ummm yes please! 🙌
Posts by Kate Robertson
So many harms have already emerged from reckless and oppressive uses of AI, with such wide-ranging & far-reaching consequences, to so many groups of people, that it seems almost impossible to document them all. But we tried, in this open letter to Minister Solomon: bccla.org/policy-submi... (1/x)
Much the Bill C-2 focus involves the warrantless disclosure demand powers. But the implications for mandated data sharing across borders and intersection with the US Cloud Act needs greater attention. @kate-ro.bsky.social joins my Law Bytes podcast to discuss.
www.michaelgeist.ca/2025/10/law-...
A few (early) thoughts on digital transnational repression and extraterritorial human rights obligations over at @bindinghook.bsky.social. Thanks for the opportunity to share my research (again!).
Undoubtedly, the constitutional problems in Bill C-2 must be addressed. However, for public debate and parliamentary scrutiny to be meaningful, the public needs complete transparency from the govt regarding the intent and implications of Bill C-2, and compliance with Canada's policy on treaties.
Despite numerous clear statements from the Supreme Court that Canada’s Charter is different from U.S. law when it comes to human rights, Bill C-2 only signals willingness to throw core protections in Canada, refined over decades of jurisprudence, under the bus.
Today's analysis also links Bill C-2 to the recent publication by @cyn-k.bsky.social and myself on Canada's negotiations with the United States under the CLOUD Act.
First, I highlight the constitutional and human rights implications of the 2AP treaty, with findings by myself and former Citizen Lab researcher Veronica Arroyo.
As a result, this preliminary analysis of Bill C-2 situates the bill within the context of existing research by the Citizen Lab about two data-sharing treaties that are most relevant to the new proposed powers being introduced in Bill C-2.
As the analysis highlights, Canada’s Policy on Tabling of Treaties in Parliament was designed to prevent the federal government from quietly introducing treaty-implementing legislation through the backdoor of Parliament without making its intention explicit.
Which raises broader questions about the public's and Parliament's ability to meaningfully scrutinize the proposed powers, if the intention behind them is not made explicit?
Other controversial new surveillance powers would, if passed, dilute well-established constitutional protections, but notably would do so in the exact areas that were anticipated to be the root of incompatibilities between Canada and the USA in reaching a potential CLOUD agreement.
Given the significant implications of a potential agreement to a data-sharing framework with foreign authorities in the USA or elsewhere, it is surprising that the federal government is quietly introducing the powers necessary to ratify the treaty, without making this clear to the broader public.
At a recent briefing on Bill C-2, govt officials acknowledged that the intent of certain provisions within Bill C-2 is to enable Canada to implement and ratify a controversial new data-sharing treaty, publicly known as the “Second Additional Protocol” to the Budapest Convention (“2AP”).
NEW today from myself @citizenlab.ca, on the unspoken implications of Canada's Bill C-2 for data-sharing with the United States and other foreign countries:
citizenlab.ca/2025/06/a-pr...
Canada 🇨🇦's Liberal govt has proposed a new "Border Security Bill," in large part in response to pressures from 🇺🇸
I raised concerns about that back in March 2025 👇
macleans.ca/politics/the...
Our letter is linked here: openmedia.org/assets/20241...
I also connected with @theguardian.com, which also reports how the findings raise important questions for the government and privacy regulators about what technologies are being used, and underscores again the need for law reform to address the security and human rights risks concerned.
The report raises important questions for law enforcement authorities about the use of mercenary spyware in Canada - from @justinling.ca of the @torontostar-rss.bsky.social:
As Mr. Humphrey notes, this is not just a Canada problem.
Warnings from international experts and human rights organizations around the world about the United Nations cybercrime convention have been loud: www.hrw.org/news/2024/10...
"Peter Humphrey, a former British private investigator jailed in China who now advocates on behalf of foreign prisoners, said the execution of multiple Canadian citizens 'is a wake up call which should shock and alert every government in the world.'"
Myself and human rights experts warn in a recent letter:
Through a single, sweeping instrument, the Convention would force Canada’s hand into cooperation agreements with authoritarian governments around the world and countries with rights-violating laws.
In @theglobeandmail.com today: Ottawa ‘strongly condemns’ executions of unspecified number of Canadians by China:
🚨 the highly concerning reporting underscores what experts have been warning: #Canada should not enter into the #UnitedNations Cybercrime Convention on cooperation/extradition
the countries that they fled from in fear for their lives and their host countries who first welcomed them, but will now put them under a Kafka-esque spotlight in order to locate and deport them."
High-risk individuals, including human rights defenders in exile, will face heightened threats, caught in the crosshairs of two adversaries:
"By acquiring surveillance technologies, Western agencies fuel a poorly regulated industry and provide authoritarian regimes with new tools to repress people. ...
Well put!
NEW and urgent: Among the many things for Canadians 🇨🇦 to be worried about regarding US 🇺🇸 authoritarianism, @citizenlab.ca has a new legal analysis, authored by @cyn-k.bsky.social @kate-ro.bsky.social about the risks of a Canada-USA CLOUD Act 👇