Introduction

This is my first report as Communications Security Establishment (CSE) Commissioner, since my appointment effective August 1, 2006. I have a three-year mandate that expires in August 2009.

My own background includes 30 years' experience on the bench, most recently as a Supreme Court Justice from 1989-2003. I believe there are strong parallels between the role of a judge and that of the CSE Commissioner. A judge's fundamental concern is to ensure fair trials and protect personal liberty, while maintaining peace and security. Correspondingly, the CSE Commissioner's fundamental concern is to balance the right to privacy with the need for information to protect national security. The similarity between these roles is reflected in the legislation specifying that the Commissioner be a supernumerary judge or a retired judge of a superior court.

The CSE Commissioner's fundamental concern is to balance the right to privacy with the need for information to protect national security.

There is, however, an important difference in context. While secrecy issues do arise in court proceedings in certain instances, for the most part the judicial process takes place in public. Secrecy, on the other hand, is at the very heart of foreign intelligence collection. Nevertheless, the balancing principles are the same. I see the role of my office as providing Canadians with the assurance that the CSE's critical intelligence work is being carefully examined by an impartial authority to ensure it is lawful, and that their rights are being protected, without compromising the secrecy required to protect national security.

In October 2006, I was presented with an exceptional opportunity to attend the International Intelligence Review Agencies Conference in Cape Town, South Africa. One of the conference themes was the need to balance the traditional rights and liberties of citizens with the need for increased powers to meet threats to national security. It was a remarkable experience to meet with the practitioners in security and intelligence review from 14 countries, including my own, and to hear from them first-hand about the challenges we all face. I remain grateful for this opportunity because it provided an occasion for me, as the new CSE Commissioner, to become totally immersed in topics of mutual interest in the company of experts.

During the early days following my appointment, I met the Minister of National Defence and the Chief of CSE. I was also provided with extensive briefings and tours, many of them at CSE, and I am particularly grateful to my briefers for their comprehensive presentations. As time progressed, I had the opportunity to meet other federal government officials, including the Auditor General of Canada and the Privacy Commissioner, the Chairs of the Security Intelligence Review Committee and the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, the Deputy Minister of National Defence, and the National Defence Ombudsman.

Most important, of course, has been the time I have spent involving myself in the work of my office, and familiarizing myself with the activities and preoccupations of my predecessors, which will be discussed later in this report.