A Podcast Called INTREPID

Subscribe to Secure Line.Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@SecureLineCASISSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3p2sEFIXkjaA5ffxXEMBDL?si=4514be4114594ebfApple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/secure-line/id1791171013

In this podcast, Stephanie sits down with Gerry Butts, vice chairman and a senior advisor at Eurasia Group, to talk about recent developments in Europe and what the war in Ukraine means for global stability. In particular, they discuss problems relating to energy, food and whether or not the West can stay united in what is increasingly becoming a protracted conflict. Please note this podcast was recorded June 24, 2022.

Diplomacy goes well beyond diplomats – so what is the role of a defence attaché (or in the case of a Commonwealth country, defence advisor) anyway? In this episode Stephanie speaks with UK Brigadier General Doug Gibson about his role in Canada, UK-Canada defence cooperation, the 2021 UK Foreign Policy and Defence Review (linked below), NATO expansion and the war in Ukraine, declassification and prebunking in the information space and more!Please note that this podcast was recorded on June 6 2022 and reflect events up to that date.2021 UK Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/global-britain-in-a-competitive-age-the-integrated-review-of-security-defence-development-and-foreign-policy

Craig and Stephanie are joined by former National Security and Intelligence Advisor Vincent Rigby and uOttawa colleague and frequent INTREPID contributor Thomas Juneau to discuss a May 2022 report on reforming Canadian national security. The uOttawa Graduate School of Public and International Affairs (GSPIA) convened a task force of former senior government officials to recommend the path forward on Canadian national security policy and reform. Their report makes a series of recommendations on strategy, tools, governance, and transparency. In this podcast, Messieurs Rigby and Juneau walk through their key observations. The report is here.

In this episode, Stephanie is joined by Intrepid contributor, Thomas Juneau, Major-General Michael Wright, Chief of Defence Intelligence and Commander of Canadian Forces Intelligence Command (CFINTCOM), and Ms. Christine Kennedy, Assistant Chief of Defence Intelligence. The four get into a detailed discussion of what CFINTCOM does, how it is structured and how it is evolving. They also discuss the challenges CFINTCOM is confronting, including the environment and climate change, the war in Ukraine (including disinformation and “debunking”), and AUKUS. NB: This was our first “in-person” recording since the start of the pandemic – so you will hear a few bumps as we get re-acquainted with our microphone discipl

In this episode Craig and Stephanie sit down with Intrepid Podcast contributor, Thomas Juneau, and Dominic Rochon, senior assistant deputy minister for the national and cyber security branch of Public Safety Canada. Thomas and Dominic are co-chairs of the National Security Transparency Advisory Group. Together, the four look at their latest report “How National Security and Intelligence Institutions Engage with Racialized Communities”. They discuss ongoing challenges in building trust, and how to balance engagement in organizations that are also seen as engaged in active community surveillance. You can access the report here: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2022-nstag-nsiirc-isnrccr/index-en.aspx Thomas and Dominic have also written a piece about Policy Options, summarizing some of the key findings in the report: https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2022/bridging-the-national-security-trust-gap-with-racialized-people/

Stephanie sits down with her former NPSIA colleague Jez Littlewood, a specialist in weapons of mass destruction, and Craig Forcese to discuss the rules governing nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and their use. They then address questions arising from the conflict in Ukraine, including recent concerns that Russia may use such weapons.

In Ep 174, Stephanie and Craig discussed many of the international issues raised by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. They did not, however, address the “laws of armed conflict” (LOAC) (also called “international humanitarian law”) governing how armed conflicts are supposed to be fought, and creating the concept of “war crimes”. In this episode, Stephanie and Craig are joined by MGen (ret) Blaise Cathcart, Canada's former Judge Advocate Lawyer (JAG). The JAG is the Canadian Armed Forces' top military lawyer. They discuss the scope and application of LOAC, and drill down on a number of specific issues: can Canada be considered a “belligerent” because of the nature of its support for Ukraine; how are combatants and civilians distinguished; what are the rules on targeting of combatants as opposed to civilians; what happens to prisoners and detainees; what the implications of civilian infrastructure being bombed; and how might enforcement of these rules work. This is a deep dive on many of the matters filling the front pages of newspapers over the last two weeks.

