In Canada, as in most nations, law and policy tied closely to counter-terrorism are among the mechanisms for regulating the spaces in which civil society functions. Since the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, these mechanisms have increased in scope and importance. The United States has adopted a prosecution-based strategy in these matters, along with detailed guidance for foundations and other non-profit organizations. The United Kingdom has retained and enhanced a charitable regulation system as a first line of defence, along with prosecutions and other steps. Because the us and UK governments have acted in different ways, civil-society groups in those countries have faced different impacts in dealing with their own liberty to operate and in representing and advocating for the broader liberties of their fellow citizens. Given that Canada's approach to anti-terrorism law and policy will be debated anew in the context of the 2010 report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Investigation of the Bombing of Air India Flight 182, as will related issues of terrorist ties to civil-society organizations, this article discusses the different approaches that have emerged in the United States and the United Kingdom, some of the problems and challenges associated with each approach, and some potential implications for Canada.
