Are we compromising civil liberties for safety?
On Jan.30, Canada’s government introduced a variety of anti-terror legislation to provide security to Canadians. In doing so, greater power has been given to CSIS to detain those who may be suspect to terrorism. While the measures cover a wide range of increased power, questions linger regarding the effect of these laws on civil liberties. Furthermore, the balance between safety and liberty becomes diluted by the threat of violent acts upon home soil. What does this bill mean for Canadians, and how does it affect our daily lives? This article will briefly examine the pros and cons of the new bill and the consequences thereof.
…allows for individuals to reflect on their own position in contemporary Canadian society…
In a Q&A session regarding the new anti-terror bill, Prime Minister Stephen Harper was asked whether or not he could guarantee that the laws would not interfere with civil liberties.
“Every time we talk about security, they suggest that somehow, our freedoms are threatened,” said Harper. “I think Canadians understand that their freedom and their security more often than not go hand and hand. Canadians expect us to do both, we are doing both, and we do not buy the argument that every time you protect Canadians, you take away their liberties.”
While Prime Minister Harper’s answer seemingly dodges the question, he brings up a crucial component of the discussion on civil liberty. How can we untangle the constant grappling between security and freedom? It seems that the balance between our safety and our rights heavily relies upon sacrifices made from one another. While the Prime Minister ensures us that the government is maintaining both fundamental liberties and rigorous security, there is a fine line that dictates what we are willing to part with.
The balance between protecting our rights and protecting our country is a fine one, and while the scales may seem to dip in the favor of one over the other, the dynamic has always been present. Even before these changes to legislation, the laws in place were beneficial to some more than to others. Furthermore, the opening of this dialogue on civil liberties presents a unique opportunity among individuals. One must begin to question the liberties they hold dear. How would you react if you were wrongfully detained?
The new legislation put in place allows for individuals to reflect on their own position in contemporary Canadian society, both as a public citizen and as a political body. While these new laws do in fact provide greater security to Canadians, many will undoubtedly question whether or not these measures are justifiable. Amidst asking these questions, it is important to recognize the civil liberties you currently hold, many of which remain unexamined.
By opening the conversation of sacrificing civil liberties for greater assurance of safety, we are able to take a step back and resituate ourselves, presenting an opportunity to gain insight on our own situation and experiences as Canadians within the political sphere.