«Compiled and edited by Simon Davies June 2014 A Crisis of accountability 2 Contents Contents Acknowledgments ...»
 Examples include: Ontario Information & Privacy Commissioner, “Big Surveillance Demands Big Privacy - Enter Privacy-Protective Surveillance”, Toronto, http://www.realprivacy.ca/index.php/international-privacy-day-symposium/; “The Politics of Surveillance: Advancing Democracy in a Surveillance Society,” May 8-10 at University of Ottawa; “Munk Debates on State Surveillance,” May 2, 2014;
RightsWatch Conference 2013, September 20-21, 2013, Toronto, http://ccla.org/events/rightswatch-2013/#Program; “CSEC Panel,” April 8, 2014 at Queen’s University; “Intelligence and National Security Panel,” March 21, 2014 at University of Toronto; “Privacy at Risk? The NSA and CSEC, its Canadian Surveillance Partner,” March 12, 2014 at University of Toronto; “Who is Watching the A Crisis of accountability 26 Watchers? A Panel of Canadian Privacy and Surveillance in the Post-Snowden Era”, October 16, 2013, University of Ottawa, Centre for Law, Technology & Society.
 “Transparent Lives: Surveillance in Canada,” http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120237.
 “The Ottawa Statement on Mass Surveillance,” http://www.digitallymediatedsurveillance.ca/the-ottawa-statement/.
 “Towards Transparency in Canadian Telecommunications,” https://citizenlab.org/2014/01/towards-transparency-canadian-telecommunications/;
“The Murky State of Canadian Telecommunications Surveillance,” https://citizenlab.org/2014/03/murky-state-canadian-telecommunicationssurveillance/; “IXMaps - See where your packets go,” http://ixmaps.ca/.
 “Data Privacy Transparency of Canadian Internet Service Providers,” http://ixmaps.ca/transparency.php; “Responding to the Crisis in Canadian Telecommunications,” https://citizenlab.org/2014/05/responding-crisis-canadiantelecommunications/.
 C. Freeze, C. Dobby & J. Wingrove, "TekSavvy, Rogers Break Silence Over Government Requests for Data", June 5, 2014, Globe and Mail,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/tech-news/teksavvy-opens-books-ongovernment-data-requests/article18999107/. M. Geist, "Rogers' Shocking Admission:
It Does Not Track Disclosures of Subscriber Information to Authorities", June 6, 2014, http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/7151/125/  Proceedings of the Senate Standing Committee on National Security and Defence, Canada’s National Security and Defence Policies, Practices, Circumstances and Capabilities, February 3, 2014, 62 Elizabeth II, 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, Issue 2, http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/sen/committee/412/SECD/pdf/02issue.pdf.
 Charmaine Borg, Terrebonne-Blainville, QC, “Charmaine Borg on Request for Emergency Debate”, excerpts from: House of Commons Debates, June 13, 2013, 62 Elizabeth II, 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, http://openparliament.ca/debates/2013/6/13/charmaine-borg-1/only/.
 Debates of the Senate, October 24, 2013, 62 Elizabeth II, 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, Volume 149, Issue 5, http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/Sen/Chamber/412/Debates/005db_2013-10-24e.htm#35.
 Christopher Parsons, “Mapping the Canadian Government’s Telecommunications Surveillance”, March 27, 2014, Citizen Lab, https://citizenlab.org/2014/03/mapping-canadian-governments-telecommunicationssurveillance/; Michael Geist, “How Telcos and ISPs Hand Over Subscriber Data Thousands of Times Each Year Without a Warrant”, April 1, 2014, MichaelGeist.ca, http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/7100/135/; Order/Address of the House of A Crisis of accountability 27 Commons, “Responses to Written Question Q-233 - Ms. Borg (TerrebonneBlainville)”, march 24, 2014, et seq, http://www.christopher-parsons.com/Main/wpcontent/uploads/2014/03/8555-412-233.pdf.
 Bill S-220, An Act to Establish the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament, October 16, 2013, 62 Elizabeth II, 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, 1st Reading, http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Bills/412/Private/S-220/S-220_1/SPDF. Bill C-551, An Act to Establish the National Security Committee of Parliamentarians, November 7, 2013, 62 Elizabeth II, 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, 1st Reading, http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Bills/412/Private/C-551/C-551_1/CPDF.
