View as Webpage

International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group

Coalition pour la surveillance internationale des libertés civiles

February 11, 2023 - 11 février 2023

Ottawa appealing ruling that officials must help repatriate 4 men in Syrian camps

Facebook 10/02/2023 - In a cruel decision designed to prolong the torture of four Canadian men arbitrarily detained for years in NE Syria, Ottawa has appealed the Federal Court's repatriation order on stunningly frivolous grounds. Sally's son is one of the four men.

Sally writes: "This appeal is a cruel delay tactic based on clearly frivolous arguments that were soundly dismissed in the original court decision. For the Canadian government to argue that it is too difficult to repatriate my son when Canada is in the exact same region repatriating women and children defies logic as well as every human rights commitment this country has ever made.

Canada has always had the capacity to do this. Everyone from the Kurds and the Red Cross to the United Nations and the US State Department have begged Canada to do this. Federal Court Justice Brown clearly and soundly enunciated why this must happen. Canada is just prolonging my son's torture and that of the other male detainees and once again showing itself to act just like the rogue states it condemns when they violate international law.” Source + Twitter

TAKE ACTION: Call/Write to Ensure Ottawa Obeys Court Order to Bring Canadian Detainees Home from Syria ASAP

TAKE ACTION: Canada must repatriate all Canadians detained in NE Syria now!

Please share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

New Book: Reasonable Cause to Suspect: A Mother's Ordeal to Free Her Son from a Kurdish Prison, by Sally Lane

Dundurn Press 02/2023 - In a story of deceit, betrayal, and injustice, two parents are tried as terrorists for attempting to rescue their son from a Syrian war zone.

On September 2, 2014, Jack Letts, an idealistic eighteen-year-old British Canadian, phoned his mother saying, “Mum, I’m in Syria.” Those chilling words from a raging war zone set in train his family’s eight-year-long battle to rescue Jack from his disastrous mistake.

When an unscrupulous journalist invented the term “Jihadi Jack,” a false image of Jack spread throughout the world. Sally and John, Jack’s parents, faced the mammoth task of persuading a hostile public that their son was the victim of a smear campaign. He should, they argued, at least be allowed home to face a fair trial to address the claims against him.

But the Canadian and British governments had other plans. Jack is currently detained in a Kurdish prison, while the Canadian government claims it doesn’t know if he is alive or dead. This is his parents’ story of their painful struggle to persuade the world to save the son they love. Source

‘I’m putting all my secrets out there’: With new book, mother of so-called Jihadi Jack seeks redemption for her son

Mother of Canadian man detained in Syria ‘thrilled’ with Ottawa’s decision to repatriate him

Mothers in Syrian camps claim Canadian ultimatum: Give up kids now or they’re stuck there

Jo Becker and Letta Tayler: Revictimizing the Victims: Children Unlawfully Detained in Northeast Syria

ICLMG testifies on extradition reform at the Justice Commitee

ICLMG 09/02/2023 - ICLMG’s National Coordinator Tim McSorley presented at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights on February 8, 2023 for their review of Canada’s unfair extradition system.

Transcript: [...] We have been deeply involved in the campaign for justice for Dr. Hassan Diab, whose devastating case you have heard about at length. This has led us to closely examine the need to reform Canada’s extradition laws in order to prevent abuses of civil liberties and human rights committed in the name of countering terrorism. As you are aware, Dr. Diab was arrested by the RCMP in 2008 for extradition to France on accusations of carrying out a terrorist attack in Paris in 1980. While Dr. Diab was accused of committing a crime 30 years earlier, his arrest, hearings and eventual extradition took place squarely in the political and social context of the so-called “War on Terror” that led to severe rights violations in Canada.

This same context applied to France. The same year as Dr. Diab’s arrest, Human Rights Watch issued a damning report that found that, “French counterterrorism laws and procedures undermine the right of those facing charges of terrorism to a fair trial.”

The report documented that it was common practice for those held on suspicion of terrorism to face psychological pressure during custody. This sadly reflects Dr. Diab’s experience of prolonged solitary confinement, the length of which amounted to torture, in violation of international human rights law.

The report also raised concerns that judges had allowed the introduction of unsourced intelligence without sufficiently probing the validity of the information. This includes judges allowing for the inclusion of testimony obtained under torture in foreign countries, in violation of the Convention Against Torture, to which France was and is a signatory. Once again, we saw the use of unsourced intelligence used in the case of Dr. Diab.

All of this was known before Dr. Diab’s extradition to France. Yet he was still extradited, and faced the consequences of France’s anti-terrorism regime. An extradition process that appropriately considers human rights, civil liberties and the right to a fair trial would have taken all these elements into account. Instead, given France’s status as an ally and extradition partner, the detailed and serious problems of the country’s anti-terrorism system were not appropriately considered.

Others have spoken about extradition cases where human rights have been violated. You have also heard how Canada has an extradition agreement with India despite reports of torture and India not being a signatory to the Convention Against Torture. Importantly, India also justifies their grave human rights abuses as necessary in their self-defined “fight against terrorism.” Our own research has found that at least 10 countries that Canada has extradition treaties with have been singled out in just the past three years by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism for introducing or adopting rights-violating anti-terrorism laws. This includes France.

Under Canada’s current extradition system, though, we continue to run the risk of extraditing individuals to face unjust, rights-violating legal systems under murky and politicized accusations of “terrorism.” Indeed, there is the real risk that France could seek a second extradition of Dr. Diab, and that our flawed system would grant it, despite all we now know and all that Dr. Diab has been through. I would also direct the committee to a 2021 letter signed by 110 Canadian jurists warning against any new extradition proceedings against Dr. Diab, based on flaws in Canada’s extradition process and the French judicial system. Given all this, we join others in calling for reforms to Canada’s extradition laws. We have publicly endorsed the recommendations of the Halifax Colloquium, as shared with you earlier. Watch or read more - Visionnez ou lire plus + Share on Facebook + Twitter

Watch the full panel with Hassan Diab’s lawyer, Don Bayne, and the question period

Watch the other testimonies by Rania Tfaily, Alex Neve, Matthew Behrens & Rob Currie

Hassan Diab, trial in absentia

EVENT: Justice for Hassan Diab - February 18, 1PM CST, online + Share on Facebook + Twitter

Abdul Nakua: The ripple effects of invoking draconian laws must not be ignore

Policy Options 30/01/2023 - After six weeks of public hearings, the public inquiry into the use of the Emergencies Act came to a close on Nov. 26, 2022, after a marathon of 300 hours of testimony and 9,000 exhibits, and more than 70 witnesses. Announced on April, 25, 2022, the Public Order Emergency Commission, led by Justice Paul Rouleau, was mandated to examine and assess the basis for the government’s decision to declare a public order emergency, and the appropriateness and effectiveness of the measures selected by the government to deal with the situation. The Emergencies Act was designed to balance the maintenance of public order with the protection of civil liberties.

Around the same time but with much less fanfare and public exposure, an obscure inquiry was being conducted by the Senate’s Human Rights Committee, chaired by Senator Salma Ataullahjan, looking at systemic biases and Islamophobia. Despite the obvious differences between the two inquiries, there are many threads that connect their relevance for Canadians. Both examine the extent of damage that can result from the use of government discretion when applying draconian laws such as the Emergencies Act or antiterrorism laws. It is puzzling, however, that antiterrorism laws have not attracted attention or generated much concern among Canadians despite their intrusion into the civil liberties space.

