The ICLMG has joined more than 100 other organizations globally setting out red-lines on the protection of civil liberties in the proposed UN Cybercrime Treaty. We are urging the Canadian government and all other member states to either incorporate crucial changes to the agreement, or to vote against it all together.

Joint Statement on the Proposed Cybercrime Treaty Ahead of the Concluding Session

23 January, 2024

We, the undersigned organizations and individual experts call on the state delegations participating in the concluding session of the United Nations (UN) Ad Hoc Committee to ensure that the proposed Cybercrime Convention (the Convention) is narrowly focused on tackling cybercrime, and not used as a tool to undermine human rights. Absent meaningful changes to address these shortcomings, the Convention should be rejected.

Civil society groups have contributed time and expertise to improve the draft and fully align it with existing human rights law and standards, the principles of the UN Charter and the rule of law, as well as best practices to provide legal certainty in efforts to improve cybersecurity. Our concerns about the proposed text of the Convention are informed by our experience and human rights advocacy around the world. National and regional cybercrime laws are regrettably far too often misused to unjustly target journalists and security researchers, suppress dissent and whistleblowers, endanger human rights defenders, limit free expression, and justify unnecessary and disproportionate state surveillance measures.

Throughout the negotiations over the last two years, civil society groups and other stakeholders have consistently emphasized that the fight against cybercrime must not come at the expense of human rights, gender equality, and the dignity of the people whose lives will be affected by this Convention. It should not result in impeding security research and making us all less secure. Robust and meaningful safeguards and limitations are essential to avoid the possibility of abuse of relevant provisions of the Convention that could arise under the guise of combating cybercrime. Regrettably, the latest draft of the proposed Convention, which is due to be finalized by February 2024, fails to address many of our significant concerns. We believe that if the text of the Convention is approved in its current form, the risk of abuses and human rights violations will increase exponentially and leave us with a less secure internet.

We are particularly concerned that the latest draft of the Convention:

• Remains over-broad in the scope of the range of the activities it requires states to criminalize. It includes cyber-enabled offenses and other content-related crimes and creates legal uncertainty through an open-ended reference to crimes under other “applicable international conventions and protocols.” This overbroad scope gives rise to the danger that the Convention will be used to criminalize legitimate online expression, which is likely to create discriminatory impacts and deepen gender inequality;
• Fails to incorporate language sufficient to protect security researchers, whistleblowers, activists, and journalists from excessive criminalization;
• Contains insufficient references to states’ obligations under international human rights law, includes weak domestic human rights safeguards in its criminal procedural chapter, and fails to explicitly incorporate robust safeguards applicable to the whole treaty to ensure that cybercrime efforts provide adequate protection for human rights and are in accordance with the principles of legality, non-discrimination, legitimate purpose, necessity, and proportionality;
• Lacks effective gender mainstreaming which is critical to ensure the Convention is not used to undermine people’s human rights on the basis of gender;
• Proposes to create legal regimes to monitor, store, and allow cross-border sharing of information in a manner that would undermine trust in secure communications and infringe on international human rights standards, including the requirements for prior judicial authorization and the principles of legality, non discrimination, legitimate purpose, necessity, and proportionality;
• Permits excessive information sharing for law enforcement cooperation, beyond the scope of specific criminal investigations and without specific, explicit data protection and human rights safeguards.

The Convention should only move forward if it pursues a specific goal of combating cybercrime without endangering the human rights and fundamental freedoms of those it seeks to protect nor undermining efforts to improve cybersecurity for an open internet. The present draft text falls far short of this goal and these basic minimum requirements, and must be comprehensively revised, amended, or rejected.

Therefore, we call on all state delegations to:

• Narrow the scope of the whole Convention to cyber-dependent crimes specifically defined and included in its text;
• Make certain the Convention includes provisions to ensure that security researchers, whistleblowers, journalists, and human rights defenders are not prosecuted for their legitimate activities and that other public interest activities are protected;
• Guarantee that explicit data protection and human rights standards – including the principles of non-discrimination, legality, legitimate purpose, necessity and proportionality – are applicable to the whole Convention. Specific, explicit safeguards, such as the principle of prior judicial authorization, must be put in place for accessing or sharing data, as well as for conducting cross-border investigations and cooperation in accordance with the rule of law;
• Mainstream gender across the Convention as a whole and throughout each article in efforts to prevent and combat cybercrime;
• Limit the scope of application of procedural measures and international cooperation to the cyber-dependent crimes established in the criminalization chapter of the Convention;
•  Avoid endorsing any surveillance provision that can be abused to undermine cybersecurity and encryption.

