Foreign interference bill needs to be reviewed
The CBA is concerned that Bill C-70 is overbroad and vague
In a nutshell
Bill C-70, Countering Foreign Interference Act, imposes harsh penalties for behaviours described in overly broad and vague terms, creating the possibility that the bill could go beyond lawmakers’ intention to protect Canada’s institutions from undue influence.
Not all entities are criminal
The CBA’s Criminal Law Section is particularly concerned with the bill’s language describing a “foreign entity,” which treats any foreign entity as akin to a terrorist organization. The Section argues this goes beyond the bill’s purpose. “We have a further concern about vagueness since determining whether a group constitutes a foreign entity is a retroactive exercise based on a definition that covers many completely lawful entities,” the CBA letter reads, emphasizing that the concern is compounded by the harsh penalties prescribed by the bill.
Critical infrastructure
The Section is also concerned by the definition of “essential infrastructure” for the sabotage offence in Bill C-70, as it gives too much power to the executive branch to define what constitutes essential infrastructure through regulation. This key element of the offence shouldn’t be subject to the whims of the government of the day.
Read the submission.