Since their introduction post 9/11, antiterrorism laws have broadened the executive power of the government with little or no oversight. They have introduced permanent changes to the Criminal Code, the Official Secrets Act, the Privacy Act and the Canada Evidence Act, giving the government and its agencies far-reaching powers in the process. A new Crown corporation, the Canadian Air Transport Security Agency was created in 2002. The Financial Transactions Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) was given antiterrorist financial tracking responsibilities. Then in 2015, the Anti-Terrorism Act (Bill C-51) underwent a major overhaul under the Harper government resulting in a massive expansion of state power without oversight or safeguards. More than 100 Canadian law professors warned that this bill was a “dangerous piece of legislation.” There were fears that the changes would erode democratic checks and balances, weaken the established guarantees of the rule of law and infringe on civil liberties. These fears will only grow with the increased pervasiveness of digital technology and growing sensitivities around privacy and surveillance.

But despite these fears and many protestations, the antiterror laws have proven remarkably resistant to amendments or repeal. Various governments of different political persuasions lacked either the will or the aptitude, or both, to change course. The only positive amendment adopted a more robust government oversight framework in 2019. The National Security Intelligence Review Agency was created to review the [national security] activities of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Communications Security Establishment as well as other national agencies and departments like the RCMP and the Canadian Border Services Agency.

More than 40 years ago, the Commission of Inquiry Concerning Certain Activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (also known as the McDonald Commission) concluded that security and intelligence agencies in Canada must be assessed on both the effectiveness as well as the conformity with the requirements of democracy. It declared that a responsible government must abide by the rule of law and guarantee the freedom of legitimate political dissent. It made clear that these principles must not be compromised, whittled down or balanced off for the sake of convenience in applying security measures.

Ironically, the government may have compromised the McDonald Commission standard in its pursuit of a risk-avoidance counter-terrorism approach. Despite that, there was no desire by the government nor any sustained pressure by the civic society to examine the necessity of these laws, their effectiveness or the potential arbitrariness in their application despite the consequences for individuals, organizations and the country as a whole. Such an independent examination and impartial assessment of the antiterrorism laws should be of the same, if not higher, priority than that for the Emergencies Act. This is because, unlike the War Measures Act or the Emergencies Act, the antiterrorism laws are permanent rather than emergency legislations. Arbitrary arrests, no-fly lists, security certificates, citizenship revocations, delisting of charitable organizations, increasing surveillance and deteriorating personal privacy along with the blurring of lines between lawful dissent and illegal activities are part of the legacy of those laws. [...]

It is time for a similar commission that examines the necessity of the antiterrorism laws, and assesses their effectiveness, and addresses their abuses. The former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Beverley McLachlin in a speech she gave in New Zealand in 2005 spoke of the Justice Rand principle that governments do not and should not have “absolute and untrammelled discretion.” Such a discretion may violate the “norms of fairness” that is the foundation of the rule of law. The antiterrorism laws are unlikely to meet this standard upon any rigorous cross-examination. The findings and recommendations of the Rouleau report could reinvigorate the public concern about government overreach and galvanize support for such an examination. Read more - Lire plus

Azeezah Kanji - Canada 2030: Drone Colony?

The Yellowhead Institute 24/01/2023 - As I helped my grandmother in the field, I could see and hear the drone hovering overhead […] When the drone fired the first time, the whole ground shook and black smoke rose up. The air smelled poisonous. We ran, but several minutes later the drone fired again […] Now I prefer cloudy days when the drones don’t fly. When the sky brightens and becomes blue, the drones return and so does the fear.” – testimony of 13-year-old Zubair Rehman to US Congress in 2013, about the American drone strike that killed his grandmother Momina Bibi in Pakistan

When it comes to Canada’s plans to acquire its first armed drones, what we do know and what we don’t know both provide cause for alarm. So far, we know that the drones will be equipped to carry at least two “precision-guided” missiles each and cost up to $5 billion in total; that the government expects to award the final contract by 2024 and for the drones to be in full operation by 2030. We do not know what legal restrictions will apply – even in theory – to the drones’ activities inside and outside Canada, or what protections and remedies will be available – even in theory – for the targets. How terrifying, that Canada has managed to provide even less transparency than “the European Union and even the United States […] regarding the law and policy framework for their use of armed drones,” as law professor Craig Martin has pointed out. And yet, these plans are being permitted to unfold with minimal outcry and scrutiny.

In the government’s 2016 Letter of Interest (LOI) to potential suppliers, a sample series of future anticipated drone use “scenarios” are described. Chillingly, in these scenarios the many faces of Canadian state violence are masqueraded as exercises of virtue: anti-Indigenous dispossession, anti-migrant border enforcement, international policing, domestic policing, war. Read more - Lire plus

ACTION: Write letter: Militarizing the Sky: Opposing Canada’s Armed Drone Purchase

EVENT: OUT OF SIGHT: Ending Canada's Armed Drone Purchase, Feb 15, 7PM ET, online

Baljit Nagra & Paula Maurutto: Anti-Muslim Surveillance: Canadian Muslims’ Experiences with CSIS

SAGE journals 02/02/2023 - The targeting of Muslim communities through “the War on Terror” has given rise to a variety of schemes and tactics informed by Islamophobia and racializing narratives. Yet, there are few studies examining the specific intelligence practices deployed by governments as they engage in forms of racialized surveillance.

This study analyses 95 in-depth interviews with Muslim community leaders in five Canadian cities to map the material structural practices employed by the Canadian Security Intelligence Services (CSIS) in its racialized surveillance of Muslim communities.

This study documents how CSIS engages in the mass surveillance of Muslim communities, transforms Mosques into spaces of surveillance, creates a community of informants, and targets political activism. Moreover, we found that CSIS deploys illegal practices such as threatening citizenship and refugee status, intimidating people in their homes during the night and denying legal representation during interrogations. The article also explores how these state-led anti-Muslim surveillance tactics produce internal forms of community surveillance where individuals begin to self-regulate their own behavior. The level of CSIS surveillance of Muslim communities raises questions about the extent to which CSIS is overstepping its powers and engaging in illegal practices. Read more - Lire plus

Canadian Parliament Votes to Bring Uyghurs to Canada​

Justice for All 01/0/2023 -  Justice For All Canada expresses our appreciation to the Canadian Parliament for voting unanimously in favour of M-62, a motion seeking to establish a refugee stream for Uyghur Muslims. Sponsored by MP Sameer Zuberi, the motion urges expedited entry for 10,000 Uyghurs through Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s Refugee and Humanitarian Resettlement Program.

“Today’s landmark refugee vote establishes Canada’s place in our collective struggle to halt China’s genocide against Uyghurs. Globally, Uyghurs constitute one of the most neglected refugees. Human rights defenders now call on Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly and Immigration Minister Sean Fraser to urgently legislate this motion,” said Taha Ghayyur, Executive Director. Oppressive Chinese state policies have forced thousands of Uyghurs to flee their East Turkestan homeland searching for safety and freedom. As refugees, Uyghurs face significant challenges finding a safe place to resettle. Nearby countries, particularly Muslim nations, have failed to extend a safe haven for Uyghurs due to pressure from China’s government. 

Within those few countries that do accept Uyghurs, they have experienced discrimination, harassment, and a lack of social acceptance. Through our Save Uyghur campaign, Justice For All Canada advocates for Uyghur refugees experiencing an epidemic of transnational repression. China’s government has taken documented measures to track, survey, control and repress Uyghurs for defending themselves or their communities in East Turkestan (Xinjiang) and China. 

