INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

The Attorney General must provide their opinion on whether sections 83.28 and 83.29 should be extended in the annual report.

SECTION WORDING

83.31(1.1) The Attorney General of Canada shall include in the annual report under subsection (1) his or her opinion, supported by reasons, on whether the operation of sections 83.28 and 83.29 should be extended.

EXPLANATION

Section 83.31(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada refers to the requirement for the Attorney General of Canada to include his or her opinion, with supporting reasons, in the annual report made under subsection (1) of the same section. This opinion is related to whether the provisions of sections 83.28 and 83.29 of the Criminal Code should be extended. The said sections relate to preventative arrests and investigative hearings that allow law enforcement agencies to detain and question individuals suspected of planning or committing terrorist acts. These provisions were introduced in 2001 as a response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States and have since been reviewed and amended several times. The purpose of including the Attorney General's opinion in the annual report is to provide transparency and accountability on the use of such provisions and whether they continue to be necessary to combat terrorism. This is particularly important as preventative arrests and investigative hearings can potentially infringe upon an individual's liberty and privacy rights. Therefore, the inclusion of the Attorney General's opinion in the annual report acts as a safeguard to ensure that the provisions are used appropriately and are not being abused to violate individual rights. It also allows for a public debate on the merits and drawbacks of such provisions and whether they should continue to be part of Canada's anti-terrorism framework.

COMMENTARY

Section 83.31(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision requiring that the Attorney General of Canada include an opinion, supported by reasons, on whether the operation of sections 83.28 and 83.29 should be extended. This provision is an important feature of Canada's anti-terrorism laws that seeks to balance the need for national security with individual rights and liberties. The two sections in question - 83.28 and 83.29 - provide for the issuance of preventative arrest warrants and the imposition of recognizance with conditions (also known as peace bonds), respectively. These measures are designed to enable law enforcement agencies to intervene and disrupt potential terrorist activities before they can occur. Preventative arrest warrants allow authorities to arrest individuals who are suspected of planning a terrorist attack, but who have not yet committed any crime. Peace bonds require individuals to abide by specific conditions, such as staying away from certain locations or individuals, in order to ensure that they do not engage in terrorist activities. The use of these measures is controversial, as they involve a balancing of individual rights and liberties against the need for national security. Critics argue that preventative measures are overly broad and can be used to target individuals without just cause, while supporters argue that they are necessary to prevent terrorist attacks. Section 83.31(1.1) is significant because it requires the Attorney General of Canada to provide an opinion on the appropriateness of the use of these measures. This opinion is based on a review of the effectiveness of the measures in preventing terrorist activities, as well as their impact on individual rights and liberties. The opinion provided by the Attorney General is an important aspect of Canada's anti-terrorism laws, as it helps to ensure that measures enacted to protect national security are balanced against individual rights and liberties. It promotes transparency and accountability, as it requires the Attorney General to justify his or her opinion with supporting reasons. It is worth noting that this requirement for an opinion is not unique to Canada. Other countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, have similar provisions in their anti-terrorism laws requiring regular reviews of preventative measures. In conclusion, section 83.31(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that helps to balance national security with individual rights and liberties. By requiring an annual opinion from the Attorney General on the effectiveness and appropriateness of the use of preventative measures, this provision promotes transparency and accountability, ensuring that the public is aware of the government's actions to protect against terrorist activities.

STRATEGY

The strategic considerations when dealing with section 83.31(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada are numerous and complex. This section mandates that the Attorney General of Canada include an opinion with reasons in the annual report about whether the operation of sections 83.28 and 83.29 should be extended. These sections relate to the preventative detention of individuals suspected of terrorism offenses and the imposition of peace bonds (court orders to prevent someone from committing a terrorism offense), respectively. One strategic consideration is the political impact of the Attorney General's opinion. The opinion will be closely scrutinized by the media, opposition parties, and civil society groups. The government's perceived competence on security issues can be a key factor in its political fortunes. If the opinion is seen as weak or vacillating, there could be political fallout. Conversely, if the opinion is perceived as overly harsh or unfounded, it could damage the government's reputation for fairness and respect for civil liberties. Another strategic consideration is the legal basis of the opinion. The opinion must be supported by reasons, which implies a certain amount of legal rigor and analysis. The Attorney General will need to consider constitutional and international human rights law constraints on the operation of sections 83.28 and 83.29. The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled on some aspects of these provisions, but new legal challenges could arise. The Attorney General will need to weigh the risks and benefits of defending these provisions in court. A third strategic consideration is the operational impact of the opinion. If the Attorney General recommends the continuation of sections 83.28 and 83.29, the police and security agencies will continue to rely on these provisions to prevent and investigate terrorism offenses. Any changes to these provisions could have significant operational impacts. For example, eliminating preventive detention could limit the government's ability to disrupt terrorist plots, while narrowing the types of conditions that can be imposed in a peace bond could make it harder to prevent someone from engaging in terrorism. Given these strategic considerations, there are several strategies that the Attorney General could employ. One would be to engage in wide consultation with stakeholders, including civil society groups, legal scholars, and security agencies. By listening to diverse perspectives, the Attorney General could gain valuable insights about the impact of these provisions in practice. Another strategy would be to commission independent research on the effectiveness of sections 83.28 and 83.29. This research could help to identify any gaps or inefficiencies in the current framework and suggest ways to improve it. A third strategy would be to develop a communication strategy that explains the reasoning behind the Attorney General's opinion. The opinion will attract significant media attention, and the government will need to be prepared to explain the legal and operational rationale behind it. By being transparent and open about the decision-making process, the government can build trust with the public and demonstrate its commitment to protecting national security while upholding civil liberties. In summary, section 83.31(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada requires the Attorney General to include an opinion with reasons on whether the operation of sections 83.28 and 83.29 should be extended. This provision raises important strategic considerations related to politics, law, and operations. The Attorney General could employ strategies such as consultation, research, and communication to make informed decisions that balance national security and human rights concerns.