The honking may have stopped in Ottawa, but the debate over the Emergencies Act is far from over. Following the invocation of the Act, there is a requirement for two reviews to take place – one by Parliamentarians, and the other a broader look at government actions. Hopefully, this will contribute to a better understanding of what happened, why, and whether the Trudeau governments actions were appropriate. To discuss these reviews, and the need for transparency, Stephanie sits down with Leah West and Thomas Juneau. They also discuss the implications of the Convoy for the national security community going forward – an issue that Intrepid will certainly be returning to over the next few months. Leah West's guide to the legal thresholds of the Emergencies Act (mentioned in the podcast) can be found on the Intrepid Podcast blog here: https://www.intrepidpodcast.com/blog/2022/2/17/public-order-emergency-a-guide-to-thinking-through-the-legal-thresholds-and-its-justification*Programming note: we will be returning soon with more content regarding events in Ukraine. 2022 shows no signs of slowing down.

Intrepid podcast continues to grapple with too much history in too short a time. Today, Craig Forcese joins Stephanie to discuss Russia's illegal and tragic invasion of Ukraine. They walk through the international law issues raised by this act of aggression (a war crime), as of the morning of 24 February. They focus especially on Russia's “lawfare” and legal trolling — its (unpersuasive) use of pretextual legal justifications to mask aggression since 2014. A earlier blog version of the some the issues they discuss is on the Intrepid website here.

In this brief episode, Jessica Davis, President of Insight Threat Intelligence, provides us with an overview of everything that has happened with finances around the Convoy since the GoFundMe crowdfunding campaign was closed. From the collapse of other crowdfunding campaigns, to Emergencies Act legislation that targets the personal and corporate accounts of Convoy supporters, to the inevitable cryptocurrency discussion, there is a lot to consider. Will this crisis lead Canada to better resource its anti-money laundering resources? See Jessica's latest for the Global Network on Extremism and Technology (GNET), “Crowdfunding and Protest Financing: Emergency Law in Canada”: https://gnet-research.org/2022/02/18/crowdfunding-and-protest-financing-emergency-law-in-canada/ While you are waiting for more Emergencies Act content, please check out Leah West's guide on the Intrepid Podcast website: https://www.intrepidpodcast.com/blog/2022/2/17/public-order-emergency-a-guide-to-thinking-through-the-legal-thresholds-and-its-justification This episode was recorded on Friday 18 February at 12:30pm.

This episode was recorded at 2pm on Friday February 11, 2022. As the Convoy currently occupying Ottawa continues into third week, and its supporters attempt to spread the movement across major Canadian cities and ports of entry, is solving this crisis a problem of law or enforcement? Mike Nesbitt joins Stephanie through some of the proposed legal options. Is this terrorism? Sedition? Treason? Or is it … surprisingly… a lot of mischief? Do we actually need emergency powers to fix this? Note: the podcast has already covered the use of emergency powers in prior episodes. See Ep 121 https://www.intrepidpodcast.com/podcast/2020/3/19/ep-120-an-emergency-podcast-on-emergency-law You can also check out emergency law through this online chapter by Craig Forcese and Leah West: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3554318 There is also a short video available through Intrepid University: https://www.intrepidpodcast.com/university

**Note: This podcast was recorded before the news that GoFundMe shut downpayments to the Convoy organizers. As noted in the podcast, organizers have other options to raise funds. We'll look to update listeners on these developments sometimes next week.**As we recorded this episode, the streets of Ottawa were occupied with trucks from a so-called “Freedom Convoy” that claims to be about mandates, but in reality has extremist origins. With non-stop honking, intimidation of those who seek to follow public health guidance and signs invoking conspiracy theories and hate groups, the residents of Ottawa overwhelmingly would like the this “Convoy” to leave. While the police do not seem to be able to do much, the “Truckers” are, at least in part, relying on a $10 million dollar war chest of money raised through GoFundMe, a crowdsourcing platform. This raises all kinds of questions about how these activities are being financed. Is it okay for political movements, with ties to extremists, to raise funds in this way? Who is responsible for investigating the money raised? Will the funds even be dispersed? Is there a threat of clandestine foreign interference? To discuss these issues and more, Stephanie sits down with Intrepid Podcast member Jessica Davis, President of Insight Threat Intelligence, and author of Illicit Money: Financing Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century (2021). This podcast was recorded on February 4, 2022.

