In Canada, the Security of Information Act is part of the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act which came into effect on December 24, 2001. The Security of Information Act renamed and replaced Official Secrets Act 1981.
The Security of Information Act creates a number of offences both with respect to espionage and to leakage. For all of these offences, no prosecutions can be commenced without the consent of the federal Attorney General.
The Security of Information Act contains the offence of unauthorized disclosure (Section 4). Most of the Act's offences relate to 'persons permanently bound to secrecy' - those 'insiders' who are included either because of where they work (for example former and current employees of CSIS) or because they have been personally notified by their Deputy Minister.
For example, Section 13 creates an offence - for which the maximum penalty is 5 years - for those insiders who 'intentionally and without authority, communicate or confirm information that, if it were true, would be special operational information'. This offence of purported communication recognizes both that (a) insiders are under a special duty with respect to the most sensitive information they had or have access to and (b) that the Crown does not need to prove the truth of the information (since to do so can simply increase the harm already done).
In Section 14, unauthorized communication of special operational information itself is punishable by up to 14 years' imprisonment.
For both of these offences, there is a 'public interest' defence - if an accused can show that information has been disclosed 'for the purpose of disclosing an offence under an Act of Parliament'. The Act sets out guidelines that a judge must consider when making his or her judgment; they include: the seriousness of the offences, the extent of the disclosure, the harm caused by the disclosure and whether the accused resorted to 'other reasonably accessible alternatives' before disclosing the information. In addition, this public interest defence can only be relied on if the accused has first (a) advised his or her Deputy Minister (or the Attorney General of Canada) and (b) if this fails, brought his or her concerns to the attention of either the Security Intelligence Review Committee or the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner.

6 comments:
George Washington, hero, terrorist, freedom fighter or traitor? All of the above?
What's your opinion Mr M? Very curious to understand your reasoning here.
A Laughing liberal
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/we-needed-wikileaks/article1652458/
A Laughing liberal
Leaks can be a very serious crime. The Afghan leaks are almost certainly going to be punished to their fullest extent, if they catch the person. There is an expectation that these people act with integrity.
If there was more leakage of govt documents in Canada, there would be a lot more Liberal politicians in Jail.
Where they belong.
If there was more leakage of govt documents in Canada, there would be a lot more Liberal politicians in Jail.
Where they belong.
Potentially yes anon, but excessive government secrecy may not be a crime, but absolutely must be confronted, by whatever means available. Especially when our troops are dying, there's no coherent reason we're spending a fortune in blood and gold, and most importantly killing innocent civilians at the same time we kill a few terrorists.
I'd really like Morton to tell us what he considers George Washington to be, and perhaps if his "status" changed during the American revolution.
Post a Comment