Geist says secret orders could precede public regulations
Michael GeistUniversity of Ottawa law professor
Geist argues that the Senate is being asked to approve a framework whose operational requirements remain unknown. He warns that ministerial orders could impose obligations on individual providers before any public regulations are established.
“secret orders could be imposed on individual providers before public regulations are even established.”
Original text
Analysis
Where this statement fits
Canada's Bill C-22: Dhillon backs lawful access; Simons warns of security risks
Senator Baltej Dhillon defends the lawful-access framework in Part 2 of Bill C-22. Senators Paula Simons and Yuen Pau Woo question its privacy, cybersecurity and oversight safeguards. The House-passed text lets the federal cabinet require designated providers to keep categories of metadata for up to six months. As of October 24, 2026, the bill was before a Senate committee and was not law.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
Part 2 of the House-passed text enacts the Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act. Section 5(2) lets the federal cabinet set capability and metadata-retention obligations for core providers, with retention capped at six months. Section 7 lets the Minister of Public Safety order any electronic service provider to meet such obligations for up to two years, once the Intelligence Commissioner approves the order. Sections 5(5), 7(5) and 24(2.1) excuse compliance that would introduce a systemic vulnerability, and section 2(4) limits decryption obligations.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Analysis
About this source
Geist evaluates the amended six-month retention framework and argues that implementation and secrecy risks remain.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Geist notes that section 7(1) would let the Minister of Public Safety, once Part 2 is in force, issue an order to any electronic service provider containing any provision that a regulation could contain.
After the quotation
Geist adds that the capability, device and metadata retention obligations in section 5(2) could be imposed on individual companies by ministerial order years before any regulation sets them for the sector.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The reference point is Bill C-22's Part 2 lawful-access framework. The speaker expressly criticizes its capability, privacy or oversight provisions.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseEFF urges Canadians to tell the Senate to stop Bill C-22
Electronic Frontier Foundation
“That’s a clear recipe for weakening the encryption we all rely on.”Read statement
Woo says the government has not justified the added risks
“I do not believe it has yet done so.”Read statement
Simons warns Bill C-22's compelled capabilities would weaken cybersecurity
“no way to create a secret passage”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Geist says secret orders could precede public regulations
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/7001-geist-argues-that-the-senate-is-being-asked
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Geist says secret orders could precede public regulations". First published: 2026-10-28. Last updated: 2026-10-28. https://disputeindex.com/events/7001-geist-argues-that-the-senate-is-being-asked