Thread by @SarahJamieLewis

Begging crypto twitter to stop conflating the orders of a Canadian Provincial court based on well established legal procedures with potential impacts from Federal emergencies act invocation.

There is a lot to criticize and be concerned about, but conflation muddies the water.

I am very troubled by the invocation of the act - and more so with statements made by MPs to put forward legislation to make some of the powers relating to financial surveillance and/or censorship permanent.

https://twitter.com/cancivlib/status/1494820569296117762

While all extra-judicial freezing of assets is reprehensible I am very concerned with claims made in the house of commons this morning that Canadians who donated small amount of money are having their accounts frozen - if verified, those kinds of actions need intense scrutiny.

As it related to crypto I've seen 2 main things discussed:

1. A list of addresses provided by the rcmp to financial service providers under the emergencies order.
2. An order sent to a wallet software provider in reference to a mareva injunction via the Ontario Superior Court

The fact that the order asked a crypto wallet to do something that they simply can't do is certainly open to many critiques but it was the result of a well defined legal process - not an extra-judicial power grab.

For those not in Canada: we are in day 3 of a 4 all-day debate in parliament which will culminate with a vote on these orders. The act itself also has a built in sunset clause. There will be several inquires after, as I am sure there will be legislation and court cases.

Make no mistake that I am concerned and troubled - I've had parliament streaming all week.

But it is important to put developments in their proper context, so that when abuses of power happen they are clear, indisputable and can be properly challenged.