The Canadian Criminal Code was amended in 2001 following the September 2001 terror attacks in the United States. The Anti-terrorism Act was included to ensure that the new law was consistent with the emerging threat of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in section 83.01 of the Canadian criminal code as an act committed “in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause" with the intention of intimidating or harming the general public.
There are several problems with the definition and description of terrorism in the criminal code in the Canadian context. First, the definition of terrorism is quite ambiguous leading to inclusion of cases that do not amount to terrorism to the terrorism category. As a result, individuals who are supposed to be tried on other types of felonies are condemned to terror related punishment. In section 83.01 (1) (b) (ii) (B), terrorism is defined as an act that intentionally endangers a person’s life or intentionally causes a serious risk to health or safety of a section of the public. The definition appears ambiguous and can easily be contested in a court of law. There are many other crimes that involves intentional endangering of people’s lives yet they do not qualify as terrorism. Third, the section on facilitation (2), is not satisfactory. It should be updated to ensure that it defines facilitation and any act that can be qualified as facilitation in an act of terror. The criminal code on terrorism was amended as a reactionary measure after the September 2001 attacks and so it failed to capture some important elements that should be included.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
How to Amend the Section
On the definition of terrorism, a clearer approach should be adopted. It should be restricted to a definition like ‘perpetration of a criminal act with the aim of causing fear or intimidating a section of the public’. The Canadian criminal code should also be fair to Muslims living in the country. There are several cases where White supremacists target Muslims and other minority groups. Such acts should be addressed and included in the definition of terrorism. Third, the issue of facilitation should be interpreted well. For instance, while the initial criminal code on terrorism was developed with the case of radical Islamists on mind, Canada suffers a different threat on terrorism.
On the categories of terrorism offenses, the issue of providing information to terrorists is not well captured. At the moment, terrorists rely on highly classified information to execute their activities. The code should provide a clear description of the offense where a person provides information to terrorists that aids in their work. The code should clarify whether providing such information qualifies as facilitation of the crime or it should be classified in a separate category. Acts that threaten the peaceful coexistence of diverse groups in the Canadian society should be categorized afresh to identify the ones that qualify as acts of terror.
Comprehensive Definition of ‘terrorism’ for Criminal Code
Terrorism is any act aimed at destabilizing or destroying the fundamental constitutional, political, economic or social structures of a given country. It is also any act that tries to cause fear, unrest or compel people to act in a specific way by using orthodox approaches such as killing, kidnapping or threatening the members of public. Any person who aides in an act of terror whether through financing or any form of facilitation qualifies to be categorized as a terrorist. Provision of money, information or any type of assistance to aid in an act that qualifies in the above section also qualifies as an act of terror.
