Section 273.65 of the National Defence Act: Inappropriate and Unconstitutional
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After six short weeks of debate, Bill C-36, The Anti-terrorism Act,1 passed into law on 28 November 2001. Bill C-36 was Parliament’s formal legislative response to the terrorist attacks upon the U.S. on September 11. Among other things, Bill C-36 amended the National Defence Act2 to grant the Minister of National Defence, in place of a judge, the power to authorize the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) to intercept private communications for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence under section 273.65. The CSE’s mandate includes acquiring and providing foreign signals intelligence.3 In this article, I argue that this amendment to the National Defence Act abolished an essential safeguard to arbitrary state actions and likely violates section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.4 The eventual removal of section 273.65 from the National Defence Act would uphold the long-standing, appropriate, and constitutional doctrine that the power to authorize agents of the state to intercept private communications rests solely with the judiciary.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".