As the UN Ad Hoc Committee convenes its concluding session, we call on state delegations to redouble their efforts to address these critical gaps in the current draft. The final outcome of the treaty negotiation process should only be deemed acceptable if it effectively incorporates strong and meaningful safeguards to protect human rights, ensures legal clarity for fairness and due process, and fosters international cooperation under the rule of law. The proposed Convention must not serve as a validation of intrusion and surveillance practices harmful to human rights.

Absent these minimum requirements, we call on state delegations to reject the draft treaty and not advance it to the UN General Assembly for adoption.

Signatories

NGOs participating under operative paragraphs 8 or 9

• Access Now
• Association for Progressive Communications (APC)
• ARTICLE 19
• Center for Democracy and Technology
• CyberPeace Institute
• Data Privacy Brasil
• Derechos Digitales
• Electronic Frontier Foundation
• Freedom House
• Global Partners Digital
• Hiperderecho
• Human Rights Watch
• Instituto Panamericano de Derecho y Tecnologia (IPANDETEC)
• International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
• Jokkolabs Banjul
• Jonction – Senegal
• Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet)
• Privacy International
• R3D: Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales
• Temple University, Institute for Law, Innovation & Technology (iLIT)

Additional signatories supporting the statement

Here is what we’ve accomplished in the second half of 2023 thanks to your support:

Bill C-20, Public Complaints and Review Commission Act

Bill C-20 would create a new, independent review agency for both the RCMP and CBSA, the first ever independent review body for the CBSA. ICLMG has:

• Met with NDP Public Safety Critic Peter Julian and his staff to discuss amendments to the bill
• Worked with other orgs to raise concerns around the lack of civil society consultation and invitations to committee hearings
• Sent and published a detailed joint statement which included specific amendments for the House Public Safety committee’s consideration. The committee adopted several key recommendations, but other important issues remain unaddressed.

Bill C-26, An Act respecting cybersecurity and amending the Telecommunications Act

The broad powers granted to government ministers in this bill raise concerns about the potential for secret surveillance, especially given the role of the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) in protecting cybersecurity in Canada. ICLMG has:

• Reviewed and signed on to a joint brief with other civil society organizations that was submitted to the House Public Safety committee.

Bill C-27, Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2022

Bill C-27 is the government’s long-promised update to Canada’s private sector privacy law and would enact a new Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA), which raises major concerns given the growing use of AI in surveillance capitalism and government surveillance. ICLMG has:

• Submitted a brief to the Industry committee (INDU) for its study of C-27
• Testified before the INDU committee calling for the removal of national security exemptions
• Created a letter writing campaign calling for the removal of said exemptions
• Joined civil society partners for a press conference before our committee appearance
• Met with the European Centre for Non-profit Law, which is working to address a similar law
• Presented on AI at the Confederation of Canadian Unions‘ labour school
• Sent three joint letters as part of the Right2YourFace Coalition – a group of prominent civil society organizations and scholars:
  • One in September to the Industry Minister demanding proper consideration for AI regulations and better protections against AI overreach
  • Another in November to the Min of Public Safety, of Industry & others on C-27’s impact on the oversight of facial recognition tech & how it will be dangerous for Canadians
  • Another in December calling for a full public consultation and redrafting of AIDA, starting with splitting AIDA from the other parts of Bill C-27
• Met with the Senior Policy Advisor to the Industry Minister to discuss our concerns and required amendments to C-27.

