Why weren the existing tools in the Criminal Code adequate to deal with terrorist activity?
Before the enactment of the ATA in 2001, the Criminal Code did not adequately address the unique challenges posed by international terrorism. Mass murder by suicide bombers or hijackers may not be an entirely new phenomenon, but it is one being further developed and increasingly used by terrorist groups. Using the Criminal Code to prosecute such crimes after the fact was inadequate to ensure Canadians’ security. We needed better investigative tools and other mechanisms to detect terrorist plots and prevent attacks from taking place. We also needed an approach that would allow us to pursue those who, by indirect means, facilitated terrorist crimes. Prevention and deterrence have always been central goals of our criminal justice system. The ATA allowed us to pursue a comprehensive strategy of preventing terror attacks and disrupting terror networks in ways that were not possible before 2001. Two of the enforcement tools enacted by the ATA, the “investigative hearing” and the “recognizanc
