The Lawful Access Act

Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act, 2026, modernizes Canada's legal framework for law enforcement and intelligence agencies to access digital communications data during investigations into serious crimes such as child exploitation, organized crime, and terrorism. It introduces confirmation of service demands and judicial production orders for subscriber information, mandates metadata retention by telecom providers for up to one year, and grants the Minister of Public Safety authority to compel electronic service providers to build technical capabilities for lawful interception.

Every Canadian who uses telecommunications services — over 34 million subscribers. The bill also directly impacts telecom companies and electronic service providers who must comply with new data retention and technical capability requirements. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies gain expanded investigative powers. Civil liberties organizations, privacy advocates, and major technology companies including Meta and Apple have raised significant concerns about the bill's scope.

Law enforcement will be able to obtain subscriber information under a lowered "reasonable suspicion" threshold, rather than the current standard. Telecom providers will be required to retain metadata — including records of who communicated with whom, when, and for how long — for up to one year. The Minister of Public Safety gains authority to compel electronic service providers to build technical capabilities for surveillance. Warrants remain required for the interception of actual communications content. The bill revisits lawful access provisions originally introduced in Bill C-2 (the Strong Borders Act) that faced heavy opposition when tabled in June 2025.

Bill C-22 was introduced on March 12, 2026 and completed second reading on April 20, 2026, when it was referred to committee in the House of Commons for detailed clause-by-clause review. The bill has drawn significant public attention and opposition from privacy advocates, technology companies, and the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, which warned that Part 2 of the bill could force encryption backdoors.