Some of the following links are to non-Government of Canada Web sites. Links to other Web sites not under the control of the Department of Justice are provided solely for the convenience of users. The Department is not responsible for the accuracy, the currency and the reliability of the content. The Department does not offer any guarantee in that regard and is not responsible for the information found through these links, nor does it endorse the sites and their contents.
Users should be aware that information on sites of organizations or other entities that are not subject to the Official Languages Act and to which the Department of Justice links, is available only in the language(s) used by the sites in question.
The ATA also amended the Criminal Code to permit the courts to order the deletion of publicly-available, on-line hate propaganda when it is stored on a computer system server that is within the jurisdiction of the court. This procedure allows the material to be deleted from computer systems such as an Internet site, in cases where the person who posted it is unknown, or is outside the country. Known individuals are given the opportunity to convince the court that the material is not hate propaganda.
In addition, the Criminal Code was amended to include an offence of mischief motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on religion, race, colour or national or ethnic origin, committed against a place of religious worship or associated religious property, including cemeteries.
These amendments recognize that fighting terrorism also requires fighting hate speech and intolerance against specific ethnic or religious groups in our society. By creating these crimes, Canada has attacked a root cause of violence.
Further amendments were made to the Criminal Code to create offences and other measures to permit Canada to implement the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. Offences created to achieve this objective were the offence of delivery, use, etc. of an explosive or lethal device, the offence of threat against UN or associated personnel, and the offence of attack on the premises, accommodation or transport of UN or associated personnel.
Changes were also brought about in the Criminal Code dealing with electronic surveillance. These changes brought the terrorism offences in line with the organized crime offences. The changes removed the last resort requirement for the use of electronic surveillance in an investigation, extended the duration of a wiretap authorization (from 60 days to a maximum of one year), and permitted delays of up to three years as a requirement to notify a target after a surveillance has been completed in relation to a terrorism offence.
Terrorist groups are extremely difficult to penetrate and infiltrate. Intercepting their communications may be the only effective way to remain aware of their plans and activities. Planning a terrorist attack may be spaced over time. Extending the duration of a wiretap authorization in these circumstances helps to ensure that terrorist groups do not defeat the ability of police to conduct effective wiretap investigations and recognizes the long-term nature of these investigations. Great harm may be caused to an investigation by a requirement to provide notice prematurely to some members of a terrorist group that their group is the object of investigations using the interception of private communications.
The DNA warrant scheme and Data Bank were extended to include terrorist offences, by adding them to the list of "primary designated offences". This permits the use of forensic DNA technology in the investigation and prosecution of these offences. Also, it would be possible for courts to issue DNA warrants and to order the inclusion of DNA profiles of persons convicted of these offences in the National DNA Data Bank.
Previous Page | Table of Contents | Next Page
Updated to April 1, 2008 .