In this episode, Stephanie sits down with Fatima Syed, journalist with The Narwal and host of The Backbench at Canadaland. They discuss covering ongoing violence against the Muslim community and the challenges in covering national security issues in Canada. Importantly, throughout the interview, Fatima discusses her approach to her work, and emphasizes the importance of having conversations across communities to better understand experiences of hate, but also build bridges with those who hold radically different views but are willing to engage. Please note this episode was recorded on December 15 2021

In this mini-episode, Stephanie hosts a quick chat with Phil Lagassé about Canada's new governor general. They also reflect on the impact of having the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the role for so long (circling back to their discussion in Ep 152). Please note, this episode was recorded on 13 July 2021. You can read some of Phil's commentary on the new Governor General with these links:https://policymagazine.ca/heavy-burdens-of-office-for-the-new-gg/https://lagassep.com/2021/07/20/the-commissioner-vs-the-constitution/ Episode 152 can be listened to here: https://www.intrepidpodcast.com/podcast/2021/3/29/ep-152-her-majesty-in-right-of-pod-evaluating-the-pandemic-parliament

What was supposed to be a committee examining the relationship between Canada and China has turned into something of a constitutional crisis. Opposition MPs on the ad-hoc Canada-China Committee are demanding access to classified documents to find out the reasons two scientists were fired from the National Microbiology Lab. The entire affair has led to the trashing of one of Canada's few national security transparency and oversight institutions, the shutting down of committees, government officials being publicly scolded and a cameo no one expected – Section 38 of the Canada Evidence Act. There is a lot to unpack here. So Stephanie sits down with Leah West and Philippe Lagassé to discuss the matter, what went wrong, why everyone is to blame – and whether it's all academic because and election is coming our way. Please note, this podcast was recorded on July 13, 2021. We did experience a few technical difficulties, so please excuse the recording!

In this episode, Stephanie sits down with Jessica Davis and Michael Nesbitt to discuss recent developments in terrorism cases in Canada. First, in the wake of the tragic attack in London, Ontario, Crown Prosecutors have brought terrorism charges, possibly the first ever against an individual motivated by far-right extremism. What are the challenges in prosecuting this as a terrorism case? Next, they discuss an extremist travel case where one individual has pleaded guilty, but charges have been stayed against another. This leads the group to ask some hard questions about terrorism charges generally. Why are so few women charged with terrorism? Why are there so few terrorism financing and facilitation charges? And why don't we know more about why charges are laid, dropped or stayed in these cases, leaving us with seemingly arbitrary decisions by the Crown? As with other areas of national security, more transparency is needed.Check out Michael Nesbitt's posts on terrorism charges in Canada on Intrepidpodcast.comhttps://www.intrepidpodcast.com/blog/2021/6/15/counting-terrorism-charges-amp-prosecutions-in-canada-part-1-what-does-the-data-sayhttps://www.intrepidpodcast.com/blog/2021/6/24/counting-terrorism-charges-and-prosecutions-in-canada-part-2Jessica Davis' new substack on national security and illicit finance: https://insightintel.substack.com/subscribe

In the late spring of 2021, University of Toronto Press released Stand on Guard: Reassessing Threats to Canada's National Security, by Stephanie Carvin. This episode features the introduction to the book which presents the evolving context in which threats to the security of Canada are manifesting and evolving. Carvin argues that rather than responding to national security threats with fear, Canadians need to responsibly widen their understanding and respond with empathy to best meet the challenges of the 21st Century. You can read the Open Canada review of the book here: https://opencanada.org/book-review-stand-on-guard/

In this episode, Leah talks with Chris Parsons and Bill Robinson of Citizen Lab to discuss NSIRA's latest review of CSE's practice of sharing incidentally collected Canadian information with government agencies and the Review Body's suggestion that CSIS hasn't been frank with the Federal Court about what happens with the foreign intelligence CSE helps them collect.

When news of the Toronto-18 Case broke in 2006, Canadians were stunned. It seemed as though the “War on Terror” had been brought to Canadian soil as a group of young men, allegedly inspired by Al Qaida, were accused of a serious bomb plot in downtown Toronto. After a high-profile news conference, however, a series of publication bans descended on the Toronto-18 cases, leaving the more complex issues and nuances of the case out of the public eye. What is the significance of the Toronto-18 attack 15 years later? What lessons should be learned from it? Jessica Davis sits down with Michael Nesbitt, Kent Roach and Amarnath Amarasingam to discuss these issues, and a new (free!) open access book: Canadian Terror: Multidisciplinary Perspectives and the Toronto 18 Terrorism Trials. Available from Manitoba Law Journal Robson Criminal Edition Collection.