Bill C-41: International assistance and anti-terrorism laws

Humanitarian aid and international assistance generally is being hindered by Canada’s anti-terrorism laws, particularly in Afghanistan – a risk ICLMG has long warned about. In Spring 2023, the government tabled Bill C-41 to ostensibly address the issue through amendments to the Criminal Code. Despite several remaining shortcomings, the bill received royal assent this past June. On this topic, ICLMG has:

• Submitted an updated brief to the Senate Committee on Human Rights
• Met with Senator Omidvar’s office regarding concerns with the bill
• Issued a statement highlighting remaining concerns regarding non-humanitarian international assistance after the bill received royal assent
• Reviewed, provided feedback and participated in group consultation with Public Safety and Global Affairs officials regarding proposed guidelines/guidance on Bill C-41.

Help us fight for justice and human rights.
Donate to the ICLMG!

Canadians detained in Northeastern Syria

At least 23 Canadians, including 13 children, and 3 non-Canadian mothers remain indefinitely detained in camps and prisons in northeast Syria in conditions akin to torture. We have:

• Updated and promoted our letter-writing campaign in favour of repatriation
• Strategized with colleagues around further actions to push for repatriation
• Reacted to the terrible news that the Supreme Court has refused to hear the appeal of the families of four Canadian men detained in NE Syria.

Justice for Dr Hassan Diab & reform of the Extradition Act

In April 2023, France proceeded with the trial of Dr. Hassan Diab, and in a miscarriage of justice, convicted him in absentia for the 1980 Rue Copernic bombing. We continue to advocate for Dr. Diab’s rights to be protected and for reforms to the Extradition Act, including by:

• Hosting a press conference featuring Hassan Diab, Alex Neve, Rob Currie & Bernie Farber, in advance of the delivery of a petition, signed by more than 10,000 people, calling on PM Trudeau to commit to refusing any second request for Hassan’s extradition
• Publishing an open letter signed by over 130 members of the Canadian legal community calling on Prime Minister Trudeau to deny any second request from the French government that Dr. Diab be extradited to France
• Updating and sharing our letter-writing campaign.

Security certificates & inadmissibility

ICLMG has continued to work to eliminate security certificates, and defend the rights of those who are placed under one. Since June, this work has included:

• Updating the Moe Harkat letter-writing campaign, and sharing on December 10, the 21st “anniversary” of his arrest, calling for justice, freedom and an end to his ordeal
• Writing an urgent letter to the Minister of Immigration, urging him to stop the deportation of Dr. Ezzat Gouda to a death sentence in Egypt. We were relieved to learn that he was not deported.

Combatting Islamophobia

The ICLMG continues to oppose racial, religious and other forms of profiling and targeting by national security activities and laws, particularly that of Muslim and Arab communities and people of color. To that effect, we have:

• Met twice with Amira Elghawaby, the federal Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia, to discuss key issues including:
  • The rise of Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism in Canada following Israel’s ongoing violence and attacks in Gaza
  • The detention of Canadians in northeast Syria
  • The impact of anti-terrorism financing laws on Muslim organizations
• Participated in a panel on “Counter Radicalization: Security Agencies and AI” at the Human Rights and Islamophobia national conference held in Winnipeg and organized by the Islamic Social Services Association.
• Attended the Muslim Association of Canada’s convention to receive their “Friend of the Community” award for our National Coordinator Tim McSorley’s work and the work of the ICLMG against Islamophobia and fighting for justice.
• Published two statements and created and updated our action calling for Canada to oppose the genocide in Gaza and to protect free speech at home.

National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA)

As part of our work on accountability, the ICLMG continues to monitor, react to and engage with the work of the NSIRA by:

• Meeting with Stephanie Mulcaster, Senior Counsel and Director, Investigations, regarding NSIRA’s relationship with the Citizen Review and Complaints Commission and Bill C-20
• Meeting with NSIRA member Craig Forcese to discuss NSIRA priorities and suggest potential areas for investigations/reviews

Prejudiced audits of Muslim charities

After the Taxpayers’ Ombudsperson tasked with investigating the CRA’s prejudiced audits released his report and complained he didn’t have access to all the necessary information, the NSIRA decided to launch its own investigation – one of the key recommendations from our 2021 report. Since, our work has included:

• Reacting to the Senate Human Rights committee’s report on Islamophobia and continue calling for a moratorium on the CRA’s audits of Muslim charities until the NSIRA completes its review and proper legal changes are made
• Speaking with media regarding the Muslim Association of Canada’s charter challenge of the CRA’s audit of the organization

Federal anti-terrorist financing consultation

The federal Department of Finance held a consultation on its review of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA). As per our mandate, we focused on the anti-terrorist financing aspect of the act. We sent in a brief detailing our concerns with anti-terror laws in general, the anti-terrorism financing regime specifically & the consultation itself.

Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

ICLMG continues to engage with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) as part of our work on oversight and accountability:

• We participated in the OPC’s quarterly civil society round-table to discuss current privacy issues, including biometrics and bill C-27
• We participated in the OPC’s consultation on its draft guidance on the application of PIPEDA and the Privacy Act regarding biometrics. We will be submitting a brief in the new year.

Canada’s 4th Universal Periodic Review

Canada is currently taking part in its 4th Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council. As we have done in previous cycles, the ICLMG has submitted a brief to the Council for consideration in its review. We have also participated in a consultation process intended to gather the views of civil society regarding the recommendations from other states given to Canada at the United Nations on November 10 as part of its UPR.

Civil Society Coalition on Human Rights and Counter-terrorism

The ICLMG continues to participate in the Civil Society Coalition on Human Rights and Counter-terrorism. Since June, this has included:

• Participation in the coalition’s annual retreat to discuss international and national areas of concerns, strategy and next steps
• Participation in working group meetings regarding the renewal of the UN’s Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, as well as the human rights impact of emerging technology used to counter terrorism
• Support from coalition members around the UN Counter-terrorism Committee’s visit and assessment of Canada’s implementation of counter-terrorism measures.

UN Counter-terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED) Canada assessment

This year marked the second assessment of Canada’s implementation of UN counter-terrorism resolutions by CTED. Following our meeting with UN representatives in March, we have continued efforts for the public release of their report on Canada. To that end, we have:

• Remained in contact with CTED regarding the status of the report
• Written to Global Affairs Canada urging the release of the report
• Met with Global Affairs Canada’s head of counter-terrorism and intelligence to discuss the matter.

UN Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights global study on counter-terrorism and civic space

ICLMG participated in a special consultation organized by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, on the impact of counter-terrorism measures on civic space. The Global Study on the Impact of Counter-Terrorism on Civil Society & Civic Space has since been published and we have shared it widely.

---

ICLMG IN THE MEDIA

“Judge expresses sympathy, but rules audit of Muslim charity should run its course,” The Canadian Press, 14 September 2023

“Proposed AI regulations need more scrutiny, groups urge Ottawa,” Jim Bronskill, Global News, 25 September 2023

“Canadian groups call for more careful consideration of artificial intelligence measures,” Jim Bronskill, CP24, 25 September 2023

« Intelligence artificielle: Des organisations et des experts soutiennent que la loi est “inadéquate” », La Presse canadienne, 25 septembre 2023

“Experts urge changes to proposed Canadian privacy, AI laws before today’s hearing,” Howard Solomon, IT World Canada, 26 September 2023

“‘The devil’s in the details and we don’t have any’: critics decry feds’ lack of clarity on changes to privacy and AI bill,” Stuart Benson, The Hill Times, 4 Oct 2023

“Privacy bill fails to address dangers of facial recognition technology: coalition,” Jim Bronskill, The Canadian Press, 1 November 2023

“Civil Society Groups Outline Concerns with Federal Privacy Reform Bill,” CPAC, 2 November 2023

“Civil liberties groups give C-27 failing grade, call for AIDA to be ‘reset and reworked’ separately,” Stuart Benson, The Hill Times, 8 November 2023

“Licence to break the law: More Canadian spies get permission to commit crimes, memo shows,” Chris Arsenault, CBC News, 6 December 2023

“Federal consultations on AI regulations heavily skewed toward businesses, industry groups, say critics,” Joe Castaldo, The Globe and Mail, 10 December 2023

“Civil society groups call for AIDA to be considered separately from C-27,” The Wire Report, 14 December, 2023

Check out all coverage of ICLMG in the media here.

We have also published many reactions and commentary on our social media accounts, which continue to reach tens of thousands.

We publish our News Digest every other week, which is distributed to thousands of people and has received numerous accolades.

+ Check out the News Digest archive if you’ve missed some of our issues.

+ If you know anyone interested in receiving it, send them an invite to sign up!

