Twenty-one civil liberties organizations, privacy groups and individual experts are deeply alarmed that, late last night, the federal government cut off debate at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on the very controversial Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act.
The federal government has rammed the controversial Lawful Access Act through Parliament despite massive opposition.
June 18, 2026, OTTAWA – Twenty-one civil liberties organizations, privacy groups and individual experts are deeply alarmed that, late last night, the federal government cut off debate at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on the very controversial Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act.
Bill C-22 raises significant privacy and security concerns, including that it will:
- Grant police easier access to our personal information;
- Allow the government to force companies to create backdoors so police and spy agencies can scoop up our personal data and communications, making online protections like encryption meaningless;
- Allow the government to order companies to hold on to our personal information for up to a year, creating a treasure trove of data that would serve as a digital map of everyone in Canada, and could be misused, leaked, or targeted by hackers; and
- Risk more of our information being shared with US intelligence and law enforcement agencies, including for the investigation of acts that are legal in Canada.
MPs have received several thousands of emails from Canadians opposing the bill. Many companies, such as Google, Apple and Meta, have sounded the alarm, especially regarding mandated backdoors into their system that would break encryption. Several, such as Signal, DuckDuckGo and NordVPN, have even threatened to leave Canada if the law passes.
It is even more troubling that the government has passed another undemocratic motion to stop debate on a rights-threatening bill when it faces more than 100 amendments, with only a fraction having been discussed before debate was cut off. The government promised to bring its own amendments to address criticisms of the bill, but they were never fully revealed before the vote, and, because of this motion, did not receive any actual debate at committee.
Bill C-22 is too complex and its impacts too significant to be rushed through. The government should not have used this draconian measure, should have allowed the study of the bill to run its course, and should have ensured that all government and opposition amendments were given full consideration and scrutinized in public. We are urging MPs to denounce the passage of the motion, and the government to change course on C-22 and its undemocratic ways.
Signatories:
International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
OpenMedia
Ligue des droits et libertés
Privacy and Access Council of Canada
Le Centre de Réfugiés / The Refugee Centre
Centre for Free Expression
British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA)
Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes (TCRI)
Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council (CMPAC)
BC Freedom Of Information and Privacy Association
Clinique pour la justice migrante / Migrant justice clinic
Start Point Organization
Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA)
Council of Canadians
IFEX
Ümit Kiziltan, researcher
Safiyya Ahmad, Lawyer
Kate Robertson, Senior Research Associate, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto
Ron Deibert O.C., O.Ont., Professor of Political Science and Director of the Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto
Noura Aljizawi, Senior Researcher, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto
Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law, University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law
