It’s been just over a month since St. Thomas University professor Christina Szurlej testified against Bill C-51, and she said her fight for the rights and security of Canadians is still far from over.
Szurlej, a professor in STU’s Human Rights department, was invited to testify on a panel before the House on Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on Oct. 21. This came after the Liberal government launched a public consultation regarding Canada’s national security framework, aiming to strike a better balance between maintaining security and protecting human rights and freedoms.
“My testimony provided a voice for 35-plus-million Canadians who are entitled to state protection of their fundamental human rights and freedoms as entrenched under the [Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms] and set out under international human rights law,” Szurlej said.
“As a proud Canadian citizen and human rights advocate, I see this as my duty.”
Bill C-51, formally named the Anti-terrorism Act, was introduced and passed by the Conservative government of former prime minister Stephen Harper. The omnibus bill broadened the government’s authority to share information about individuals easily.
Specifically, one provision, the Security of Canada Information Act, authorizes government institutions to disclose information directly to fellow government agencies that deal with activities undermining the country’s security.
Szurlej said preventing terrorism and maintaining national security is important, but the costs to Canadians’ rights and freedoms as set out under Bill C-51 “is far from proportionate.”
“Under the Act, the threshold for inter-agency [and] departmental data sharing is too low and not clearly defined, shared data is not adequately protected and there are no commensurate safeguards,” she said.
Szurlej said Bill C-51 was “drafted and passed as a knee-jerk reaction” following the shooting on Parliament Hill in 2014 that resulted in the death of one soldier. In the days preceding the shooting at parliament, two soldiers were attacked in Quebec and one died.
“What would have been more useful is for the government to have launched in inquiry into why the security framework at the time failed to detect and prevent these threats, and address those reasons.”
Szurlej said the government is contradicting its attempt to protect its citizens by doing more harm than good when it comes to human rights.
“Under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms … Canada’s populace is entitled to ‘life, liberty and security,’ not life, liberty or security,” Szurlej said.
“To me, this indicates that the drafters recognized an interdependent relationship. One should not be sacrificed for the other.”
Szurlej said being called before a House of Commons committee only in her fifth year of teaching was intimidating, but cited a quote from writer Audre Lorde as being a boost of encouragement: “When I dare to be powerful, to use my strength in the service of my vision, it then becomes less and less important whether I am afraid.”
She said while most university-level courses are theory-based, she tries to incorporate skill-building in one of her classes that focuses on human rights activism and social justice organizations. It offers students the opportunity to learn to write non-governmental stakeholder reports to the United Nations, create their own NGOs, write proposals and campaigns and volunteer with local NGOs.
“Each student in the course is a human rights defender in their own way – a journey I hope will continue well beyond the classroom.”