---

What we have planned for 2024!

Your support will allow us to continue our work on these issues and much more in the next year:

• 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

• Pressuring lawmakers to protect our civil liberties from the negative impact of national security and the “war on terror”, as well as 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!

---

If you think our work is important, please support the ICLMG!

We do not receive any funding from any federal, provincial or municipal governments or political parties so your support is essential to our work.

We are counting on people like you.

Today, 30 civil society organizations, experts, and academics — including the ICLMG — released an open letter to the House of Commons Industry Committee, urging them to hit the reset button and fully scrutinize the government’s controversial Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA). They recommend a full public consultation and redrafting of AIDA, starting with splitting AIDA from the other parts of Bill C-27, which deal with unrelated privacy matters, so that it can be subject to the careful democratic scrutiny it requires.

Highlighting what they describe as ISED’s mishandling of “a process biased heavily toward narrow industry interests”, the signatories call on MPs to ensure that any future public consultation is not stewarded exclusively by ISED. The call comes two weeks after Industry, Science, and Economic Development (ISED) Minister François-Philippe Champagne published a beefy, 38-page package of proposed amendments to AIDA, rivaling in size the text of the original bill, and fundamentally altering its shape and implications halfway through the committee’s study and after many witnesses have already testified — worsening the already problematic parliamentary process around this bill.

AIDA has been subject to fierce criticism since it was first introduced in June 2022, without the public consultation process that typically precedes similar legislation. Key concerns include:

• Its failure to recognize fundamental human rights, such as privacy and free expression, that AI must be designed and deployed to respect;
• Its lack of any independent oversight or enforcement, instead placing its AI & Data Commissioner under the authority of the Industry Minister, who sponsors and subsidizes the AI industry;
• Its failure to address the societal level risks of AIDA, including risks to marginalized communities;
• Its light-touch, mark-your-own-homework approach to regulating the AI industry, which is inconsistent with the serious potential dangers of AI;
• Its failure to consult the public, instead heavily prioritizing industry input;
• Its broad exemptions for private sector AI tech developed for government intelligence, defence and national security purposes, giving a free pass for some of the most potentially harmful AI tools.

Read the full letter here.

Read today’s press release here.

The letter’s signatories are:

Organizations

1. British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
2. Digital Public
3. International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
4. OpenMedia
5. Privacy & Access Council of Canada
6. Tech Reset Canada
7. Canadian Civil Liberties Association
8. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association
9. Ligue des droits et libertés
10. Centre for Digital Rights
11. Centre for Free Expression
12. Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF)

Individuals (organizational affiliations for identification only)

1. Ana Brandusescu, McGill University
2. Andrew Clement, Professor emeritus, University of Toronto
3. Fenwick McKelvey, Concordia University
4. Dr. Kristen Thomasen, UBC
5. Bianca Wylie, writer and public interest technology advocate
6. Jonathan Roberge, Professor, Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS)
7. Luke Stark, Western University
8. David Murakami Wood, University of Ottawa
9. David Lyon, Queen’s University
10. Christelle Tessono, Tech Policy Researcher University of Toronto Faculty of Information
11. Brenda McPhail, Ph.D., Acting Executive Director, Public Policy in Digital Society Program, McMaster University
12. Bill Hearn, Lawyer, Fogler Rubinoff LLP
13. Leslie Regan Shade, Faculty of Information, University of Toronto
14. Maroussia Lévesque, Harvard University
15. Ben Shneiderman, Professor Emeritus
16. Gary Marcus, Professor Emeritus NYU
17. Sara M. Grimes, University of Toronto
18. Evan Light, York University

Since you’re here… … we have a small favour to ask. Here at ICLMG, we are working very hard to protect and promote human rights and civil liberties in the context of the so-called “war on terror” in Canada. We do not receive any financial support from any federal, provincial or municipal governments or political parties. You can become our patron on Patreon and get rewards in exchange for your support. You can give as little as $1/month (that’s only $12/year!) and you can unsubscribe at any time. Any donations will go a long way to support our work.You can also make a one-time donation or donate monthly via Paypal by clicking on the button below. On the fence about giving? Check out our Achievements and Gains since we were created in 2002. Thank you for your generosity!