Uyghurs abroad are threatened, extradited or deported to China, where they face the serious risk of detention in internment camps, forced labour, and restrictions on fundamental freedoms, among other crimes against humanity. One example includes Canadian citizen Huseyin Celil, an Uyghur activist deported to China in 2006. To no avail, Celil’s family in Canada continues to await news of his wellbeing. In 2022, Justice For All Canada joined Amnesty International in adopting Celil as a prisoner of conscience.

Recommendations 

Canada has a long history of helping refugees through a robust asylum system working to resettle millions of vulnerable people. Like Syrians, Afghans and Ukrainians, Uyghurs deserve life-saving refugee assistance. 

When legislating Motion 62, we urge Canada’s Foreign Affairs and Immigration Ministers to consider implementing the following actions:

1. Increase the number of Uyghur refugees to at least 30,000 (instead of 10,000);
2. Launch the resettlement plan sooner than 2024 because Uyghur refugees require speedy humanitarian intervention. Read more - Lire plus

We can throw escaped Uyghurs a lifeline by bringing more to Canada

TAKE ACTION: Canada must do more to free Huseyin Celil

Basman and Sadinsky: Refugees still endangered by Canada-U.S. border accord

Ottawa Citizen 25/01/2023 - Not a winter goes by without the risk people will lose their lives crossing the border. We must end the 'Safe Third Party Agreement' that imperils them.

Not even one week after the calendar flipped to 2023, a familiar story played out near the Canada-U.S. border in Quebec. A Haitian man died trying to cross the border travelling south. Not a winter goes by without the possibility of individuals losing life and limb on our border. Regrettably, the start of the new year has not heralded a new conversation around the border. Instead, the news media and political leaders of all stripes have resorted to the same narrative, focusing on the border crossing at Roxham Road where many individuals cross into Canada between ports of entry to seek refugee protection. But in 2023, the federal government could signal a change in policy. This can be the year in which our leaders tackle the issues that are directly caused by the operation of the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA), which bars refugee claimants in the United States from making refugee claims at official Canadian land border ports of entry, subject to limited exceptions. In a recent interview with CTV’s Vassy Kapelos, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino stated that Canadian and U.S. officials are working together to “modernize” the safe third country act.

Let’s be frank. Any efforts to “modernize” the STCA that involve extending it across the whole border will cause more harm than good. Individuals will continue to cross the border in hopes of finding protection in Canada; they will just use riskier methods of doing so. And of course, sealing a border this long is simply not practical. The prime minister acknowledged in May 2022 that refugees will continue to attempt to enter Canada even if Roxham Road is shut down. They do so because they need protection against attacks, torture and imprisonment in their countries of origin simply because of their sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity. Even federal Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre mentioned that he understands “why desperate people are trying to cross there,” though he erroneously claimed that it is illegal to cross at Roxham Road. While Roxham is not an official port of entry, it is lawful to enter a country at any point for the purpose of seeking refugee protection.

Change is needed, but not in the way recently discussed. It’s not the monitoring of the Canada-U.S. border that is “broken.” The STCA itself is the culprit. The STCA is the reason that refugee claimants are funnelled to Roxham Road. The prime minister recently applauded the “generosity” of Quebec in welcoming refugee claimants but said that “we want to be in a situation where it is not necessary.” There is a simple solution: End the STCA. While the Supreme Court is currently assessing the lawfulness of the agreement (CARL is an intervenor in the case), there are good policy reasons for Canada to end or suspend the agreement even if the court upholds its legality. Refugee and social services advocates in Quebec have described the stress they are under because of Roxham Road funnelling claimants into that province. Were the agreement suspended, potential claimants could initiate claims at any port of entry nationwide. This would spread claimants across the country, ease the pressure on Quebec, and likely lead to faster processing.

In addition, even without suspending the agreement, a middle of the road solution already exists within STCA. Article 6 of the agreement allows either country to establish “public interest” exceptions for certain types of claimants. Canada has created one such exception for those who could face the death penalty if returned to the U.S. or a third country. Canada could make greater use of Article 6 to create exemptions for those who do not receive the equivalent protection in the U.S. that they would in Canada. These categories include refugees who would be put into U.S. jails, women fleeing domestic violence, and those who are time-barred from making claims in the U.S. We cannot ignore that a significant number of people who cross at Roxham Road are accepted as refugees and contribute to the Canadian economy — including many who served on the frontlines of the pandemic as “guardian angels.” And although the number of arrivals at the border increased in 2022, this number remains a small drop in the global bucket. Let 2023 be the last year that the STCA forces some of society’s most vulnerable to risk their lives to reach our refugee system and obtain the protection they need. It is time to tackle this once and for all. Source

Locked away: Speaking out about Canada’s arcane immigration detention system

State files confirm targeted RCMP violence in the aftermath of 1969 Sir George protest

Canadian Dimension 29/01/2023 - When Concordia University issued a public apology last October for its role in the 1969 student protest at Sir George Williams University, it acknowledged the many acts of institutional racism that led up to the landmark protest, including the university’s role in involving the police to quell the demonstration. Over 50 years later, details of RCMP violence aimed at Sir George protesters and their allies continue to emerge through freedom of information access to state files.

The two week sit-in at Sir George William University, which later became Concordia, lasted from January 29 to February 11, 1969 and was launched in response to the administration’s mishandling of incidents of anti-Black racism. Nine months earlier, Caribbean students from the biology department filed a complaint that professor Perry Anderson was deliberately failing them because they were Black. When the administration refused to take their grievance seriously, protesters occupied the university’s ninth floor computer centre and seventh floor faculty lounge. After a peaceful protest, police were called on the morning of February 11, 1969. A fire then broke out, destroying the computer centre and ending the sit-in. In the aftermath, 97 students were arrested, and formal charges were issued for mischief and obstruction of private property, causing lengthy criminal trials.

The Sir George uprising occurred amidst the backdrop of the 1960s, when the RCMP was acting preemptively against fears of New Left and socialist movements, especially those situated at universities. One briefing describes the student occupation at Sir George as unrest that “will terminate in a communist dictatorship of the proletariat that will be more fascist than even that of the Nazi regime in Germany during World War II.” In response to this Cold War fervour, the RCMP established a “racial intelligence program” to disrupt the organizing efforts of Caribbean students and activists connected to Sir George, and those who identified with Black power and Black nationalist movements.

In an aide-mémoire submitted to a public inquiry for RCMP abuses, Assistant RCMP Commissioner Stanley Vincent Maurice Chisholm gave detailed examples of tactics used to divide and discredit Black organizations in Canada and their leaders, specifically Rosie Douglas and those close to him. Douglas was one of the leaders of the Sir George occupation, and would go on to become the prime minister of Dominica, a small Caribbean island nation. Targeted activities included pouring a chemical agent into the gas tank of Douglas’s car that would prevent him from driving it, and forcing him to ride in an informants’ car instead, where he and others could be recorded. Chisholm wrote about how the objective of this operation was “to discredit Douglas as a leader within the Black community and factionalize an already shaky alliance of Black groups.”

The operation also included the issuance of a death threat to community worker and Dominican national, Nathalie Charles, by an RCMP agent. RCMP officials would later stage a “rescue” of Charles at her apartment, advising her that they were aware of threats being made against her life and offered her protection and assistance to leave Canada.