Please note, this podcast contains references to sexual assault.In this episode, Stephanie and Amar sit down with Leah and guest LGen (retd) Mike Day who served with Joint Task Force Two (JTF2) and Canada's Special Operations Forces Command. The four discuss the issues surrounding the long-standing issue of sexual assault in the military. How did we get to this point? Why has this issue never been fully addressed? What, if anything can be done about it? Are there reasons to have hope? This podcast was recorded on 5 May 2021 but was delayed due to technical issues. You can watch Leah West's testimony on these issues to the House of Commons Status of Women Committee hearing here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts4d2XG3cZI

Last week, the Ontario Court of Justice issued a decision holding that Iran engaged in a terrorism offence in downing Ukrainian Airlines Flight 752 in January 2020, and therefore is civilly liable under Canada's Justice for the Victims of Terrorism Act (JVTA) (and related provisions in the State Immunity Act). Craig invites Thomas Juneau, Leah West and Michael Nesbitt to discuss the background to this lawsuit and to the JVTA (and related State Immunity Act provisions). Leah and Michael then lay out their concerns and criticism of the Ontario court's reasoning, also discussed in their recent blog post.

Stephanie and Craig are back with the latest discussion of key court decisions affecting national security law. Here, we take a quick look at how Charter section 7 “fundamental justice” has created expectations about the “substance” of government conduct in select national security cases. We discuss Operational Dismantle (and the application of the Charter to the Crown's prerogative powers over defence and international relations), Suresh (and the prospect of removing someone to a place where they may be tortured) and O'Neill (dealing with the nonsense that is s 4 of the Security of Information Act).

Stephanie and Craig are back with the latest discussion of key court decisions affecting national security law. Here, we take a quick look at the thorny issue of disclosure of information by the government in criminal cases, governed by several key section 7 cases. We discuss Stinchcombe and O'Connor. And then segue into how national security confidentiality privileges under section 38 of the Canada Evdence Act feed into the discussion. Here, we chat about Ribic and Ahmad. Once again, Craig has prepared a “Charter Short” providing a video primer on section 7 and criminal law disclosure. You may want to view this first. For a deeper dive on the “intelligence to evidence” issues this system of disclosure raises, see this article by Leah West and this article by Craig Forcese.

In this episode of Intrepid Podcast, Leah and Stephanie sit down and speak with Shelly Bruce, Chief of the CSE about the organization she is responsible for in an era of changing legislation, threats, review and, of course, a worldwide pandemic. The trio also speak about a number of topics, including Shelly's career, cyber attribution, cyber defence, the CSE's 75th anniversary, and the importance of diversity in STEM and national security.

The Intrepid crew start a new series, discussing the leading court decisions in national security law. We keep dropping case names. So we figured we should do a walk through. We've organized this cases in progressions, mostly built around Charter rights. In this first episode Craig and Stephanie focus on section 7 of the Charter, and those cases decided under it implicating procedural fairness in national security matters. Before listening to the deep dive, please also consider reviewing another feature Craig has created: Charter “Shorts” (basic primers on different Charter rights). The 10 minute section 7 “short” is here. You may also want to go back to our earlier special series on the Charter with Carissma Mathen, our Muskoka Chair Charter Chats from the summer of 2020. Here's the section 7 discussion.In this podcast, we focus on four cases: Singh (1985); Charkaoui I (2007); Charkaoui II (2008); Harkat (2014).Hope this is helpful. Always pleased to receive your positive reviews at iTunes and elsewhere. Keeps us at it.

During the pandemic we have heard a lot about state actors engaging in threat-related activity. But what are non-state actors up to? In this episode, Stephanie sits down with Alex Wilner and Casey Babb to discuss their forthcoming chapter on this very question. Wilner and Baab identify three major activities that non-state actors are engaging in online: delegitimation, recruitment and incitement. After describing these activities, the three discuss what might be done about this problem. At a time when Parliament is investigating the regulation of social media companies, are there options for both the government and private sector to curb the risk of violence? Note - Wilner and Babb's chapter will be appearing in Leah West, Thomas Juneau, and Amarnath Amarasingam, eds. Stress Tested: The COVID-19 Pandemic and Canadian National Security. Calgary: University of Calgary Press – open source and out this spring! Stay tuned to the podcast and Intrepidpodcast.com for more information.

