Even though the committee received advice that Bill 7, as it is written, is in accordance with Canada's Charter, we should be mindful that Canada's Charter is an ever-evolving document that is constantly being reinterpreted by legislators and the judicial system.

With a program like the SCAN office, it would not be unreasonable to assume that it, too, would evolve, and that the actual practices in enforcing the act or the regulations could be in contradiction of the Charter at some point in the future.

With this in mind, the committee believes it would be beneficial to quote the concerns raised by the NWT Human Rights Commission in their written submission:

“Section 2(d) of the Charter protects freedom of association. Bill 7 could be seen as punishing individuals for freedom of association. For example, persons living in a unit under investigation may be adversely affected even though they are not engaged in criminal or other activities. Yet, their privacy can be invaded and residence taken away. The appeal mechanisms are onerous and do not provide for meaningful protection for an innocent occupant.

“Section 6(2) of the Charter protects the right of every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada to move and take up residence in any province. The Minister of Justice has made it clear that “if the people who are causing the problem move to another house, we will gather evidence and evict them again. We will follow them wherever they go until they stop their illegal activities or leave the NWT” (Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Legislation: A consultation paper about a proposed new way to make their community safer, page 1). Bill 7 sets up a process where privacy can be invaded, due process denied, and persons can be harassed until they are forced to leave the NWT.

“Section 7 of the Charter protects the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Yet, there are violations of the principles of fundamental justice in Bill 7. For example:

• Bill 7 can require self-incrimination. Failure to do so could result in being charged with a criminal offence and imprisoned for up to a year (Section 30 and 66);
• Bill 7 can allow the Director of Safer Communities (the “Director”) to designate a fortified building as a threat to public safety in the absence of a hearing (Section 41). The Director can then impose a closure/eviction order without notice to the owner or occupant;
• Bill 7 requires a low standard of proof given the severity of losing one's home or facing imprisonment;
• Bill 7 denies the rights of the accused person to face their accuser or to have all information necessary to mount a defence. Indeed, Bill 7 does not even guarantee that occupants can argue in their own defence.

“Section 8 of the Charter guarantees the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure. The search and seizure provisions in Bill 7 are broad. For example, neighbours could gather video surveillance in support of their own application for a Community Safety Order (“CSO”). Government agencies and individuals could be forced to provide confidential information or face fines or imprisonment if they refuse. There is no requirement for a warrant for this information. Also, Bill 7 allows for an intrusive investigative process in which the Director can place dwelling houses and other places under video surveillance.

“Section 1 of the Charter states that a government can infringe upon Charter rights if the infringement is a reasonable limit “prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” Bill 7 exceeds this reasonable limit.”