“This was engineered to get one more organizer out of the way. And in this case not only was I an organizer, I was also calling out an agent provocateur as an imposter. This is where the motive for the death threat likely came from,” said Charles from her home in Dominica. Charles never returned to Canada, and was forced to abandon her academic pursuits because of the incident. These events occurred in 1972, a time when violent threats against Black life in Toronto were so prevalent that a coalition of local Black organizations set up a community defence force. This was in response to months of racial terror that included threatening letters supposedly penned by the Ku Klux Klan, racist slogans painted on the windows of Third World Books (an icon of the Black cultural renaissance in 1960s Toronto), and the burning of a Jamaican-Canadian community centre.

The proximity of the RCMP to these events through the use of informants can be traced right back to the Sir George Williams occupation, including the time of the fire. An RCMP briefing from March 1969 described how “the infiltration of Sir George Williams is an example of what’s happening in universities throughout North America.” Within this briefing, reports following the February 11 fire and the 97 arrests remain heavily redacted.

“Many students including myself were beaten and tortured by the Montréal Police. Students were forced to lay down on broken glass on the floor and were beaten with clubs,” recalled Lynne Murray, one of several veteran protesters who spoke during the public apology event at Concordia last October. “One of the students from the Bahamas suffered a brain aneurysm, and she died shortly after. Her parents believe she died because of the actual beatings she received that day.”

Rosie Douglas was deported from Canada in 1976 after being deemed a national security threat based on an alleged RCMP report of an arson conviction—but Douglas was convicted of obstruction of the use of private property, not arson. Following numerous attempts by Douglas to testify before the MacDonald Commission of Inquiry into Certain Activities of the RCMP to challenge and correct this record, all of his requests were denied. Anne Cools and Brenda Dash, who received convictions for mischief from their involvement in the protest, later submitted applications for a pardon from the Queen. With consequences concerning employment, international visas, continued academic education, and mental health impact for many veteran protesters, it is ironic that a pardon from the Queen be the sole remedy to expunge criminal records that were dictated by counterinsurgency tactics and the repressive violence of the Queen’s agents and the Canadian state—which remain unaccounted for.

At a time when institutions like Concordia University are now attempting to repair the harms they caused to Black communities and organizations involved in the 1969 Sir George occupation, when will the Canadian state acknowledge its role in manufacturing anti-Black violence during the occupation, and the continuum of harm and racial terror committed by the RCMP that followed? Source

Imperial Dominance Disguised as Democratic Deterrence

TomDispatch 15/01/2023 - More than two millennia ago, in the History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides recounted a disastrous conflict Athens waged against Sparta. A masterwork on strategy and war, the book is still taught at the U.S. Army War College and many other military institutions across the world. A passage from it describing an ultimatum Athens gave a weaker power has stayed with me all these years. And here it is, loosely translated from the Greek: “The strong do what they will and the weak suffer as they must.”

Recently, I read the latest National Defense Strategy, or NDS, issued in October 2022 by the Pentagon, and Thucydides’s ancient message, a warning as clear as it was undeniable, came to mind again. It summarized for me the true essence of that NDS: being strong, the United States does what it wants and weaker powers, of course, suffer as they must. Such a description runs contrary to the mythology of this country in which we invariably wage war not for our own imperial ends but to defend ourselves while advancing freedom and democracy. Recall that Athens, too, thought of itself as an enlightened democracy even as it waged its imperial war of dominance on the Peloponnesus. Athens lost that war, calamitously, but at least it did produce Thucydides, a military leader who became a historian and wrote all too bluntly about his country’s hubristic, ultimately fatal pursuit of hegemony.

Imperial military ambitions contributed disastrously to Athens’s exhaustion and ultimate collapse, a lesson completely foreign to U.S. strategists. Not surprisingly, then, you’ll find no such Thucydidean clarity in the latest NDS approved by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. In place of that Greek historian’s probity and timeless lessons, the NDS represents an assault not just on the English language but on our very future. In it, a policy of failing imperial dominance is eternally disguised as democratic deterrence, while the greatest “strategic” effort of all goes (remarkably successfully) into justifying massive Pentagon budget increases. Given the sustained record of failures in this century for what still passes as the greatest military power on the planet — Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, of course, but don’t forget Somalia, Syria, Yemen, and indeed the entire $8 trillion Global War on Terror in all its brutality — consider the NDS a rare recent “mission accomplished” moment. The 2023 baseline “defense” budget now sits at $858 billion, $45 billion more than even the Biden administration requested.

With that yearly budget climbing toward a trillion dollars (or more) annually, it’s easy to conclude that, at least when it comes to our military, nothing succeeds like failure. And, by the way, that not only applies to wars lost at a staggering cost but also financial audits blown without penalty. After all, the Pentagon only recently failed its fifth audit in a row. With money always overflowing, no matter how it may be spent, one thing seems guaranteed: some future American Thucydides will have the material to produce a volume or volumes beyond compare. Of course, whether this country goes the way of Athens — defeat driven by military exhaustion exacerbated by the betrayal of its supposedly deepest ideals leading to an ultimate collapse — remains to be seen. Still, given that America’s war colleges continue to assign Thucydides, no one can say that our military and future NDS writers didn’t get fair warning when it comes to what likely awaits them.

Bludgeoning America with Bureaucratese

If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BS. That’s a saying I learned early in my career as an Air Force officer, so I wasn’t exactly surprised to discover that it’s the NDS’s guiding philosophy. The document has an almost Alice in Wonderland-like quality to it as words and phrases take on new meanings. China, you won’t be surprised to learn, is a “pacing challenge” to U.S. security concerns; Russia, an “acute threat” to America due to its “unprovoked, unjust, and reckless invasion of Ukraine” and other forms of “irresponsible behavior”; and building “combat-credible forces” within a “defense ecosystem” is a major Pentagon goal, along with continuing “investments in mature, high-value assets” (like defective aircraft carriers, ultra-expensive bombers and fighter jets, and doomsday-promising new ICBMs).

Much talk is included about “leveraging” those “assets,” “risk mitigation,” and even “cost imposition,” a strange euphemism for bombing, killing, or otherwise inflicting pain on our enemies. Worse yet, there’s so much financial- and business-speak in the document that it’s hard not to wonder whether its authors don’t already have at least one foot in the revolving door that could, on their retirement from the military, swing them onto the corporate boards of major defense contractors like Boeing and Raytheon. [...]

As the military-industrial complex maneuvers and plots to become ever bigger, ever better funded, and ever more powerful, abetted by a Congress seemingly lustful for ever more military spending and weapons exports, hope for international cooperation, productive diplomacy, and democracy withers. Here, for instance, are a few of the things you’ll never see mentioned in this NDS:

1. Any suggestion that the Pentagon budget might be reduced. Ever.
2. Any suggestion that the U.S. military’s mission or “footprint” should be downsized in any way at all.
3. Any acknowledgement that the U.S. and its allies spend far more on their militaries than “pacing challengers” like China or “acute threats” like Russia.
4. Any acknowledgment that the Pentagon’s budget is based not on deterrence but on dominance.
5. Any acknowledgement that the U.S. military has been far less than dominant despite endless decades of massive military spending that produced lost or stalemated wars from Korea and Vietnam to Afghanistan and Iraq.
6. Any suggestion that skilled diplomacy and common security could lead to greater cooperation or decreased tensions.
7. Any serious talk of peace.

