• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Canadian Foreign Intelligence Service

I would wonder about oversight. Our parliamentary committee system doesn't strike me as all that robust and secure; certainly not enough to deal with matters that are potentially very sensitive and possibly very un-Charter-ish.

What would be the policy goals? Do we want to protect the Canadian state or effect change elsewhere? Protect Canadian intellectual and industrial capacity? Better domestic laws and walls might do the same. Rotting in a jail for a few decades, not a few years, for helping a foreign state might help.

There are dark forces at work in the civilian criminal world. Would we be ok with our cops colouring outside of their lines?

I say all of this with a knowledge base of spook work coming from movies and TV.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but have we even had an inquiry into our Covid response? Or how our governments (municipal, provincial, federal) failed to control/stop a small group of protestors. If we can't/won't do that, how the heck do we think we have the maturity to control a foreign intelligence service?
 
Would it be considered ironic that individuals caught doing illegal activities in a foreign country holding a Canadian passport (like has happened frequently in the past), were actually Canadian?
 
Would it be considered ironic that individuals caught doing illegal activities in a foreign country holding a Canadian passport (like has happened frequently in the past), were actually Canadian?
For a while ex DHTC folks where in demand due to the passport and clearances.

Decades prior serving Mounties also in the employ of the Agency did all sorts of shenanigans
 
The British manage to do it.
Indeed. Our parliamentary committee process seems to be set up as (a) consolation prizes for members who aren't made ministers and (b) a method to bury something, either completely or long enough for minister or executive to come up with a solution.

We seem to lack the ability, or even desire, to have public and elected officials know and talk about stuff in secret.

One of the first things that we would have to decide, first among many, is where the head of a Canadian FIS sits in the chain. A Minister? An Officer of Parliament? A permanent member of Cabinet? Something else?

No, which is part of why the RCMP lost the role as I understand it, and CSIS formed.
The RCMP Security Service doing illegal things (or knowingly allowing them to happen - I can't recall) was certainly part of it. All of it still remains on our soil.

How do other countries handle it? How do CIA members survive getting caught doing stuff in other countries that violate your Constitution, or even directing from Langley, that they be done? Is there some manner of Executive immunity baked into your system?
 
How do other countries handle it?

The UK has the Intelligence Services Act 1994.

Section 7 (007 :cool:) is titled 7. Authorisation of acts outside the British Islands. and begins . . .

7 (1) If, apart from this section, a person would be liable in the United Kingdom for any act done outside the British Islands, he shall not be so liable if the act is one which is authorised to be done by virtue of an authorisation given by the Secretary of State under this section.
 
Also within the FVEY community Australia has the Intelligence Services Act 2001

Similar to the UK legislation, it has provision about legal liability for actions taken outside the home country.
14 Liability for certain acts

(1) A staff member or agent of an agency is not subject to any civil or criminal liability for any act done outside Australia if the act is done in the proper performance of a function of the agency.
. . .
It continues with more caveats and legalese. Of interest may be other sections in the act that deal with the training, use and provision of firearms outside the country as well as within. There's some discussion of those in this 2019 article.

 
Indeed. Our parliamentary committee process seems to be set up as (a) consolation prizes for members who aren't made ministers and (b) a method to bury something, either completely or long enough for minister or executive to come up with a solution.

We seem to lack the ability, or even desire, to have public and elected officials know and talk about stuff in secret.

One of the first things that we would have to decide, first among many, is where the head of a Canadian FIS sits in the chain. A Minister? An Officer of Parliament? A permanent member of Cabinet? Something else?
One would hope a Senior member of cabinet.
Or maybe an appointee that reports to a Minister.
The RCMP Security Service doing illegal things (or knowingly allowing them to happen - I can't recall) was certainly part of it. All of it still remains on our soil.
Before my time, or at least before I knew what any of it meant.


How do other countries handle it?

@Blackadder1916 got the UK.

How do CIA members survive getting caught doing stuff in other countries that violate your Constitution, or even directing from Langley, that they be done? Is there some manner of Executive immunity baked into your system?
Executive Orders can handle some. As well JSOC and IC internal documents I am lead to believe provide top cover for government directed actions.
 
Back
Top