Her Majesty in Right of Pod returns to ask: How well has Parliament fared in the pandemic? Stephanie sits down with Phil Lagassé to discuss whether or not the fears expressed in last year's Ep 122 over the challenges of running a legislature during COVID-19 came true. But there are other issues to discuss as well, especially Parliament's weak performance in the area of national security. With legislation dying at prorogation, omnibus bills and a slow roll out of reform and change, why is Canada so bad at passing national security legislation? And what might be done about it? But first, Stephanie asks Phil about the state of the Governor General's office, and what it means to have the Supreme Court Justice acting in a Vice Regent role. (Unfortunately, it turns out Phil is not interested in the role.)Ep 122: Her Majesty in Right of Pod -- The World Turned Upside Downhttps://www.intrepidpodcast.com/podcast/2020/3/26/ep-122-her-majesty-in-right-of-pod-the-world-turned-upside-down

President Biden came into office in January 2021 with promises of holding Saudi Arabia accountable for the death of Jamal Khashoggi, but also to turn the focus of US foreign policy away from the Middle East and towards the Asia-Pacific. Six weeks later, he released a damning intelligence report, but took few other steps to hold Prince Mohammed bin Salman responsible. Nor did he take steps that can be seen as really separating the US from its traditional alliance with the Kingdom. Are there implications of this for Canada? Stephanie sits down with Thomas Juneau to discuss Biden's policy towards Saudi Arabia, the impact on MBS and the Kingdom (and its campaign against dissidents and other former Saudi officials in Canada). They also discuss the disastrous war in Yemen, Canada's controversial arms deal and the future of Canada's relations with the Kingdom.

Since December 2020 there have been six attacks against Black Muslim Women in Edmonton, Alberta where they were threatened, and verbally and physically assaulted. While Edmonton Police have now made an arrest in connection with these cases, the way these incidents were handled by law enforcement and politicians raises questions about how well Canada is doing in tackling Islamophobic attacks and whether more can be done. To discuss these issues, Stephanie sits down with Sarah Mushtaq who recently co-authored an editorial with Hanan Mohamud on the attacks and what steps leaders at all levels of government can take. They also discuss recent steps taken by the government to list far-right groups as terrorist entities, and whether legislation such as Quebec's Bill C-21 undermine efforts to combat violence against Muslims in Canada. References: Sarah Mushtaq and Hanan Mohamud, “Meaningful action required on hate crimes in Alberta”, Edmonton Journal 2, March 2021. https://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/columnists/opinion-meaningful-action-required-on-hate-crimes-in-alberta Michael Nesbitt, “An Empirical Study of Terrorism Charges and Terrorism Trials in Canada between September 2001 and September 2018” 2019. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3325956 Barbara Perry and Ryan Scrivens, “Resisting the Right: Countering Right-Wing Extremism in Canada”, in Right Wing Extremism in Canada, Palgrave 2019. Pp. 121-141.

Canada has a 5G and Huawei dilemma – but what is it, exactly? Is it technical risk? A matter of economic national security? Geopolitics? In reality, it is all of the above, but conflating these issues is hindering Canada's ability to respond. Stephanie sits down with Christopher Parsons, a Senior Research Associate at the Citizen Lab at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto, to talk about these issues on the podcast. They walk through Chris' report that unpacks Canada's Huawei/5G dilemmas, and what this means for Canadian national security, foreign policy and critical infrastructure going forward. You can (and should!) read Chris Parson's report, “Huawei and 5G: Clarifying the Canadian Equities and Charting a Strategic Path Forward” here: https://citizenlab.ca/2020/12/huawei-5g-clarifying-the-canadian-equities-and-charting-a-strategic-path-forward/

In this episode, Stephanie and Leah sit down with Bill Robinson, Citizen Lab Fellow and one of Canada's leading national security researchers, to discuss the first reports by two of Canada's new intelligence review and oversight bodies, the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) and the Intelligence Commissioner (IC). The three make comparisons to prior reports produced by their predecessors (the Security and Intelligence Review Committee and the Office of the Commissioner of the Communications Security Establishment respectively). In some cases, they are left wanting for some of the detail of previous reports. While the trio sometimes dig into the weedy details in these reports, they do so in the context of an important question: Bill C-59 augmented the powers of the national security agencies on the understanding that this would be balanced by an enhanced review process – is that expectation being met here? Resources: NSIRA, 2019 Annual ReportICO, 2019 Annual ReportCheck out Bill Robinson's blog on the NSIRA report here: https://luxexumbra.blogspot.com/2020/12/first-nsira-annual-report-released.htmlFor more information on some of the concepts in this episode, see Forcese and West, National Security Law, Safeguarding Information: Chapters 12-13; Review: Chapter 18Online Course at a University Called INTREPID: National Security Law Primer, Module: Accountability; Module: Search 1 and 2; Module: Screen