In brief, in that document and thanks to the staggering congressional funding that goes with it, America is being eternally spun back into an age of great-power rivalry, with Xi Jinping’s China taking the place of the old Soviet Union and Vladimir Putin’s Russia that of Mao Zedong’s China. Consistent with that retro-vision is the true end goal of the NDS: to eternally maximize the Pentagon budget and so the power and authority of the military-industrial-congressional complex. Basically, any power that seeks to push back against the Pentagon’s vision of security through dominance is defined as a threat to be “deterred,” often in the most “kinetic” way. And the greatest threat of all, requiring the most “deterrence,” is, of course, China. Read more - Lire plus

What Is The Pentagon’s Updated Policy On Killer Robots?

Forbes 15/12/2022 - The Pentagon has issued an update to its Directive 3000.09, which covers what they term Autonomy in Weapon Systems and others call ‘killer robots.’ Current drones like the Air Force and CIA MQ-9 Reapers are operated by remote control: a human being sitting in front of a video screen identifies targets on the ground thousands of miles away, places them in the crosshairs and releases a Hellfire missile or other weapon. Autonomous weapons are different: they pick their own targets without any human intervention. Clear rules are needed on when and how they can be used, and the new directive brings them a step closer.

Ten years ago when the first version of 3000.09 was released, autonomous weapons looked like science fiction. Now they are very real. The U.N. claimed that Turkish-supplied drones attacked targets autonomously in Libya in 2020 and Russia is now deploying loitering munitions in Ukraine with autonomous capability. Many activists, like the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, want an outright ban on autonomous weapons, insisting any remote weapon remains under meaningful human control at all times. The U.N. has been debating how to control such arms for many years.

However, as the new directive makes clear, the Pentagon is sticking to a different line.

“The DoD has consistently opposed a policy standard of ‘meaningful human control’ when it comes to both autonomous systems and AI systems,” Gregory Allen, director of the Project on AI Governance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told me. “The preferred DoD term of art is ‘appropriate levels of human judgement,’ which reflects the fact that in some cases – autonomous surveillance aircraft and some kinds of autonomous cyber weapons, for example – the appropriate level of human control may be little to none.”

Just what autonomous weapons would be permitted under what circumstances? Allen believes the previous version of the directive was so unclear that it discouraged any development in this area. “Confusion was so widespread – including among some DoD senior leaders – that officials were refraining from developing some systems that were not only allowed by the policy, but also expressly exempted from the senior review requirement,” says Allen. [...]

Kallenborn also notes that while effectively autonomous weapons like landmines have been in use for over a century, the landscape is changing rapidly because of the advances in AI and particular machine learning. These have given rise to systems which are very capable, but technically brittle – when they fail, they fail spectacularly in ways that no human would, for example mistaking a turtle for a rifle. Read more - Lire plus

TAKE ACTION: Stop Killer Robots

UN counterterrorism expert to finally visit the Guantanamo detention facility for the first time

OHCHR 01/02/2023 - The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, will undertake a technical visit to the United States commencing 6 February 2023.

Between 6 and 14 February, the independent expert will visit Washington D.C. and subsequently the detention facility at the U.S. Naval Station Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Over the course of the subsequent three-month period, Ní Aoláin will also carry out a series of interviews with individuals in the United States and abroad, on a voluntary basis, including victims and families of victims of the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks and former detainees in countries of resettlement/repatriation.

The visit takes place in accordance with the Terms of Reference for Country Visits by Special Procedures Mandate Holders.An end-of-mission statement of the Special Rapporteur’s findings and recommendations will be issued following the end of the technical visit. Source

‘Secrecy the priority’: Guantanamo battling COVID outbreak

Guantanamo: Tumour discovered on detainee Ammar al-Baluchi's spine, court filing says

Longtime Client Majid Khan Released from Guantánamo, to Begin New Life in Belize

Top Bush Lawyer Admits Guantánamo Military Commissions 'Doomed From the Start'

Biden Leery of Involvement in Potential Plea Deal in Sept. 11 Case

Pentagon Lifts Trump-Era Ban on Release of Guantánamo Prisoners’ Art

Local cops harassed and threatened U.S. veteran because of terror watchlist, lawsuit says

The Intercept 08/02/2023 - In 2015, he sued the U.S. government over his placement on the Department of Homeland Security’s no-fly list, as well as the larger terrorist watchlist from which that database is built. Eventually, Long was told his name was removed from the no-fly list, but, as the traffic stops in Oklahoma indicate, he has remained on the broader terrorism watchlist. His lawsuit in federal court related to that watchlist is still ongoing. [...]

A 2016 report by Yale Law School and the American Civil Liberties Union found that the U.S. government had “drastically expanded a consolidated watchlisting system that includes hundreds of thousands of individuals based on secret evidence.” The report documented how the system was now being used and interpreted by local police forces who were frequently acting upon “potentially erroneous, inaccurate, or outdated information.” Unlike the no-fly list, which has some limited redress processes, the broader terrorism watchlist remains largely opaque and unchallengeable. “The FBI accepts almost every single ‘nomination’ to its list submitted by anyone,” Long’s lawsuit says. “This is because the FBI uses a standard so low that, based on a string of speculative inferences, any person can be made to qualify.” [...]

The most recent incident, when he was pulled over earlier this month by a group of police officers who drew guns on him and ordered him out of his vehicle — an incident that Long also caught on his own dashboard camera — was the most alarming in his recent series of run-ins. A video of the incident shows police officers yelling contradictory instructions at him for several minutes while standing with guns drawn behind his vehicle. “I was wondering if they were going to make my wife a widow now for something so silly,” Long said, “just for me being on this list, when they themselves don’t even know why I’m on it.” Read more - Lire plus

The #NoFly list is a #MuslimBan list

COINTELPRO 2.0: How the FBI Infiltrated BLM Protests After Police Murder of George Floyd

DemocracyNow! 07/02/2023 - A new podcast out today called “Alphabet Boys” documents how the FBI disrupted racial justice organizing after the police killing of George Floyd in 2020, including paying an informant at least $20,000 to infiltrate and spy on activist groups in Denver, Colorado. The informant also encouraged activists to purchase guns and commit violence, echoing the FBI’s use of the COINTELPRO program to sabotage left-wing activist groups in the 1960s. For more, we’re joined by three guests: journalist and creator of the “Alphabet Boys” podcast Trevor Aaronson, Denver-based activist Zebbodios Hall, who was one of many activists targeted by the FBI’s infiltration, and former FBI special agent and whistleblower Mike German, who left the agency after reporting misconduct and mismanagement in its counterterrorism efforts. [...]

What’s significant here is that we’re seeing a lot of the powers and tactics used against would-be terrorists or supposed terrorists in the post-9/11 era being applied against political activists in Denver in the summer of 2020. And the reason that is significant is that the internal FBI records show, in the case in Denver, that the FBI launched its investigation based on nothing more than First Amendment-protected activities, which were, essentially, things that Zebbodios Hall and other activists had said, which in some cases were quite incendiary, but ultimately were First Amendment-protected activities. And yet they launched this investigation based solely on that, without any reason to believe that any of these activists were moving toward a plot of violence or anything of the like.

