IP: Canadian Law Could Define Protesters as Terrorists

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:42:16 -0500
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> From: Graham Blake <grahamb () ssimicro com>
>
> A new law rapidly making its way through the Canadian Parliament could 
> open the door for protesters at international meetings to be classified 
> and prosecuted as terrorists.
>
> *SNIP*
> It works like this. First, Bill C-35 sweepingly defines "internationally 
> protected persons" as "representatives of a foreign state that is a member 
> of or participates in an international organization." The principle is 
> taken from the UN Convention granting diplomatic immunity to politicians 
> attending UN conferences.
>
> But Bill C-35 expands the UN definition to include foreign state 
> representatives attending meetings of any kind. That means delegates to a 
> trade summit with China, an APEC summit, and yes, a G8 meeting. In a pen 
> stroke, these events will be placed behind a shield of diplomatic immunity.
>
> Next, C-36 steps in, defining interference with "protected persons," 
> including visiting dictators, as not just criminal acts but terrorist 
> ones. Bill C-36 states that anyone who commits "a violent attack on the 
> official premises, private accommodation or means of transport of an 
> internationally protected person that is likely to endanger [that 
> person's] life or liberty" has committed a terrorist act.
>
> In fact, anyone who "threatens" to commit any of these acts is guilty of 
> terrorism, and will lose many of their constitutional rights, as outlined 
> in the rest of the bill.
> *SNIP*
>
> http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?tf=tgam/common/FullStory.html&cf=tgam/common/FullStory.cfg&configFileLoc=tgam/config&date=20011128&dateOffset=&hub=columnists&title=Columnists&cache_key=columnistsNational&current_row=1&start_row=1&num_rows=1 


For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/