CSIS DDO Directive on information sharing with agencies with poor human rights records (2008)
Operational policies
The Directive specifies that international exchange of information and intelligence is vital to safeguarding Canada's national security and public safety. In that context, however, the Service may be required to deal with foreign governments and agencies having poor human rights records. This Directive sets out the principles that will guide our actions in the sharing, seeking and use of information from such agencies or government. This DDO seems likely to have been superseded since it predates the 2011 ministerial directives on information sharing with foreign agencies.
ATIP CSIS 117-2010-7
2008
CSIS OPS-100 Targeting, Section 12
Operational policies
To state the principles and directives governing the approval process for an initial request, renewal, upgrade, downgrade or a termination of a targeting level pursuant to the CSIS Act. Targets can be persons, groups or organizations, and issues or events
ATIP
2010
CSIS OPS-501 Operational Reporting
Operational policies
To provide direction for reporting through various phases of the intelligence cycle.
ATIP
2010
CSIS OPS-504 Special Events
Operational policies
Ensure that CSIS meets its mandate re ‘special events’.
ATIP
2006
CSIS OPS-707 Human Source Compensation
Operational policies
This policy outlines the principles and standards that govern CSIS human source compensation
ATIP
2013
CSIS OPS-805-3 Foreign Agency Visits
Operational policies
CSIS procedures re: foreign agency visits.
2010
CSIS Procedures: S. 12.1 Threat Reduction Measures
CSIS internal policy for approving threat reduction activities (pursuant to new powers given to CSIS in 2015 by Bill C-51)
ATIP CSIS 117-2016-335
2015-10-20
Memorandum of Understanding between Global Affairs Canada and CSIS regarding consultation on CSIS threat reduction activities
MOU
<strong>Description: </strong>CSIS and GAC have developed an enhanced consultation mechanism (ECM) regarding consultation related to threat reduction activities (TRA) pursuant to s.12.1 of the CSIS Act (the new powers added by bill C-51).
c.2015
Ministerial Direction for CSIS Operations (2008)
Ministerial direction
Ministerial direction on CSIS operations from 2008, superseded by the 2015 version.
ATIP
2008
Ministerial Direction to CSIS for Operations and Accountability (2015)
Ministerial direction
<p><strong>Analysis: Comparing the Old (2008) and New (2015) CSIS MD for Operations </strong></p>
With the passage of Bills C-44 and C-51 in 2015, new Ministerial Directions were issued to CSIS to set parameters for the use of its new powers.<br /><br />The old MD was titled ‘Ministerial Direction for Operations’ whereas the new 2015 MD is titled ‘Ministerial Direction for Operations<strong><em> and </em></strong>Accountability’ (in the past, two separate MDs were used for operations and accountability).<br /><br />In the new MD, accountability is found under a newly created Annex A. In the old MD, Annex A was titled ‘General.’ <em>However, the new Accountability provisions under Annex A are largely redacted so it is difficult to tell what accountability mechanisms have been introduced, other than the fact that CSIS is obliged to consult with the Minister of Public Safety. <br /></em><br />Under ‘<strong>Fundamental Principles</strong>’: the new MD maintains the first 3 principles as the old MD which include: the rule of law; reasonableness and proportionality in operations; and the greater the risk, the greater authority requires for approval.<br /><br />The fourth principle’s wording is different in the new MD: its main focus is on ‘rights and freedoms of individuals’ as opposed to ‘intrusive techniques’ as written in the old MD. The new MD also explicitly mentions <strong>privacy</strong> as an important human rights consideration under ‘Fundamental Principles’ whereas the old MD did not. In the old MD, privacy appears under ‘Annex A: General.’<br /><em><br />It seems that the fourth principle is fundamentally the same: human rights must be regarded when CSIS engages in intrusive operational techniques; just the wording has been changed.</em><br /><br />The new power of <strong>threat reduction</strong>:
<ul><li style="text-align:left;">The old MD stated that “CSIS shall focus its collection, analysis and advisory activities…”</li>
<li style="text-align:left;">The new 2015 MD states that “The Service shall focus its collection, <strong>threat reduction</strong>, analysis, and advisory activities…”</li>
<li>Annex C: <strong>Human Source Program </strong>
<ul><li>Very interesting: the old MD stated that “human sources will carry out their tasks on behalf of the Service <span style="text-decoration:underline;">without engaging in illegal activities.”</span> In contrast, the new MD says “human sources will carry out their tasks on behalf of the Service <span style="text-decoration:underline;">in a manner that supports the duties and functions of the Service</span>.”
<ul><li style="text-align:left;"><em>Is the implication that illegal activities are acceptable for human sources, under the new MD, something that is plausible (with warrant) under the post-Bill C-51 regime<br /></em></li>
<li>Annex D: <strong>Operational Activity Outside Canada</strong>
<ul><li style="text-align:left;">No significant changes in wording from the old MD</li>
<li>Annex F: <strong>Foreign and Domestic Arrangements:</strong>
<ul><li style="text-align:left;">No significant changes in wording but: the old MD used 'CSIS' and 'the Service' interchangeably, the new MD seems to use <strong>'The Service'</strong> consistently.</li>
</ul></li>
</ul></li>
</ul></li>
</ul></li>
</ul>
2015