This episode of Intrepid Podcast examines some recent developments with regards to CSIS. First, Stephanie and Jessica discuss the public speech that the CSIS Director gave on Tuesday February 9 at the Centre for International Governance Innovation. Next, Stephanie sits down with Leah and the long-lost Craig Forcese to discuss to recent Federal Court Decisions about CSIS foreign intelligence authorities. Once again, the Court has reaffirmed a very strict interpretation of what it means to collect intelligence “within” Canada. But where does this leave the Service in terms of the expectations that it can monitor an increasingly complex array of threats? And is this a problem that can be fixed without creating a foreign intelligence service? Finally, as a bonus, we're happy to introduce A University Called INTREPID – a free mini-course on national security law for all of our listeners. Hey, it's easier than hosting your own podcast. https://www.intrepidpodcast.com/university References:CSIS Director's 2018 Speech to the Economic Club of Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/security-intelligence-service/news/2018/12/remarks-by-director-david-vigneault-at-the-economic-club-of-canada.html CSIS Director's 2021 Speech at the Centre for International Governance Innovation: https://www.canada.ca/en/security-intelligence-service/news/2021/02/remarks-by-director-david-vigneault-to-the-centre-for-international-governance-innovation.html References to Forcese and West, National Security Law (2d Ed 2021): International law and sovereignty: p. 263-66 International law and espionage: p. 277-278 CSIS's foreign intelligence mandate: p. 455Bob From Mordor's first appearance (Justice Noel's decision) – Episode 48Federal Court decisions:2018 FC 738 (“Within Canada” Case, Justice Noel)2020 FC 697 (Justice O'Reilly)2020 FC 757 (Justice Gleeson)

Should Canada do more to counter hate online? This is a question currently before the House of Commons Heritage Committee. A new survey conducted in January 2021 on behalf of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation find that 93% are in favour of doing so. Stephanie sits down with Mohammed Hashim, the new Executive Director of the CRRF to discuss these results and what he thinks should be done. Importantly, before they dive in, they contextualize the discussion with some reflections of the four year anniversary of the violent extremist attack on a mosque in Quebec City, Islamophobia and the significance of a new National Day of Remembrance. You can read the results of the survey here: https://www.crrf-fcrr.ca/images/CRRF_OnlineHate_Racism_Jan2021_FINAL.pdfYou can follow Mohammed Hashim on Twitter at: @mohashimYou can follow the CRRF on Twitter at: @CRRF

In this episode, Michael Nesbitt interviews Jessica Davis about her recent article in Lawfare, “Rethinking Global Counterterrorist Financing” where she identifies the challenges that new terrorist and extremist movements and groups pose for counter-terrorist financing, and argues that we need to stop thinking of the end goal of counterterrorism financing (CTF) as simply stopping the flow of money, and more of a source of intelligence that can be used to learn more about existing and evolving threats. You can read Jess' article here: https://www.lawfareblog.com/rethinking-global-counterterrorist-financing

In the wake of the riot (often described as an insurrection) at the Capitol Building in Washington DC on January 6, there have been calls for the government of Canada to do more to combat far right terrorism. This includes listing the Canadian-founded Proud Boys, a far-right, chauvinist and neo-fascist organization. It is alleged that members of the Proud Boys participated in acts of terrorist violence that day, as well as during several earlier high-profile incidents. In this episode, Stephanie, Leah and Jess break down the listing process – how it is done and what the consequences are. They look at the issue of whether it is a political vs a politicized process, and some criticisms of the listings process – does adding more entities to the listings process simply strengthen a system that disproportionately impacts minorities in Canada, particularly Muslim groups? What might be done to improve this process? Referenced in this episode:Jessica Davis in the Globe and Mail: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canada-cant-continue-to-give-the-proud-boys-and-other-extremist-groups/For a critical take of the listings process, see Monia Mazigh: https://rabble.ca/columnists/2021/01/should-proud-boys-be-labelled-terrorists#at_pco=smlrebv-1.0&at_si=600516190552ed95&at_ab=per-2&at_pos=1&at_tot=5Vice media coverage of the Proud Boys' actions on Capitol Hill: https://www.vice.com/en/article/epdmva/a-proud-boy-in-disguise-helped-lead-the-insurrection-at-the-capitol

