New Delhi: Canada’s terror laws cover more than 10 criminal terrorism offences — facilitating terrorism, financing terrorism, concealing a terrorist, leaving Canada to engage in terrorist activity and more — but none against “apology” or “glorification” of terrorism. This is unlike the UK, France and some other European countries which have criminalised the act.
Experts say this — along with the memorialisation of Sikh militants in Canada-based gurudwaras, parades featuring tableaus of Indira Gandhi’s assassination and glorifying Sikh extremists as ‘martyrs’ and the growing political clout of Sikhs in Canada — have all contributed to perceptions that the North American country is “soft” on Sikh extremism.
“The British and other European countries have adopted provisions which directly and explicitly make the glorification of terrorism a criminal offence. But Canada doesn’t have that language,” Canadian journalist-author Terry Milewski told ThePrint.
Terror laws aside, Canada’s hate speech laws only apply when hate is directed at groups, not individuals. “What if you’re one Indian diplomat? Suddenly, you’re not covered,” said Milewski. “This is a weakness in Canada.” (He was referring to pro-Khalistan posters that emerged in July and called for the deaths of Indian diplomats in Canada.)
Canada does have a Human Rights Act, however, which prohibits the “spreading of hate messages that would expose a person or group to hatred or contempt because of that individual’s identification with a prohibited ground of discrimination”.
According to ex-Canadian federal minister Ujjal Dosanjh, Canadian terror laws could have been used “retroactively” for the 1985 Kanishka bombing that killed over 300 people, but the investigation was “bungled”.
On 23 June 1985, Air India Flight 182 was bombed, causing it to disintegrate mid-air on its way from Canada to India, resulting in the death of all 329 members on board.
Orchestrated by Sikh extremists at the height of the Khalistan movement — for a separate Sikh homeland — it is often regarded as the deadliest act of aviation terrorism before the 9/11 attack on the US World Trade Centre.
“When the Air India [bombing] happened, this Act [2001 Anti-Terrorism Act] wasn’t in its current form. Retroactively, perhaps, it could be applied,” Dosanjh told ThePrint in an interview.
He added: “The police in Canada were not aware of the culture and language of the [Sikh] community. After bungling the investigation, it took a long time to prosecute the Air India accused and [Canadian authorities] were unsuccessful in prosecuting them.”
Only one man was convicted in the case. It has largely been viewed that the suspected mastermind, Talwinder Singh Parmar — founder of the Sikh militant group Babbar Khalsa International — walked free in the early days of the investigation. He died in a gunfight with Punjab Police in 1992.
ThePrint looks at some of the provisions of Canada’s anti-terrorism laws and how they are different from those in UK and France, two of the countries which criminalise “glorification” of and “apology” for terror.
Also read: Justin Trudeau’s 15 seconds of fame—undoing two decades of India-Canada rebuilding ties
What are Canada’s laws on terrorism & hate speech
In 2001, Canada enacted the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) in the wake of the 9/11 bombings in New York, US. The ATA is “not a standalone Act, but rather an amending statute”, which amended the Criminal Code, the Official Secrets Act, the Canada Evidence Act, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) Act, among others, and also enacted the Charities Registration (Security Information) Act.
In 2013, these laws were expanded to include new offences such as leaving or attempting to leave Canada to commit an act of terror. Many of these sentences carry a maximum penalty of 10 to 14 years in prison.
Section 319 of Canada’s Criminal Code deals with hate speech.
Section 319 (1) talks about public incitement of hatred against any “identifiable group” which can lead to a “breach of the peace”. This attracts a maximum prison time of two years.
Section 319 (2.1) criminalises anti-semitism.
“Everyone who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes antisemitism by condoning, denying or downplaying the Holocaust (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction,” it states.
Despite the law, Canada found itself on a sticky wicket, when last Friday then Speaker of Canada’s House of Commons, Anthony Rota, referred to Yaroslav Hunka, a 98-year-old Canadian of Ukrainian origin, as a “Ukrainian hero, a Canadian hero”, who had fought for Ukraine’s independence from Russia, prompting others to applaud for the nonagenarian seated in the gallery.
While Hunka did indeed fight against the Russians in World War II, he did so in a military unit commanded by Nazi Germany as a part of the Waffen-SS — a combat branch of the Nazi’s Schutzstaffel (SS) protective squads — which was later declared a “criminal organisation” by the Nuremberg trials which followed the end of World War II.
Rota has since not only apologised for his oversight, but also resigned from the post of Speaker. Meanwhile, Poland has said it is looking at the 98-year-old’s extradition, to investigate if he was wanted for war crimes against the Polish.
What British, French laws say on glorification of terrorism
The UK’s Terrorism Act 2006 came into force after the 7 July, 2005, London bombings — coordinated suicide bomb attacks on the London transit system, which reportedly killed over 50 people and injured over 700.
The UK law covers the glorification of terrorism not just in public, but on the internet and dissemination of terrorist publications. It defines “glorification” as any form of praise or celebration.
Part 1 of the Act, under “Offences”, criminalises statements that even “indirectly” encourage or induce people to commit, prepare or instigate acts of terrorism. Such crimes attract a maximum jail term of 15 years, a fine, or both.
In 2014, France updated its Penal Code to include an offence for “apology for terrorism” which refers to presenting or commenting in a positive way on a terrorist attack. This offence is applicable if made via a public statement or on social media platforms. This is punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine.
How Canada investigated 2 critical terror acts by Sikh militants
Two acts of terrorism stand out in the history of Sikh extremism in Canada — that of the 1985 Kanishka bombing and the 1986 attempted assassination of Punjab minister Malkiat Singh Sidhu in Vancouver.
In June 1985, Air India Kanishka flight was bombed by terrorists, killing over 300 people. In the early months of the investigation, Canadian authorities arrested Parmar — the alleged mastermind — and Inderjit Singh Reyat, who was convicted of making the bombs that caused the blast, among others. Parmar was released on grounds of insufficient evidence, but Reyat was charged. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter and was sentenced. The only person to be convicted in the case, Reyat was reportedly released from custody in 2017, after spending 20 years in prison.
In 2000, two separate arrests had been made in the case, Ripudaman Singh Malik and Ajaib Singh Bagri Malik. They were charged with murder, conspiracy, and placing bombs on an aircraft. There were no terror charges as it would take another year for Canada to enact its terror laws. In 2005, Ripudaman — the alleged financier of the attack — and Ajaib Singh were found not guilty and walked free on grounds of insufficient evidence.
The second major terror act by Canada-based Sikh extremists took place in 1986. Members of the banned group International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF) attempted to assassinate a Punjab minister Sidhu, while he was visiting Vancouver for a wedding in 1986.
Nine ISYF members were reportedly arrested and four were later sentenced to 20 years in jail. One of those convicted was Jaspal Atwal, also accused of beating Dosanjh a year before.
Atwal was the centre of a controversy in 2018 when the Canadian High Commission invited him to a dinner to honour Canadian PM Justin Trudeau in Delhi. The invitation was eventually rescinded.
(Edited by Poulomi Banerjee)
Also read: Canada second top pick for Indians seeking foreign citizenship