Above watch: Federal Minister Peter Mackay was in Halifax today discussing the Prevention of Terrorist Travel Act, an act that has been met with criticism. Natasha Pace reports.
HALIFAX – The federal government has introduced measures that would allow it to cancel, refuse or revoke the passports of high-risk travellers.
Justice Minister Peter MacKay announced the introduction of the Prevention of Terrorist Travel Act and changes to the Canadian Passport Order in Halifax on Friday.
New amendments allow the government to cancel, refuse or revoke passports as a preventative measure against travellers who might be going abroad to engage in terrorism-related activity.
“It sends a signal that we’re not going to tolerate these violent activities or be a safe haven for terrorism or an exporter of terrorists,” MacKay said. “These changes will also ensure that Canada’s good name isn’t associated with the jihadist movement.
Besides terrorist activity, the government could also revoke or cancel a passport for national security reasons or for transnational child sex offences. MacKay said the changes to the passport order could help stop offenders who prey on children before they’re able to commit offences — people such as Ernest Fenwick MacIntosh, who left a trail of victims in Canada and around the world.
“Often predators will leave our shores to carry out these acts in countries where the laws are less stringent, where the protection simply isn’t there, where it’s a more permissive environment, where they’re able to gain access to children. We have a global responsibility as well,” he said.
For David Fraser, a Halifax privacy lawyer, the changes raise a number of concerns.
“Canadians have a constitutional right to travel and you only want to have that curtailed when somebody’s made a compelling case,” he said.
Fraser doesn’t think having a suspicion someone may commit a crime is enough.
“Is suspicion really the proper threshold, should it be that they believe the person will actually do this? Because we’re talking about revoking somebody’s passport for a period of 10 years,” he said.
If a passport is cancelled, the person has 30 days to appeal the decision, and a judge can decide what evidence is made public and what is not.
Fraser compared the changes to the no-fly list, where some people are added that shouldn’t necessarily be there, and have very little opportunity to change it.
“There really has not historically been enough opportunity for somebody to challenge their inclusion on these lists, and I’m concerned that the same thing is going to happen with these passports,” he said.
Comments