Canada Signs UN Cybercrime Treaty Despite Human Rights Concerns

A Surveillance Treaty in Disguise: Canada Signs UN Cybercrime Convention

Canada Signs UN Cybercrime Treaty Despite Human Rights Concerns

Canada recently signed the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime, a move ministers claim protects children but critics argue enables global surveillance. Despite previous opposition from experts and allies like the United States, the government proceeded without public consultation. This decision risks converting repressive domestic laws into triggers for cross-border evidence gathering and undermines existing safeguards against transnational repression.

The reality is that the convention is not primarily a cybercrime treaty at all, but rather a sweeping cross-border surveillance and electronic evidence-sharing agreement.
  1. Waterluvian

    It feels like there’s this weird layer to domestic and international politics where you do a lot of signalling to one audience while simultaneously winking at other audiences that you’re not actually serious. (I can never tell who is getting winked at…)

    I feel like WYSIWYG politics is what most of us want, but probably doesn’t actually work. The Ned Stark character that is righteous and right and quickly meets the headman’s axe of the game theory and brinksmanship of everyone else.

  2. panarchy

    Canada is so lucky to have someone like Michael Geist. He's been reporting on and doing in depth investigations on privacy invasions for about 2 decades now.

  3. leonvoss

    >As of May 2026, the following 76 participants have signed the treaty: Algeria, Angola, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Columbia, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Ivory Coast, Cuba, Czechia, North Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, European Union, Fiji, France, Ghana, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Ireland, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Laos, Libya, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Palestine, Sweden, Thailand, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe.

    Some wonderful countries here: North Korea, Saudi Arabia, China. Thankfully the US hasn't signed it and probably won't because it thinks itself too above international law.

    Interestingly, Qatar signed it with [the reservation](https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mt...) that

    >The State of Qatar does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Articles (16), (15), and (14) of the Convention, as they contradict the provisions of Islamic Sharia, national legislation, and the social and cultural values of the State of Qatar.

    These provisions [being](https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/cybercrime/convention/text/co...) Article 14: Of […]

  4. bethekidyouwant

    Canada signs most UN stuff

  5. alephnerd

    So has Australia, the EU, and the UK [0].

    That said, being a signatory has limited impact as long as it isn't ratified.

    [0] - https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mt...

  6. sunshine-o

    About "cybercrime" in general my feeling is there is a status quo between the criminals and countries. Something like we do not take down your economy and you do not go after us.

    I know for a fact that even the most powerful organizations are powerless to have some relatively unsophisticated group caught and put behind bar.

    The idea we would need conventions to start acting is a joke.

  7. failbuffer

    When are we going to see substantive legislation advancing digital rights instead of chipping away at them?

    For the US, we need a new bill of rights, a bill of digital rights that constitutionally protects right of repair, right to root our own devices, right to be free from dragnet surveillance, right to general purpose computing, and the right to access speech without government-mandated age or identity checks.

    With all the libertarian millionaires and billionaires swirling around silicon valley and the venture capital space, why can't we make that happen?

  8. andrewstuart

    Wrong. The government cares.

More from this day

2026-08-01