And as for the question of whether this happens on the right, it does. You know, obviously, there have been other plots that have targeted right-wing activists. The most well known right now is the plot that targeted a group of men in Michigan in a supposed plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer. And so, I think what’s important about this story now is that we are entering this phase when Jim Jordan and the Congress are about to launch this committee that is specifically looking to establish this narrative that the FBI is solely focused on this type of tactic against right-wing groups and right-wing political activists, when that isn’t true. What ultimately is true is that the FBI has an enormous amount of power that deserves a lot more oversight than it currently receives. And all sorts of groups, from left to right, are subjected to this kind of activity by the FBI. And so, this narrative that the right wing is attempting to establish, that the FBI is prejudiced against right-wing groups and we’re only seeing this activity among right-wing groups — there is evidence of that, and no doubt Jim Jordan will find it, but the truth is that this is far more extensive. It involves many groups. And in most cases, I would argue, if you look at the history of prosecutions in the post-9/11 era, these types of tactics are used far more against left-wing activists and left-wing political groups than they are against right-wing groups. Read more - Lire plus

UK: Shawcross review of Prevent is 'deeply prejudiced and has no legitimacy'

Amnesty International UK 08/02/2023 - Amnesty International strongly criticises the review of the UK’s counter-terrorism Prevent duty published today (8 February). Ilyas Nagdee, Amnesty International UK’s Racial Justice Director, said:

“This review is riddled with biased thinking, errors, and plain anti-Muslim prejudice - frankly, the review has no legitimacy.

“William Shawcross’ history of bigoted comments on Muslims and Islam should have precluded his involvement in this ill-starred review in the first place.

“There’s mounting evidence that Prevent has specifically targeted Muslim communities and activists fighting for social justice and a host of crucial international issues – including topics like the climate crisis and the oppression of Palestinians.

“There is growing evidence that Prevent is having disastrous consequences for many people; eroding freedom of expression, clamping down on activism, creating a compliant generation and impacting on individual rights enshrined in law.

“A proper independent review of Prevent should have looked at the host of human rights violations that the programme has led to - but these have largely been passed over in silence."

Last year, Amnesty joined a coalition of 17 human rights and hundreds of community groups in a boycott of the Shawcross-led review, citing serious concerns about bias and a pattern of behaviour which demonstrated the Government’s unwillingness to seriously interrogate the Prevent Duty.

Prevent: Children and young people targeted

Devised in 2003 by the Government, there is ever-mounting evidence that Prevent, the controversial counter-terrorism strategy, is discriminatory and disproportionately targets Muslims - specifically children and young people. The indicators of extremism used to refer thousands of young people to Prevent include if they display behaviours such as a sense of adventure or if they change their appearance - these should not be considered indicators of extremism because they are the behaviours of an average teenager. 

Data released last month shows that in the year leading to March 2022, only 13% of Prevent referrals are taken forward as cases by the Government resulting in thousands of young people put through daunting referrals impacting their mental health, trust in schools, hospitals and other important bodies. This trend of referrals has existed for years and has been attributed to Prevent having a wide scope for discretionary interpretation, which was criticised by multiple UN Special Rapporteurs including E. Tendayi Achiume, former Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, in her visit to the UK in 2019. Read more - Lire plus

Shawcross’ review of PREVENT exploits Muslim prejudice to expand state powers

8 point plan to abolish Prevent

“An Intolerable Situation”: Rashid Khalidi & Orly Noy on Israeli Colonialism & Escalating Violence

DemocracyNow! 30/01/2023 - U.S. Secretary of State Tony Blinken is in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories amid an alarming rise in violence, with Israel killing at least 35 Palestinians since the beginning of January. The deadliest incident occurred on Thursday, when Israeli forces raided the Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank, killing 10 people, including two children — the deadliest Israeli raid in the West Bank in two decades.

A day later, a Palestinian gunman shot dead seven people in occupied East Jerusalem, targeting worshipers observing the Sabbath. Israelis living in illegal settlements in the West Bank responded by carrying out scores of attacks on Palestinians as the far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, vowed to make it easier for Israelis to get guns. We speak with Israeli activist and journalist Orly Noy, in Jerusalem, and Palestinian American scholar Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said professor of modern Arab studies at Columbia University. [...]

AMY GOODMAN: And after the Jenin attack — and let’s remember that the well-known, the world-renowned Palestinian American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh was killed right outside the Jenin refugee camp as the Israeli forces were engaging in raids. Talk about what happened the next day. Talk about the Palestinian gunman, the attack on the synagogue, and, interestingly, the difference between — I mean, all of this is terrorizing communities, but when the word “terror” is used, and “terrorist,” Professor Khalidi.

RASHID KHALIDI: Yeah, I lost the sound there for a minute. I think what you’re pointing to is the fact that the much more massive number of Palestinian casualties, most of them civilians, are never recognized as the result of Israeli terror, whether it’s settler violence or whether it’s the actions of the Israeli military or the border guards or the police. We are talking about a three-to-one, four-to-one, five-to-one ratio of civilian deaths — many, many more Palestinians killed. We are only told that what the Palestinians do is, quote-unquote, “terror.” What the Israeli government does is in service of, quote-unquote, “security.” And again, this term “security” is one that is used as a bludgeon by Israel to justify not just the murder of civilians, not just attacks on localities like the Jenin refugee camp or the town of Jenin or the city of Nablus, but to justify the continued appropriation, expropriation, theft of Palestinian land for the building of exclusive Israeli — new Israeli settlements. All of this is justified in terms of security.

What it is is colonization. Israel is systematically colonizing occupied Arab East Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied West Bank. And in so doing, it is employing terror, terror wielded by Israeli settlers, armed Israeli thugs, and by the Israeli military, which invariably protects the settlers. And so, we are talking about use of a term as a bludgeon against the Palestinians in support of this colonization process — one which the United States constantly refutes. We had President Biden talking about the attack on the worshipers outside the synagogue as an attack on civilization. This is the language of colonizers throughout history, in Ireland, in Kenya, in India, in Egypt. Anything that’s done by the occupied, by the colonized to resist is terrorism; what the state does is legal violence. And that’s the way in which this is always being framed, by Israel and by its supporters in the United States, including the U.S. government under President Biden. Read more - Lire plus

3 million signatures for the removal of PKK from terror list submitted to the European Commission

ANF News 31/01/2023 - The campaign for the removal of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) from the EU list of terrorist organisations, launched by the international initiative Justice for Kurds in November 2021, has been concluded. The results of the campaign were presented at a public press conference in Brussels on Tuesday. According to the results, three million people supported the campaign to remove the PKK from the list of banned terrorist organisations.

Representatives of various organisations that have actively participated in the campaign also took part in the press conference. Yüksel Koç, co-chair of the European umbrella organisation of Kurdish associations KCDK-E, emphasised that the supporters had sent an important signal with their signatures. Especially in view of the "extermination policy" pursued by the Turkish state in Kurdistan, it is significant that so many people are calling for the PKK to be removed from the EU terror list, said Koç, describing the movement as the "will of the Kurdish people".

"The classification of the Kurdistan Workers' Party as a terrorist organisation serves the Turkish state as a justification for its attacks on Kurds everywhere. In fact, this listing serves Turkey as a guarantor for genocidal measures against our people. A peaceful solution to the Kurdish question is therefore long overdue. This is the prerequisite for a functioning democracy and for stability, not only in Turkey, but in the entire Middle East. The solution to the Kurdish question guarantees the existence and livable future of our people," Koç stated. The President of the European Left, Walter Baier, expressed his full solidarity with the Kurdish people, their struggle for self-determination and the aims of the Justice for Kurds campaign. "The reason to take the PKK off the EU terror list is actually quite simple: the PKK is not a terrorist organisation. It is the party of the Kurdish people," Baier said. Ludo de Brabander agreed and said that the time had come to reassess the PKK. He added that the peace organisation Vrede was also behind this demand. After the speeches, the notarised signatures were handed over by a delegation to the EU Commission, the politically independent executive of the EU. The Commission is responsible for drafting proposals for new European legislation and implementing the decisions of the European Parliament and the Council of the EU. Read more - Lire plus

Peru calls on citizens to report ‘acts of terrorism’ on social media

The Guardian 08/02/2023 - Peru has called on citizens to report social media users suspected of supporting or inciting “acts of terrorism”, as the country reels from two months of violent anti-government protests which have claimed at least 59 lives. In a move widely condemned by human rights organisations, the country’s interior ministry said on Monday that the criminal definition of “apology for terrorism” was being modified to include the use of social media, after the first jail sentences for the alleged crime last month.

