Dangerous Technologies and the Loss of Privacy Rights: Analyzing Canadian Lawful Access Legislation through Social Problem Theory

Abstract

This project analyzes efforts to “modernize” Canadian lawful access legislation, focusing primarily on legislation proposed by the Conservative government between 2009 and 2014. Though privacy is a democratic right integral to citizens’ political participation, research shows that governments often mobilize security threats to justify the expansion of surveillance measures that infringe upon privacy rights, citing the need to “balance” national security and civil rights. The purpose of this project is to understand how security and privacy were socially constructed in relation to lawful access legislation. Using social problem theory, which studies how social problems are socially constructed through the rhetorical claims-making activities of relevant parties, this project examines newspaper articles, parliamentary records, and government documents to understand how political parties, lawyers, privacy advocates, victims’ advocates, and other claims-makers defined the security and privacy issues that surrounded lawful access legislation. Similarly to broader trends, the endangerment of Canadian society by cybercrime and cyberbullying and the loss of privacy rights were prominent issues in the rhetoric, as was the need to balance security and privacy. However, the analysis shows that proponents of lawful access legislation took a nuanced approach to the balance between security and privacy by claiming that the legislation would respect and protect privacy rights. This rhetorical claim subverted the common framing of security and privacy as mutually exclusive benefits in a zero-sum game. This suggests that defending privacy rights on the grounds that they are equal to security rights would be an ineffective strategy, as the state can simply deny claims that its policies would infringe upon privacy rights.