 Michael Geist, “Why CSEC and CSIS Should Be the Subject of an Independent Investigation”, January 8, 2014, MichaelGeist.ca, http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/7043/135/.
 Re X, 2013 FC 1275, https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2013/2013fc1275/2013fc1275.html. See also: Re X, 2009 FC 1058, https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2009/2009fc1058/2009fc1058.html and Re CSIS Act, 2008 FC 301, https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2007/2007canlii62002/2007canlii62002.html.
 British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, “Spying in Canada: Civil Liberties Watchdog Sues Surveillance Agency Over Illegal Spying on Canadians”, October 22, 2013, BCCLA.org, http://bccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Final-PressRelease-Spying-10_21_131.pdf; British Columbia Civil Liberties Association v.
Attorney General of Canada, British Columbia Supreme Court File No.: VLC-S-SOctober 22, 2013, Notice of Civil Claim, http://bccla.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/10/2013-10-22-Notice-of-Civil-Claim.pdf.
 British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, “Illegal Spying: BCCLA Files Class Action Lawsuit Against Canada’s Electronic Spy Agency”, April 1, 2014, BCCLA.org, http://bccla.org/news/2014/04/illegal-spying-bccla-files-class-action-lawsuit-againstcanadas-electronic-spy-agency/; Lyster v. Attorney General of Canada, Federal Court File No. T-796-14, Statement of Claim, April 1, 2014, http://bccla.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/04/20140401-Statement-of-Claim-Class-ActionProceeding.pdf; Omar Ha-Redeye, “BCCLA Files Class Action for Spying by CSEC”, April 13, 2014, Slaw.ca, http://www.slaw.ca/2014/04/13/bccla-files-class-action-forspying-by-csec/.
 Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), “The Canadian Civil Liberties Association Challenges Constitutionality of Privacy Legislation”, May 22, 2014, CCLA.org, http://ccla.org/2014/05/22/press-release-ccla-challenges-constitutionalityof-privacy-legislation/; Corporation of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association et. al.
v. Attorney General of Canada, Ontario Superior Court File No.: CV-14-504139, Notice of Application, May 13, 2014, http://ccla.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2014/05/Notice-of-Application-re-PIPEDA-Issued.pdf.
A Crisis of accountability 28  Bernier, Chantal, “Statement from the Interim Privacy Commissioner of Canada Regarding Telecommunications Companies’ Responses to Information Requests from Government Authorities”, April 30, 2014, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, http://www.priv.gc.ca/media/nr-c/2014/s-d_140430_e.asp, Canadian Wireless Telecommunication Association, “Response to Request for General Information From Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association (the “CWTA”) Members”, December 14, 2011, http://www.priv.gc.ca/media/nrc/2014/let_140430_e.pdf; Michael Geist, “Canadian Telcos Asked to Disclose Subscriber Data Every 27 Seconds”, April 30, 2014, MichaelGeist.ca, http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/7116/125/.
Correspondents: Micheal Vonn, Christopher Parsons and Tamir Israel.
A Crisis of accountability 29 Colombia Snowden’s leaks confirmed that many governments in the world are under permanent surveillance. Moreover, according to those leaks, during the last 5 years Colombia was the third-highest priority country in the region for surveillance activities (1). In Colombia, a simple diplomatic note by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was sent to Washington stating some discomfort over the activities (2).