In this episode, Jessica Davis interviews Michael Nesbitt about a recent case out of Halifax where an individual was found not guilty of breaching Canadian sanctions on Syria. The two discuss Canada's sanction regime and the challenges in enforcement. Turns out while Canada may have many sanctions laws on the books, we do not have much in the way to enforce them. This episode was recorded on 16 December 2020. For more on the case see: https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/halifax-businessman-found-not-guilty-of-breaching-economic-sanctions-on-syria-528928/

In this podcast, Stephanie converses with Navaid Aziz of the Islamic Information Society of Calgary. Navaid has been described as a “bridge builder” between the Muslim community, and the Canadian national security community. He is also actively engaged in community-based intervention and prevention. In their conversation, the two discuss bias in Canadian national security, harmful language that is used, and what, if anything, might be done to improve community relations. In addition, they discuss a social media incident this past fall where Stephanie posted a picture of a cake depicting a drone strike that was condemned as insensitive and Islamophobic. Navaid asks Stephanie about the aftermath – what she has learned and the actions she has taken to begin repairing relations.

In this episode Leah sits down with the co-chairs of the National Security Transparency Advisory Group, Dominic Rochon, Assistant Deputy Minister of National and Cybersecurity at Public Safety Canada and Thomas Juneau (Associate Professor at the University of Ottawa, and Intrepid Podcast editor) to discuss their first report, the group's first year, and what we can expect from the NS-TAG in 2021.

We continue with a series theme we began in the summer: diversity and inclusion in the security and intelligence sector. In this episode, Jessica Davis speaks with Dr. Rachel Schmidt on her recent International Journal article “Investigating implicit biases around race and gender in Canadian counterterrorism”. As the two discuss, this is not about being politically correct: bias affects national security operations and policy outcomes. However, while Rachel's research suggests this problem is largely recognized in the Canadian national security community itself, individuals are lost when it comes to trying to create change. But this is no excuse for not taking action: confronting implicit bias around gender, race and religion is important for doing national security better. The article under discussion can be found here: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0020702020976615

In Part 2 of our look at the 2020 National Cyber Threat Assessment, Leah sits down with two of the people responsible for producing this year's report, JP Racicot and Tyler from the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, to talk about what goes in to writing the NCTA, five key trends and what they mean for Canadians, and what they hope readers will take away from the report.

Leah sits down with Dr. Christopher Parsons of Citizen Lab to dig into the biggest cyber security threats facing Canada in Part 1 of our discussion of the Canadian Cyber Centre's 2020 National Cyber Threat Assessment (NCTA). Leah and Chris cover threats to critical infrastructure, ransomware, encryption, hackback, online foreign influence and disinformation, and what the NCTA doesn't say (but should).

Once again, Leah, Jess and Mike sit down for Part II of catching up on a busy summer of national security criminal cases. They look at: the ongoing case against Cameron Ortis; a guilty plea in a terrorism case out of Kingston (did we ever figure out what that RCMP plane was doing?); and an update in the Via Rail case where the conviction of one of the accused has been successfully appealed. Finally, the gang reflects on what the events of the summer indicate about ongoing violent extremism trends in Canada.

After the inevitable “beginning of the academic year” pause, Season 4 of INTREPID continues. In this episode, Leah West, Jess Davies and Mike Nesbitt begin to go through a busy summer's worth of national security cases. They start with the Abu Huzayfah terrorism hoax charge, then two travel-related cases (resuscitated from 2014!) in Calgary and, briefly, the attempted ricin poisoning of Donald Trump by a Canadian/French citizen.

We're back with Carissima Mathen and the last of our special summer series of “explainers” on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Today, Carissima walks us through two last issues: the equality rights in section 15 of the Charter; and the two remedies sections, section 52 of the Constitutional Act 1982 and section 24 of the Charter. The text of these provisions is reproduced below. As noted, this is our last Muskoka Chair chat. We hope people have enjoyed this deep dive into the Charter. Please give us a shout out if so, on iTunes or wherever you listen to your podcasts, and help other people find INTREPID. We're back after a brief pause for the beginning of the academic year. Thank you for your continued interest.15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.(2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.(2) The Constitution of Canada includes(a) the Canada Act 1982, including this Act;(b) the Acts and orders referred to in the schedule; and(c) any amendment to any Act or order referred to in paragraph (a) or (b).

