Security Intelligence Review Committee

www.sirc-csars.gc.ca

Common menu bar

• Français
• Home
• Contact Us
• Help
• Search
• canada.gc.ca

Breadcrumb

1. Home >
2. Annual Reports >
3. Annual Report 2003-2004 >
4. Statement from the Committee

Annual Report 2003-2004 - An Operational Review of CSIS Activities

Statement from the Committee

Rarely have Canadians had as much cause to be concerned about the balance between rights and security as they had in 2003–2004: the deportation of a Canadian citizen to a country with a questionable human rights record; threats from Al-Qaeda to carry out terrorist acts against Canada; and allegations that Canadian officials exchanged information improperly concerning various individuals with the officials of foreign governments.

Such issues are at the heart of our mandate as members of the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) as we review the activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS)—a function SIRC has now fulfilled for 20 years.

In July 1984, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act was proclaimed, creating CSIS to investigate, analyse and advise the Government of Canada on threats to Canada's national security. At the same time, Parliament put in place a comprehensive system of accountability for the new agency. The centrepiece of that accountability system is the ongoing external independent review of CSIS for which we are responsible.

It is worth recalling the events that led to the passage of this legislation, in circumstances not unlike those of today. Allegations of unlawful or improper behaviour by security intelligence officers of the RCMP prompted the government in 1977 to establish the Commission of Inquiry Concerning Certain Activities of the RCMP, chaired by Mr. Justice David McDonald. The Commission concluded that Canada needed an effective security service to protect itself, but recommended that, given the differences between security intelligence work and police work, the government separate the security intelligence function from the law enforcement function of the RCMP. The creation of CSIS and SIRC was the result.

In the 20 years since, SIRC has played an important role in the evolution of CSIS.

• In 1987, the government established a task force to review concerns raised by SIRC in the Service's early years. The task force's report led to significant changes at CSIS, including the disbandment of CSIS's Counter Subversion Branch.
• At about the same time, in response to more than 2000 complaints made by CSIS employees in 1985–86 and 1986–87 about the official languages practices of the Service, SIRC published a report on staff relations and language issues, Closing the Gaps, which had a major impact on how CSIS conducted its internal affairs.
• In 1992, after an extensive review of the 1985 Air India tragedy, the Committee reported that CSIS had not been in a position to predict that the Air India flight was to be the target of a terrorist bomb. SIRC also concluded that CSIS senior management had not provided adequate direction to employees concerning the Service's mandate and role in relation to the RCMP criminal investigation, and that CSIS policies in relation to the collection, retention and erasure of surveillance audiotapes were seriously deficient.
• In the early 1990s, SIRC examined CSIS's handling of the delicate balance between lawful dissent and political violence through studies regarding the Canadian peace movement, native extremism and university campuses. This issue remains pertinent now, as our recent studies on domestic extremism (2001–02) and domestic threats (2002–03) demonstrated.
• In 1994, the Review Committee investigated allegations that, among other things, a CSIS informant had created, funded and built the white-supremacist Heritage Front organization. The investigation required the review of 25 000 pages of documents, and interviews with more than 100 people. In a 200-plus page report to the Solicitor General, SIRC provided extensive detail on CSIS's investigation of the Heritage Front, and concluded that CSIS was correct to investigate the leadership of that extremist organization. Committee members later presented more than 16 hours of testimony on the case before the House of Commons Sub-Committee on National Security.
• In 2001, the Chair and another SIRC member appeared before the Special Senate Committee studying the Anti-Terrorism Act to provide their views on this ground-breaking piece of legislation. SIRC will undoubtedly also contribute to the upcoming review of the Act that Parliament agreed to.

During our 20 years of existence, many distinguished Canadians have given of their time to serve as members of the Review Committee, from all parts of the country and from each major national political party. And SIRC has been productive, issuing to date 150 reports and studies, which are listed in Appendix B at the end of this report. It has also received over 3186 complaints in the past 20 years and produced written reports for 118 of these complaint cases.

Review Committee members and staff have endeavoured to contribute to public understanding of the security and intelligence issues facing Canada by testifying before Parliamentary committees, speaking at public events, issuing declassified versions of reports and studies, and producing 20 public Annual Reports.

We believe that our work remains as relevant now as it was two decades ago. In fact, in the heightened post-9/11 security environment of today, Canadians need to be especially vigilant in protecting the democratic rights and freedoms that set our country apart from so many others.

Events of 2003–2004 illustrate just how high a profile national security issues have attained in Canada.

• CSIS is now part of a new Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness portfolio, which integrates activities that secure the safety of Canadians and other activities that protect against and respond to natural disasters and security emergencies. The new portfolio reports to the Deputy Prime Minister.
• The Prime Minister created a new Cabinet Committee on Security, Public Health and Emergencies—chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister—and appointed a National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister in the Privy Council Office.
• The Prime Minister also proposed the creation of a National Security Committee of Parliamentarians, whose members would be sworn-in as Privy Councillors so that they could be briefed on national security issues.
• In April 2004, just after the end of our reporting period, the government issued Securing an Open Society: Canada's National Security Policy, which, in the words of the policy, “articulates core national security interests and proposes a framework for addressing threats to Canadians.”
• The government also announced, in January 2004, the creation of the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar. Mr. Justice Dennis O'Connor is inquiring into the actions of Canadian officials in the deportation and detention of Mr. Arar from the United States to Syria, and making recommendations concerning an independent, arm's-length review mechanism for the RCMP's activities with respect to national security.

We expect our work to provide input to the deliberations of the O'Connor Commission. In May 2004 we provided to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness a classified, comprehensive report on the role of CSIS in the Arar case, with the suggestion that the Minister share the report with the Commission of Inquiry. We also anticipate that our 20 years of experience in carrying out comprehensive review of CSIS will assist the Commission in formulating its recommendations regarding a review mechanism for the RCMP's national security activities.

We also note with interest that Mr. Justice O'Connor has appointed the Hon. Ronald G. Atkey Amicus Curiae or “Friend of the Court”. Mr. Atkey, who served as our first Chairman from 1984 to 1989, is acting as counsel, independent from government, and his mandate is to test government requests for in camera hearings on the grounds of national security confidentiality.

It is in this environment that we are carrying out our ongoing work. In our studies this past year, we moved from the fairly intense focus on counter terrorism that marked our efforts for many months after September 11, 2001 to a more balanced review of the broad range of CSIS activities.

Our ability to shift our focus as required to address the concerns of Parliament and the public is an indication of the flexibility wisely built into the CSIS Act by its drafters. After 20 years we can say with confidence that the Act works well for both SIRC and CSIS. CSIS is a still-evolving—indeed, perpetually evolving—organization adapting necessarily to changes in the global environment, and SIRC must ensure that our evaluative activities evolve at the same pace. It is our intention in the year ahead to maintain our broad-based overview of the Service while preserving for ourselves the flexibility to respond to the sudden events and dislocations that have come to characterize the early years of the 21st century.

For half its life, CSIS was led by Ward Elcock, who completed his 10-year term as Director in May of 2004. Members of our Committee met frequently with Mr. Elcock over the past decade, and found him to be a principled and determined advocate for the Service. He left CSIS a stronger and more professional organization than it was at the beginning of his term. We extend to him, and to his successor, our best wishes.

Primary navigation (left column)

Date Modified:

2010-10-14