|
|
Bien que ces bases de données existent, il est très clair, que je sache, que la loi n'autorise pas le SCRS à avoir accès à ces informations à moins d'avoir suivi sa propre procédure, c'est-à-dire en ouvrant un dossier, en obtenant les mandats nécessaires et en suivant les formalités qui s'imposent. Le CST, quant à lui, n'aurait même pas accès à ces bases de données, puisqu'il ne recueille que des renseignements électromagnétiques.
|
|
|
I have a question I want to throw out. This may seem counterintuitive, but of all the agencies we've referred to here today, Mr. Radwanski, the one that is constrained in gathering together information about individuals, private or otherwise, is CSIS. Even though these databases exist, it is, as I understand it, pretty clear in law that CSIS doesn't have access to any of it unless it has gone through its own processes, opened a file, obtained appropriate warrants, and followed the procedures there. And CSE wouldn't go to these databases at all, because they simply gather signals intelligence. So in a very strange way, the two agencies that have been and in law are apparently the most intrusive upon our privacy don't have the legal ability to go and use this stuff we're all concerned about. It is the other agencies whose hands are apparently not tied, the CCRA, agencies with whom they have MOUs, the RCMP, who are not apparently constrained, except on a policy basis, in their security offences directorate. Could you comment on that? Have I got a good picture of that?
|
