INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section outlines the parliamentary procedure for debating and adopting a resolution, which cannot be amended, regarding terrorism measures.
SECTION WORDING
83.32(3) A motion for the adoption of the resolution may be debated in both Houses of Parliament but may not be amended. At the conclusion of the debate, the Speaker of the House of Parliament shall immediately put every question necessary to determine whether or not the motion is concurred in.
EXPLANATION
Section 83.32(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that outlines the process for adopting a resolution that can be debated in both Houses of Parliament. The resolution in question is related to the listing of terrorist entities, organizations, and groups. This section specifically refers to the adoption of a resolution, which is the formal process by which Parliament approves or rejects a proposal made by the government. The section states that a motion for the adoption of the resolution can be debated in both Houses of Parliament but cannot be amended. This means that once the motion is presented to Parliament, it can be discussed and debated by members of both the House of Commons and the Senate. However, no changes can be made to the original proposal put forward by the government. The section also stipulates that at the conclusion of the debate, the Speaker of the House of Parliament must immediately put every question necessary to determine whether or not the motion is concurred in. This means that the Speaker must ensure that all necessary votes are taken to determine whether the motion has been approved or rejected by the members of Parliament. This provision is important in the context of the fight against terrorism because it provides a clear and efficient process for listing terrorist organizations and entities. By prohibiting amendments to the original proposal, it ensures that the government's recommendations are considered and voted on as a whole, without the risk of diluting their effectiveness. Ultimately, the provision serves to promote the safety and security of Canadians by ensuring that terrorist entities are identified and designated as such by Parliament.
COMMENTARY
Section 83.32(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the procedure for adopting or rejecting a resolution related to the listing of an entity as a terrorist organization. This section of the Code is an important component of Canada's counter-terrorism strategy and seeks to ensure that the country's legislative process is transparent, efficient, and effective. The process outlined in this section of the Code gives Members of Parliament (MPs) the opportunity to debate the pros and cons of adopting a resolution related to terrorist entities. It underscores the importance of deliberation and the need for thorough analysis of the potential impact that such a move could have on various stakeholders. However, it is noteworthy that the motion cannot be amended. This requirement is essential to maintain the integrity of the resolution and prevent any changes that could derail the government's efforts to combat terrorism. The non-amendable nature of the motion also ensures that the debate remains focused on relevant issues and that MPs do not stray away from the primary objective of the resolution. The requirement for both Houses of Parliament to debate the motion also highlights the democratic process and emphasizes the role of MPs in making crucial decisions that affect the country's security and wellbeing. MPs from all political parties can participate in the debate, and their contributions can shed light on aspects of the issue that may have been overlooked or not adequately considered. The final step of the process involves the Speaker of the House of Parliament putting every question necessary to determine whether or not the motion is concurred in. This requirement ensures that the decision-making process is transparent and accountable. The Speaker must ensure that MPs have had ample opportunity to express their views, and the outcome of the vote reflects the opinions of the majority of MPs. Overall, section 83.32(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial component of Canada's counter-terrorism strategy. It ensures that decisions related to the listing of terrorist entities are transparent and democratic, emphasizing the importance of debate and analysis while providing a mechanism for swift action when necessary. The non-amendable nature of the motion and the requirement for both Houses of Parliament to debate it underscore the need for focused attention on issues related to national security. The legislation provides an essential framework for Canada to combat terrorism while ensuring that the country remains a democratic, free, and open society.
STRATEGY
Section 83.32(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines a strict procedure for the adoption of a resolution related to declaring an organization as a terrorist entity. While this section limits the ability to amend the resolution, it does provide the opportunity for parliamentary debate. As such, there are various strategic considerations that should be taken into account when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code. One strategy that could be employed is to prepare in advance for the debate. This would involve conducting research on the organization in question, its actions, and its potential impact on national security. By having a thorough understanding of the situation, the arguments made during the debate can be more informed and persuasive. Additionally, it may be advantageous to build alliances with other members of parliament who share similar views. This can strengthen the argument and increase the likelihood of the resolution being adopted. Another key strategy to consider is messaging. Given the importance of the issue at hand, it is critical to ensure that messaging is clear and concise. This means articulating the reasons why the organization is being labelled a terrorist entity, the potential risks associated with its activities, and the need for decisive action. Moreover, it is crucial to ensure that the messaging is tailored to the audience. This involves considering the political leanings and values of the members of parliament and framing the argument in a way that speaks to these values. Furthermore, it is essential to anticipate potential objections and rebuttals. Members of parliament may have differing opinions on the proposed resolution or the organization in question. To counter these objections, it is necessary to have a well-prepared response that addresses their concerns. This response should be grounded in data and evidence. Additionally, taking the time to anticipate objections can help to identify potential weaknesses in the argument, which can be addressed proactively. Lastly, it is worth mentioning the importance of timing. The debate on the resolution needs to be carefully timed to maximize its impact. If held too early, it may not receive the necessary attention or support. Conversely, if held too late, it may be viewed as reactive rather than proactive. As such, careful consideration needs to be given to the timing of the debate, taking into account political events, media attention, and other relevant factors. In conclusion, Section 83.32(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada sets out a specific procedure for the adoption of a resolution related to terrorist entities. When dealing with this section, it is crucial to take into account various strategic considerations, including preparation, messaging, anticipating objections, and timing. By doing so, the chances of the resolution being adopted are significantly increased.