“Canada” didn’t sign….Carnage did. He doesn’t speak for me.

Copied ⬇️

The Carney government has quietly signed a controversial United Nations cybercrime treaty that critics warn could dramatically expand international surveillance powers—all without a public announcement in Parliament or a national debate.

The move has triggered demands for answers from Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis, who questioned why Ottawa abandoned its earlier objections to the agreement and signed it with little public attention.

“The Liberal government should explain why there was no parliamentary or public debate on this treaty that many believe will impact the surveillance of Canadians,” Lewis wrote Friday.

Ottawa insists the UN Convention against Cybercrime is intended to help countries cooperate against transnational cybercrime and contains some of the strongest human rights safeguards ever included in an international criminal justice treaty.

“Cybercrime is a global threat that requires a global response,” Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand said, arguing the convention will strengthen the fight against serious crime while protecting human rights. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree similarly said it will give law enforcement better tools to pursue increasingly sophisticated cybercriminals.

But University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist says the agreement is “not primarily a cybercrime treaty at all,” calling it instead “a sweeping cross-border surveillance and electronic evidence-sharing agreement” that Canada previously refused to sign.

Geist notes Canada opposed launching negotiations in 2019 because it warned the process could expand state surveillance powers. Although Canadian negotiators later stayed at the table to push for stronger human rights protections, Ottawa declined to sign when the treaty first opened for signatures in Oct. 2025, joining allies including the United States, Japan, New Zealand, Norway and the Netherlands.

Nine months later, the Carney government quietly signed the agreement without publicly explaining what had changed.

“So what changed and why sign now?” Geist asks. “It is not clear that anything has changed and the concerns that animated Canada’s decision to not sign nine months ago are still there.”

Lewis is now demanding the government explain what prompted the reversal, whether Parliament will have the opportunity to scrutinize implementing legislation before ratification, and how Charter rights, privacy protections, artificial intelligence, cloud computing and Canadians’ personal data will be protected.

Geist argues the treaty reaches well beyond hacking and online fraud. Its investigative powers apply to electronic evidence tied to any “serious crime,” raising concerns that countries with broad criminal laws could use the convention to seek information across borders.

He also notes that organizations including Amnesty International Canada, PEN Canada, OpenMedia and Citizen Lab researchers urged Ottawa not to sign, warning it could facilitate transnational repression and erode Canada’s existing legal safeguards.

The academic further speculates the treaty could become a vehicle for reviving Ottawa’s controversial lawful access agenda.

“The treaty and the lawful access agenda are mutually reinforcing,” he wrote, arguing ratification would likely require legislation creating expanded production orders and cross-border data-sharing powers similar to those proposed in Bill C-22.

He added that the convention’s greatest practical effect could be increased cooperation with countries such as Russia, China and Iran, and concluded that signing the treaty “in the middle of the summer when few are paying attention” raises questions that deserve far more scrutiny than the government’s brief announcement.

Canada has signed the convention, but has not yet ratified it. Before it becomes legally binding, the government would still need to complete the ratification process, including any required implementing legislation.

https://www.junonews.com/p/canada-quietly-signs-un-treaty-critics