Fourteen Years of Imprisonment

March 8th, 2014

The Canadian Standards Association (“CSA”) has been providing influence over the drafting of Canadian law to a variety of foreign governments, foreign owned companies and to the citizens of foreign countries. 

Care to verify that?  A partial list of CSA committee members, the folks who draft law, is available here.  But its only a partial list, mind you.

The CSA claims that their public list includes “all CSA Corporate Supporters,” but sources inside the CSA have furnished us with an internal membership list, and it doesn’t match the public list.  Their internal list is much, much longer.  And its crammed with foreigners.

Apparently, leadership at the CSA still haven’t figured out that deleting evidence diminishes credibility. 

We were also surprised to learn that CSA is selling access to, and control of, Canada’s laws from the United States.  Right now, if you want permission to read certain Canadian laws, you have to phone to Ohio and make a payment to CSA’s US office.  Then you can read the laws that apply to you.  Its true, the CSA’s Lisa Eberman runs this operation from an office in Cleveland, OH.

In this context, RestoreCSA wrote to the Department of Justice in August of 2013, requesting that they consider the actions of the CSA.  Here’s part of what we said:

The membership of [CSA’s] committees may amend existing electrical law or may elect to draft entirely new regulations.  The membership of these committees includes foreign governments, foreign owned companies and the citizens of foreign countries.  Influence in these committees is purchased from CSA in annual payments.

By the way, its not just an electrical laws issue, there are about 630 federal and provincial laws that are drafted by the CSA.  The boilerplate in such laws often includes a line such as “accepted as amended.”  That is, if CSA’s committees decide to change a law, to “amend” it, then that change is automatically “accepted” as law without legislative review.  Specifically, and by way of Provincial example, the Ontario Legislation Act states that CSA’s laws “may be incorporated subject to such changes as the maker of the regulation considers necessary.”  That is, the CSA’s committees have the power to alter Canadian law at their own discretion, to their own purposes or to the purposes of their committee members, and they may do so without review or appeal.  That’s a lot of power over the Canadian people, and its power they’re giving to foreign powers, and that’s a problem. 

Our comments to the Department of Justice continued:

Given the recent wave of unauthorized disclosures of sensitive, technical and classified information in the United States and elsewhere, we are urgently aware of the increasing, relatable value of sovereignty over national legal statues and the validity of existing legal statutes, and their enforcement, in safeguarding the primacy and continuity of Canadian control of Canadian law.  We are aware that disuse is, by precedent, discontinuance by degrees, a nullification of a critical defensive statute of our democratic society.

In the context of the above, we are hereby requesting that the Department of Justice issue a Legal Opinion on the applicability of Section 46 of the Criminal Code to the actions by the [Standards Council of Canada] entity CSA in respect of their practice of selling influence over Canadian law to foreign powers, in the event that neither the SCC nor CSA have received annual authorization to do so from the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Section 46 of the Criminal Code is Canada’s treason law.  Quoting Sec.46.2.(b); “Every one commits treason who, in Canada, […] without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character [that] may be used […] for a purpose prejudicial” to Canada. 

All private working papers (documents, notes, articles, etc.) related to legislation controlled by the CSA are necessarily available to the foreigners on the committees that amend those laws.  The same applies to the technical and scientific information pertinent to specific legislation.  Moreover, the laws controlled by the CSA are, in the main, laws governing the safety of the Canadian people.  Further, foreign commercial interests are intrinsically at variance with Canadian commercial interests, inasmuch as our corporations compete against theirs.  In this, it appears that every component category within Section 46.2.(b) is met in CSA conduct.

Lest one think that only CSA’s leaders are in trouble, the law also covers peripheral conduct.  Quoting Sec.46.2.(e); Every one commits treason who “conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in [Sec.46.2.(b), as above] or forms an intention to do anything mentioned [above] and manifests that intention by an overt act.”  Further quoting Sec.46.4.4; “Where it is treason to conspire with any person, the act of conspiring is an overt act of treason.”  For legal hounds, Sec. 463, “Attempts & Accessories,” markedly broadens the net and may also be applied in this context.

And it doesn’t just apply to Canadian offices.  Quoting Sec.46.3.(b); Every one “commits treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in [Sec.46.2.(b), as above].”

The standard for conviction is surprisingly low.  Basically, its two witnesses.  That’s it, just two, unless the accused can be really nailed with just one.  Quoting Sec.47.3; “No person shall be convicted of […] treason on the evidence of only one witness, unless the evidence of that witness is corroborated in a material particular by evidence that implicates the accused.”

The best sort of witnesses are the public kind of course, where verification of the accusation is neat and easy.  If the accused publicly bragged about the deed or, say, if they voluntarily published an admission that they did what they’re accused of doing.  Well, the CSA has published long lists of foreigners that have paid to influence Canadian law.  And they’ve done so repeatedly.  We’re not short of witnesses.

Finally, those thinking about “making available” unlawful influence to foreigners should take seriously how seriously the Criminal Code takes this conduct.  Quoting Sec.47.1.(c); Persons in violation of Section 46 are “to be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not exceeding fourteen years if he is guilty of an offence under [Sec.46, as above].”

So what did the Department of Justice do with our request for a Legal Opinion?  Well, last fall they chose to ignore it.  Why would they ignore such a major issue?  Its hard to say.

Curiously, one of the CSA’s board members was installed at the Department of Justice last fall.  Her name is France Pegeot.  Her job is to advise the Deputy Minister on major issues.