Summary of the Meeting of the National Security Transparency Advisory Group (NS-TAG) - November 10, 2021

Held via Videoconference

Members Present:

• Jillian Stirk
• Khadija Cajee
• Mary Francoli
• Thomas Juneau (co-chair)
• Daniel Jean
• Justin Mohammed
• Bessma Momani
• Dominic Rochon (co-chair)
• Jeffrey Roy

Members Absent:

• Michèle Audette
• Harpreet Jhinjar

Meeting Theme:

• “Connecting with Diverse Communities: Enhancing How National Security Organizations Engage, Build Trust, and Evaluate Success” – Part Five

Invited Guests and Speakers:

• Nader Hasan – Lawyer, Stockwoods LLP
• Faiza Patel – Director, Liberty and National Security, Brennan Center for Justice

National Security Community Members Present (as observers):

• Canada Border Security Agency (CBSA)
• Canada Revenue Agency (CRA
• Communications Security Establishment (CSE)
• Department of National Defence (DND)
• Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC)
• Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
• Public Safety Canada (PS)
• Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)
• Transport Canada (TC)

Agenda:

• Opening of the Meeting and Roll Call
• Private NS-TAG Discussion on Report
• Discussion Session with Guest Speakers: “Connecting with Diverse Communities: Enhancing How National Security Organizations Engage, Build Trust, and Evaluate Success” – Part Five
• Closing Remarks

Meeting Summary:                  

The fifteenth virtual NS-TAG meeting took place on November 10, 2021, on the theme “Connecting with Diverse Communities: Enhancing How National Security Organizations Engage, Build Trust, and Evaluate Success – Part Five”.

During the first session of the meeting, the NS-TAG members privately discussed their third report, which will focus on the current theme of engaging and building trust with diverse communities.

During the second part of the meeting, the NS-TAG welcomed guests from Stockwoods LLP and the Brennan Center for Justice. During the discussion, participants discussed  the need for increased accountability mechanisms for national security and law enforcement agencies, and how to build trust with Muslim communities. Speakers also advised on how national security agencies can enhance transparency by reporting relevant information in a more accessible manner, and improving outreach by consciously interacting with communities.

Key Takeaways of Guests’ Presentations and Remarks during the Discussion Session

• Guest speakers noted that CSIS is not a law enforcement agency and is therefore not involved in investigating crimes that have occurred. Rather, it investigates threats, i.e., individuals who they believe may commit a crime or an act of violent extremism. Guests believe that this threshold is too low in determining subjects of investigations. They also noted their belief that, in comparison to law enforcement agencies, there are limited mechanisms to hold CSIS to account.
• Guest speakers discussed issues regarding “threat algorithms” used by CSIS which, from their perspective, is flawed and can wrongly identify Muslims as threats. The speakers stated that something as simple as a Muslim-sounding name, being born outside of Canada or frequent travels to their country of origin, could lead to someone being wrongly identified as a threat by the algorithm. Guests suggested that other variables may include being a Muslim who was born in Canada and has gone abroad to do charitable work or being a Muslim who works in engineering or is in the military reserve.
• In terms of cultural and legislative reforms, guests commented that there is both a limited understanding and an inability to distinguish Islamophobic propaganda from legitimate information sources, or, for example, recognize situations where pro-democracy families are vilified by state controlled media of non-democratic regimes.
• On legislative reform, the guests argued that warrant powers available to CSIS should be thoroughly examined, specifically noting that, an amicus curiae (“a friend of the court” who helps the court in its decision-making process by making sure that all relevant advice and evidence are properly presented to the court) should be appointed to argue against the issuance of national security warrants.
• Guests suggested that  different factors, including a lack of time and resources, make it difficult for individuals to hold CSIS to account. People usually do not know if they are the subjects of investigation unless action is taken or a referral is made to law enforcement. As a result, guests stressed that it is important to have more accountability and oversight.
• Guests expressed the sentiment that the fundamental problem with the laws and policies that are being carried out in the counterterrorism space, is that Muslims are seen and treated as suspicious, even if they have not committed – or are suspected of committing – criminal activities. As long as this sentiment that Muslim communities in Canada feel that they are constantly under suspicion exists, they will not trust Canadian security agencies, and no amount of transparency will change that. 
• On transparency, speakers commented that in order to build trust, many of CSIS’ practices need to be changed, and that larger structural reforms are required. Knocking on doors, for example, may erode trust even if CSIS is transparent.
• Speakers commented that transparency is not just about disclosure of information and government reporting. The information must be disclosed in a manner that is understandable and digestible to the average person. For example, when the National Security Agency (NSA) in the U.S. wanted to become more transparent, it decided to disclose certain cases from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The documents that were released, however, were highly technical cases that are difficult to understand, even for those who work in that field.
• A key aspect of transparency is to increase public confidence by demonstrating that agencies follow the rules.
• Guests also argued that national security agencies should be required to create impact statements and determine which populations are affected by certain kinds of measures. These impacts should then be measured and publicly reported.
• Speakers advised that when conducting community outreach, it is important for the national security community to have a clear idea of what they are trying to accomplish. The communities that security agencies engage with should not be seen nor treated as potential security threats. Engagement helps to secure ties with communities.
• Speakers noted that the detention and interrogation of Muslim travelers – often, without a clear explanation – is a common problem in the United States. They suggested that increased internal oversight mechanisms for such actions is one potential way to cease detention and interrogation based on perceived implicit biases.