Prime Minister Stephen Harper spoke out strongly against jihadist terrorists and the brutal attack on Charlie Hebdo’s headquarters in Paris. “The international jihadist movement has declared war,” he said in his first public statement after the attack.
Around the same time British Prime Minister David Cameron said security agencies should have the right and ability to read all messages sent online. He added the government should ban online communications which reduce their surveillance abilities, including smart-phone applications WhatsApp and Snapchat.
Changes in laws such as these are becoming worrisome, as they are seen by many to be infringements on privacy and freedom. These kinds of changes are not limited to the U.K., either.
Harper discussed threats to Canada in his statement, pointing to the recent shooting on Parliament Hill. He stressed this was not the first attack and mentioned a homegrown plot to blow up the Parliament buildings in 2006 as well as several other incidents.
Despite this, he said Canadians should not be afraid. “Yesterday, hundreds of thousands of people around the world and in cities across this country openly demonstrated that we will not be intimidated by jihadist terrorists,” he said on Jan. 8.
He went on to reveal that a new anti-terror bill is soon to come, which will allow security agencies more power and tools to identify threats and arrest suspects.
If recent security trends continue, then this bill will almost certainly focus on cybersecurity and Internet law.
The Harper government has specifically targeted Internet privacy and cybersecurity with bills such as Bill C-13 (Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act) which was passed last October. It was in many ways a do-over of Bill C-30 (Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act), which failed amid criticisms it didn’t mention either children or internet predators, instead focusing on bypassing warrants and expanding or strengthening police powers.
These bills were strategically put in motion during times in which they were anticipated to receive much public support, like after high-profile cases of cyberbullying. Some may see this as the government reacting to the people’s wants and needs, but many people fear that it is the government taking advantage of public fear or outrage to push their agendas.
“There is an inclination among right wing parties in the Western world to be comfortable with a certain level of authoritarianism,” said Shaun Narine, a political science professor at St. Thomas University. “I think the government will take every opportunity it can to gain security and control. If they see this as that opportunity, then that is what they will do.”
Narine also said that it is easy for parties to bring in laws which are designed to protect people, but the danger lies in the ease at which these laws can open the door for the state to become too involved. He pointed to the U.S. National Security Agency as an example of this. He believes it started out trying to protect the United States against national security threats, but it expanded to the point where it now stores and takes record of everything that goes on online.
It becomes easy for governments to label opposition to these bills and measures as people being soft on terror or soft on crime. While Canadians are not likely to lose their ability to use Snapchat, it is a dangerous road to go down when privacy is not seen as an important or valid concern and mass surveillance is seen as the norm.