We're back with chapter 5 of our Muskoka Chair Chats on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In this episode, Carissima Mathen from the Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, guides us through the Charter “legal rights”, with a focus on sections 9 to 14 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These read as below. She also examines some of the controversies that have arisen from recent Supreme Court cases on these matters.9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention(a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;(b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and(c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.11. Any person charged with an offence has the right(a) to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence;(b) to be tried within a reasonable time;(c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;(d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal;(e) not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause;(f) except in the case of an offence under military law tried before a military tribunal, to the benefit of trial by jury where the maximum punishment for the offence is imprisonment for five years or a more severe punishment;(g) not to be found guilty on account of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted an offence under Canadian or international law or was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations;(h) if finally acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again and, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again; and(i) if found guilty of the offence and if the punishment for the offence has been varied between the time of commission and the time of sentencing, to the benefit of the lesser punishment.12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.13. A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence.14. A party or witness in any proceedings who does not understand or speak the language in which the proceedings are conducted or who is deaf has the right to the assistance of an interpreter.

Stephanie and Craig are back with the third part in the INTREPID special series on diversity and inclusion in Canada's security and intelligence community. They are very pleased to welcome to the show Michelle Tessier, Deputy Director of Operations, at the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS). We discuss Ms Tessier's career, and her experience and views on the significance of diversity and inclusion for a largely HUMINT-oriented intelligence service like CSIS. As always with guests, we end with a “day in the life” and career advice. Thank you to Michelle Tessier for joining us on the show.

This spring, Amnesty International issued an updated report on Chinese harassment of Chinese human rights critics in Canada. This report and accompanying issues were featured last week in the Globe and Mail. Joining Stephanie and Craig to discuss the report and the issue of Chinese-sponsored harassment are Alex Neve, Secretary-General of Amnesty Canada, and Chemi Lhamo, 2019 student president at the University of Toronto's Scarborough campus. Chemi describes harassment and threats of violence she experienced, as a Canadian of Tibetan origin, during her period in student government — conduct she believes was orchestrated by China. Alex describes the more general pattern of suspected Chinese government harassment activities within Canada, directed at those who oppose the Chinese government's human rights record and other authoritarian policies. Both guests call for closer attention to this issue by Canadian authorities, and end by describing the recommendations made in the Amnesty report. Thank you to Chemi and Alex for joining us on the podcast.

In just a few years the QAnon movement has gone from a fringe online conspiracy theory to a movement that is now present in up to 54 countries worldwide. Given its links to several attempted attacks, there is growing concern that QAnon may be inspiring some individuals to mobilize to violence. But is QAnon really a national security threat? If so, what should be done about it? To find out more, Jessica Davis sits down with Amarnath Amarsingam and Marc-André Argentino to discuss their recent CTC Sentinel Paper , “The QAnon Conspiracy Theory: A Security Threat in the Making?” They discuss who is in QAnon, its rapid spread, why it is different from previous popular conspiracy theories and how authorities should handle a growing phenomenon that does not fit our conventional understandings of political extremism.

We're back with an episode focusing on a recent development: the Federal Court's holding that the “safe third country” refugee agreement with the United States is unconstitutional. In fact, it violates section 7 of the Charter — the very right we explored on Chapter 4 of our Muskoka Chair Chats in Ep 129. (Listeners may want to listen to that explainer first). Here, Jamie Liew from the Faculty of Law, uOttawa takes us through how the refugee law system works at both the international and domestic level, including in relation to some security issues. She then describes the operations of the “safe third party” agreement with the United States — and why it created the so-called irregular border crossing phenomena much in the news a few years back. Then, she walks us through the Federal Court decision and what it means. This is an excellent primer on a topic we have mentioned from time to time on this podcast series — refugee law — but not fully discussed. Hoping everyone gets as much from the discussion with Jamie as we did. The Federal Court decision is here.

We're back with Carissima Mathen in our “Muskoka Chair Charts,” our summer series on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Today's topic is section 7 of the Charter, a major right with huge implications in national security space and elsewhere. We walk through when section 7 is “triggered” — the concepts of life, liberty, or security of the person — and then the accompanying concept of “fundamental justice”. Section 7 reads: “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.” Onward and upward!