevent — not authorize — Charter violations," February 17, 2015).

Prof. Kent Roach and University of Ottawa law professor Craig Forcese are engaging in an experiment in legal scholarship done in “real time” in a highly politicized environment, in which fundamental decisions about the shape of law are being made.

They are undertaking an ongoing analysis of Bill C-51, the government’s controversial anti-terror law proposal, which began immediately after the bill was proposed and is proceeding as the bill works its way through Parliament.

Prof. Kent Roach and University of Ottawa Prof. Craig Forcese have continued their analysis of the Canadian government's proposed new anti-terrorism bill with a commentary in the Toronto Star about its impact on privacy ("Bill C-51 moves us one step closer to the end of privacy," February 17, 2015).

Read the commentary on the Toronto Star website, or below.

Prof. Kent Roach and Prof. Craig Forcese of the University of Ottawa have written a commentary in The Globe and Mail about effective strategies to discourage young people from being radicalized to violence ("France shows West the smart way to fight IS at home," February 13, 2015).

Read the commentary on The Globe and Mail website, or below.

In a commentary in the National Post, Prof. Kent Roach and University of Ottawa Prof. Craig Forcese provide a hypothetical situation to show how the Canadian government's proposed laws against advocating for terrorism could in fact undermine law enforcement ("The government’s new speech crime could undermine its anti-terror strategy," February 10, 2015).

The commentary is based on their in-depth analysis at antiterrorlaw.ca.