In a statement, Amnesty International said it rejected the measures that “threaten freedom of expression”. It warned that the creation of a virtual platform to report the crime could lead to wrongful convictions. A Peruvian court sentenced two men to eight years in prison in January for allegedly praising Abimael Guzmán, the late leader of the Shining Path terror group, on their Facebook accounts. Carlos Rivera, a lawyer at Peru’s Legal Defence Institute, called the government’s move “extremely irresponsible”, adding there was a risk of “people being charged with terrorist offences that they have nothing to do with”. The timing of the move has also raised concerns: Peru has been embroiled in political turmoil and street violence since early December when former president Pedro Castillo was accused of staging a coup after attempting to dissolve congress and rule by decree. He was arrested, and his vice-president and former running mate, Dina Boluarte, took office.

The move also comes as Boluarte’s government faces accusations of using excessive force against civilian protesters. At least 47 people have been killed by security forces, prompting the UN human rights office to demand an investigation into the deaths and injuries last month. Some observers say Boluarte’s government has formed a tacit coalition with powerful far-right lawmakers who have portrayed the protesters as “terrorists” – a throwback to the internal conflict with the Shining Path in the 1980s and 90s, in which nearly 70,000 Peruvians died. Known as terruqueo in Peru, it is a common practice used to dehumanise protesters with legitimate grievances and even attack critical stances towards the government.

“These kinds of actions end up justifying the government’s discourse that terrorism is literally about to take power,” said Rivera. He added the government had become a “sounding board” for the campaign which, he said, was being pushed by the anti-terrorism police. A video posted on social media shows police and soldiers singing anti-terrorist chants as they march down a rock-strewn road in the Andean region of Huancavelica. The protesters on the side of the road respond by singing: “We are not terrorists, we are campesinos.” Read more - Lire plus

Hong Kong: landmark national security trial of 47 democracy advocates begins

The Guardian 06/02/2023 - Hong Kong’s largest national security trial began on Monday, involving 47 of the city’s most high-profile democracy advocates, in a hearing that has been labelled a trial of the territory’s pro-democracy movement itself. The group of former politicians, activists, campaigners, and community workers are accused of “conspiracy to commit subversion” over the holding of unofficial pre-election primaries in July 2020. The case is at the centre of the Hong Kong and Beijing governments’ crackdown on opposition and dissent in the city, after the mass pro-democracy protests in 2019. Among the accused are legal academic Benny Tai, former lawmakers Claudia Mo, Au Nok-hin and Leung Kwok-hung, and well-known activists Joshua Wong and Lester Shum. Gwyneth Ho, 32, a former journalist turned primary candidate, is among those pleading not guilty.

On Monday prosecutors told the West Kowloon magistrates court that the accused had conspired to seriously interfere, disrupt or undermine the duties and functions of the Hong Kong government, “with a view to subverting the state power”. An amended filing revealed the prosecution had dropped one accusation that the group intended to use “the threat of force”, a change noted in court by Ho. The trial opened with the court reading out the charge and formally taking pleas from 18 defendants in front of three national security judges – Andrew Chan, Johnny Chan and Alex Lee. All 18 repeated that they would plead not guilty except Ng Kin-wai, an ex-district councillor, and Mike Lam, a merchant. Read more - Lire plus

Ban all AI systems posing an unacceptable risk to fundamental rights

EDRi 02/02/2023 - Civil society are calling on the Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) negotiators to ban all AI systems posing an unacceptable risk to fundamental rights. The members of the European Parliament (MEPs) must put people first and include the following prohibitions in the AI Act: 

1. Remote biometric identification in public spaces: Thousands of people have called for a full ban! It’s crucial that MEPs include a ban on ALL types of remote biometric identification, including ‘post’-analysis of past footage.
2. MEPs must ensure a full ban on all types of Predictive Policing. Place-based predictive policing leads to automated racial profiling & redirecting police to already oversurveilled areas where mostly working class & racialised groups live. AI systems are used to discriminate & profile people, deciding who is credible, risky or harmful on the basis of prejudiced assumptions. Increasingly the use of ‘predictive’ analytics to map where ‘illegal’ movement is happening & sending punitive responses.
3. A wide coalition of 200 orgs and academics have been calling for MEPs to protect people on the move by prohibiting these uses of AI in migration in the AI Act.
4. Emotion recognition - MEPs need to prohibit systems from detecting or inferring emotion on the basic data about our appearance or behaviour. These systems are based on racist pseudo-science and should not be allowed.
5. AI systems must not be used to infer or predict our race, sexuality, gender, ability. Such systems are inherently discriminatory & can be used for harmful outcomes, such as the policing of access to public bathrooms for trans & non-binary people.
6. Automated behavioural analysis – these practices can unfairly mark people out as suspicious or criminalise their use of public spaces and should be prohibited.

Why do we call for bans? Some AI systems are simply too harmful to be allowed. They exacerbate structural imbalances of power & harm the most marginalised in society. We cannot put the burden on people affected to fight the use of such systems. These demands have been developed by a strong coalition of civil society. 120+ orgs have called for an AI Act that puts people first. MEPs - make it happen! Source

Prohibit biometric categorisation in publicly accessible spaces, and any discriminatory biometric categorisation

Racist algorithms and AI can't determine EU migration policy

Emotion (Mis)Recognition: is the EU missing the point?

ICLMG ACTIONS & EVENTS

UPDATED Canada must repatriate all Canadians detained in NE Syria now!

On January 20, 2023, Federal Court Justice Henry Brown ruled that Canada must repatriate Canadians illegally and arbitrarily detained in northeast Syria. On February 6, 2023, the Canadian government filed an appeal and asked that the Brown ruling be set aside and placed on hold while the appeal plays out. This is unacceptable. 

Every day the government fails to bring these Canadians home, it places their lives at risk from disease, malnutrition, violence, and ongoing military conflicts, including bombing by Turkey’s military. United Nations officials have even found that the conditions faced by Canadians in prison are akin to torture. Please click below to urge the federal government to repatriate all Canadians illegally & arbitrarily detained in northeast Syria without delay.

Please share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

20 years of fighting deportation to torture: Justice for Mohamed Harkat Now!

December 10, 2022 - ironically Human Rights Day - marked the 20th "anniversary" of the arrest of Mohamed Harkat under Canada's rights-violating security certificate regime. For Mr. Harkat, it's been two decades of fighting deportation to torture, 16 years of harassment and intrusive surveillance, arbitrary detention, solitary confinement, secret trials, PTSD: enough is enough! We call for justice for Moe Harkat now! Watch - Visionnez

TAKE ACTION: Stop Moe Harkat's deportation to torture!

ACTION: Arrêtez la déportation vers la torture de Mohamed Harkat!

Take Action for Justice for Hassan Diab!

Sign and share the LeadNow petitions to protect Hassan from further injustice

Petition in English + Pétition en français

Send an email using ICLMG’s one-click tool and share widely!

Letter in English + Lettre en français

For more information on the case of Hassan Diab, read our webcomic, watch our animated version of the comic, or visit justiceforhassandiab.org.

