DO IT
I mean sure, investigate away - but they’re not likely to find anything, because the legal definition of “treason” is quite narrow. Mere “foreign interference and influence” ain’t gonna cut it.
High treason
46 (1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,
a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;
b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or
c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.
Treason
(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,
a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.
So Charles is free game.
They might want to update 46 (1) a).
Laws change…
I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that we shouldn’t change laws to retroactively target individuals.
You say retroactive like this is over. That’s cute.
This is not an article about amending the criminal code, nor is it an article about having the RCMP investigate people for future crimes (at least, I hope not).
👍