Shortly after this scandal, the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, visited Colombia and during his press conference it became clear that the incident was considered to be over.(3) Colombia accepted Kerry’s explanation that the NSA had acted under established cooperation agreements in keeping with the mutual fight against local guerrilla groups and drug cartels.(4) To no great surprise for Colombian citizens, the meeting between Colombia’s President Juan Manuel Santos and Kerry marginalised the issue and the Colombian government further agreed that the activities were done in line with our Constitution and legal framework.(5) Clearly, during this last year, there has been no official reaction to Snowden’s revelations, nor has any public authority demanded any sort of guarantee for citizens from such State surveillance activities, despite the fact that there are real threats by way of recent examples in Colombia. (6) There is a previous episode that should be considred: the 2009 “DAS wiretapping” spy scandal.(7) The former State Intelligence Agency (DAS in Spanish) illegally tapped the communications of journalists, politicians, judges and NGOs. The facts remain obscure but the incident culminated in the entity’s disappearance (many of its officials passed to the new Security Agency and others are now working as freelancers (8). But, after Snowden, the spy scandals returned in 2013, when the media drew attention to “PUMA”, the communications-monitoring platform for criminal investigations and key for the implementation of the Intelligence Act.(9) At the time, it became evident how little was known about the new Colombian intelligence institutional framework and State mass and selective surveillance. However, in February 2014 President Santos announced a revision of the Intelligence legal framework (10) triggered by a new revelation exposing a military intelligence A Crisis of accountability 30 facade operation called “Andromeda.”(11) Once again, the target of State surveillance activities were mainly journalists, political opponents, government and guerrilla peace negotiators in La Habana. The language describing the initial impact of the proposed revision soon changed from reviewing the intelligence legal framework to enhancing the State cyberdefense.
If Snowden's revelations have had some influence in Colombia it was to highlight the fact that intelligence decisions cannot be based solely on State security rationale. To some extent, these revelations have served to demonstrate that there are limits to state surveillance activities. It has also shown that there is a need to guarantee citizens' rights, as well as to establish civil society oversight mechanisms. Yet, it will take some time to translate this recognition to the domestic reality.
1. Colombia, el tercer país más espiado en la región http://www.eltiempo.com/archivo/documento/CMS-12920262
2. EE.UU. debe explicar espionaje en Colombia: Cancillería http://www.semana.com/nacion/articulo/eeuu-debe-explicar-espionajecolombia-cancilleria/350271-3
3. John Kerry defends NSA surveillance programs in Latin America http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/12/john-kerry-nsa_n_3745886.html
4. Presidente Santos pide explicaciones a Estados Unidos en caso de espionaje http://www.elcolombiano.com/BancoConocimiento/P/presidente_santos_pide _explicaciones_a_estados_unidos_en_caso_de_espionaje/presidente_santos _pide_explicaciones_a_estados_unidos_en_caso_de_espionaje.asp
5. Jhon Kerry defendió los programas de NSA http://laopinion.com.co/demo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id= 426284&Itemid=29
6. Risks of an uncontrolled state surveillance in Colombia http://karisma.org.co/?p=3900
7. Colombian intelligence service wiretapped journalists http://www.cpj.org/2009/02/colombian-intelligence-service-wiretappedjournali.php
8. El DAS a la sombra y otros tenientes visibles http://www.caracol.com.co/noticias/actualidad/el-das-a-la-sombra-y-otrostenientes-visibles/20140204/nota/2070530.aspx
10. With New Unchecked Surveillance Revelations, Colombian Government Ignores Both History and Human Rights https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/04/new-unchecked-surveillancerevelations-colombian-government-ignores-both-history
11. A new wiretapping scandal casts doubt on the Colombian military\u8217\'19s support for peace talks http://www.colectivodeabogados.org/A-new-wiretapping-scandal-casts
Denmark Since the first Snowden revelations became available in June 2013 there has some activity in Denmark with governmental, political and judicial responses to questions asked by media and NGOs. But the overall observation is that none of these debates actually led to any changes in attitude for the vast majority of parties in the Danish Parliament - the Folketinget.
Only one small leftist party, Enhedslisten, took a critical stand, while the rest
of the parties supported an often repeated statement from the Government:
"We have no reason to believe, that any illegal American intelligence activities directed toward Denmark or Danish interests are taking place."1 Media Coverage of the Snowden revelations has in general varied over time.
Niche media in Denmark did cover some of the initial stories. 11,12 By January, 2014, media coverage seemed to peak, especially when details about the the top meeting COP 15 in Copenhagen were released in January.13 The remainder of 2014 has seen a decline in coverage.
No judicial or legislative initiatives have been carried out to prevent mass surveillance or limit access to company and personal data as a consequence of the Snowden revelations. On the contrary, there have been initiatives to further legalise and legitimise the current modus operandi - as carried out by intelligence services operating in Denmark or on behalf of Denmark.2, 3