Since the Taliban takeover of a year ago, Canadian aid organizations have faced barriers in sending aid to Afghanistan due to Canadian sanctions and a restrictive interpretation of the Canadian Criminal Code’s anti-terrorism provisions. This is despite the US, the UK, the EU countries and even the UN taking action to ensure sanctions do not interfere with crucial humanitarian assistance.

ICLMG has teamed up with other Canadian organizations to call on Prime Minister Trudeau and the Canadian government to act immediately to remove barriers to the provision of humanitarian assistance. This includes ensuring that sanctions and counter-terror finance and criminal law restrictions do not impede the provision of lifesaving humanitarian aid. This issue isn’t limited to Afghanistan, either, which is why we are also asking the government to address the long-standing issue of ensuring that anti-terrorism laws and sanctions do not interfere with humanitarian assistance. Version française

Reform Canada's extradition law now!

Canada’s extradition system is broken. One leading legal expert calls it “the least fair law in Canada.” It has led to grave harms and rights violations, as we’ve seen in the case of Canadian citizen Dr Hassan Diab. It needs to be reformed now.



Click below to send a message to urge Prime Minister Trudeau, the Minister of Justice and your Member of Parliament to reform the extradition system before it makes more victims. And share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram. Thank you!

Version française: Le Canada doit réformer la loi sur l'extradition! + Partagez sur Facebook + Twitter + Instagram

Phone PM Justin Trudeau

TAKE ACTION: Justice for Hassan Diab!

Just Peace Advocates' action: Write a letter to Prime Minister Trudeau: Say “No" to a second extradition of Hassan Diab

Canada must protect encryption!

Canada’s extradition system is broken. One leading legal expert calls it “the least fair law in Canada.” It has led to grave harms and rights violations, as we’ve seen in the case of Canadian citizen Dr Hassan Diab. It needs to be reformed now.



Click below to send a message to urge Prime Minister Trudeau, the Minister of Justice and your Member of Parliament to reform the extradition system before it makes more victims. And share on Facebook + Twitter + Instagram. Thank you!

Regardez la vidéo avec les sous-titres en français + Agir

Protect our rights from facial recognition!

Facial recognition surveillance is invasive and inaccurate. This unregulated tech poses a threat to the fundamental rights of people across Canada. Federal intelligence agencies refuse to disclose whether they use facial recognition technology. The RCMP has admitted (after lying about it) to using facial recognition for 18 years without regulation, let alone a public debate regarding whether it should have been allowed in the first place. Send a message to Prime Minister Trudeau and Public Safety Minister Bill Blair calling for a ban now.

OTHER NEWS - AUTRES NOUVELLES

Afghanistan

TAKE ACTION: Canada Must Save At-Risk Afghan Women’s Rights Advocate Sadia: Issue Entry Permits ASAP!

Attacks on dissent

Attaques contre la dissidence

Atlanta’s “Cop City” Moves Ahead After Police Kill 1 Protester & Charge 19 with Domestic Terrorism

TAKE ACTION: Tell the Atlanta Police Foundation: Stop Cop City and Resign!

MPs deliver several blows to UK government’s anti-protest public order bill

UK: Stop the Public Order Bill

Met officers did not examine if spying was justified, inquiry finds

Denouncing arbitrary designation of Dr. Naty Castro as a ‘terrorist’

Second undercover police officer spying on Barcelona activists unmasked

Biometrics

Biométrie

Amnesty International Canada podcast: Facial recognition and policing protesters

Freedom of expression and of the press

Liberté d'expression et de la presse

Iranian blogger couple sentenced to prison on security charges

UK: IPI joins global media freedom concern about National Security Bill

Apple quietly expanded the use of Chinese company Tencent’s website blacklist to users in Hong Kong

Islamophobia

Islamophobie

Prominent Quebecers plead for federal anti-Islamophobia rep to be given a chance

Migrant and refugee rights

Droits des migrant.es et des réfugié.es

Rep. Delia Ramirez to Biden: Further Militarizing the Border Is Not the Answer to Immigration

Privacy and surveillance

Vie privée et surveillance

New book: Pegasus by Laurent Richard and Sandrine Rigaud

Public hearing at Dutch court over police surveillance of activist

EU: Travel surveillance: member state comments on "improving compliance" with court ruling

CCTV cameras will watch over Egyptians in new high-tech capital

Police

Ottawa People’s Commission’s first report documents residents’ experience of violence, abandonment during convoy occupation

Community Groups Speak Out Against Proposed Increase to Ottawa Police Force's Budget

‘Proactive policing’ and Canada’s Scorpions

John Tory and Doug Ford’s vision of ‘safety’ is anti-Black

Five RCMP Officers Charged in Killing of Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan Man Dale Culver

Body Cameras for Police Threaten Public Safety

Release of Tyre Nichols’ arrest video shows why police shouldn’t control body-cam footage

UK: Police and intelligence agencies to increase joint work, with reduced privacy safeguards

Miscellaneous

Divers

EVENT: No to War, No to NATO: North American perspectives on Ukraine, Russia, and NATO - Feb 19, 12PM ET, online

Marines charged in Capitol riot got highly sensitive spy jobs after Jan. 6

statewatch: Submission for the EU Rule of Law Report 2023

July to December 2022 - Juillet à décembre 2022

In case you missed it, we've published our biannual summary of activities last month. Here are the legislation and issues we worked on from July to December 2022:

• Bill C-20, Public Complaints and Review Commission Act
• Bill C-26, An Act respecting cyber security & amending the Telecommunications Act
• Bill C-27, Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2022
• "Online harms" proposal
• Countering terrorist financing & prejudiced audits of Muslim charities
• International Assistance and anti-terrorism laws
• Justice for Dr Hassan Diab & reform of the Extradition Act
• CSIS accountability and duty of candour
• Facial Recognition Technology (FRT)
• Canadians detained in Northeastern Syria
• Justice for Moe Harkat and abolish security certificates
• Canada’s armed drone purchase
• Listing of Iranian Canadians
• Ongoing No Fly List problems

For more details on each issue, click here. And here are the issues we plan to work on in the first half of 2023:

• Advocating for changes to anti-terror laws that prohibit Canadian organizations from providing international assistance in Afghanistan and other regions in need;
• Ensuring that the Canadian government’s proposals on “online harms” do not violate fundamental freedoms, or exacerbate the silencing of racialized and marginalized voices;
• Protecting our privacy from government surveillance, including facial recognition, and from attempts to weaken encryption, along with advocating for privacy law reform;
• Fighting for Justice for Mohamed Harkat, an end to security certificates, and addressing problems in security inadmissibility;
• Ensuring Justice for Hassan Diab and reforming Canada’s extradition law;
• The return of the 40+ Canadian citizens indefinitely detained in Syrian camps, including more than 20 children;
• The end to the CRA’s prejudiced audits of Muslim-led charities;
• Pushing for Canadian government action on behalf of Iranian Canadians negatively and unjustly impacted by the US terror listing of the IRGC;
• Greater accountability and transparency for the Canada Border Services Agency;
• Greater transparency and accountability for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service;
• Advocating for the repeal of the Canadian No Fly List, and for putting a stop to the use of the US No Fly List by air carriers in Canada;
• Pressuring lawmakers to protect our civil liberties from the negative impact of national security and the “war on terror”, as well as keeping you and our member organizations informed via the News Digest;
• And much more! Read more - Lire plus

Les opinions exprimées ne reflètent pas nécessairement les positions de la CSILC - The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the positions of ICLMG.