PROFUNC: In the Name of Canadian Safety

Posted: April 11, 2013 by gambini7 in Uncategorized

The PROminent FUNCtionaires of the communist party (PROFUNC) operation was approved by the Canadian government in the 1950’s and carried out by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). The communist ideological movement that swept through North America terrified citizens, causing high tensions between democratic and communist individuals. Consequently, the RCMP decided to construct a list of known communists and other activists associated with communists in Canada. The PROFUNC program was managed by the RCMP and was implemented in response to possible a communist movements that may result in Canadian societal reform. Placing people on this list did not require observations of conspicuous activity and instead relied heavily on speculation . The list was extensive and contained over two thousand names, from Ontario alone in 1953. Majority of the black-listed individuals were unaware of being monitored. Not only did the list contain alleged communists, but also extended to their children and wives. To combat any potential communist uprising, M-day, the codename that would have been used to bring PROFUNC into nation wide mobilization, would be implemented. If a threat of national security ever arose from within the communist society of Canada, operation M-day would dispatched all RCMP districts within Canada. The RCMP venture out to detain every person on the PROFUNC list and confine them for an undermined amount of time, also including their wives and children. Following capture, they would be transported to detainment centres and be denied all their rights as Canadian citizens. The RCMP had strict rules in place for the prisoners and guards in regards to what communists were permitted to do within these detainment centres. Thankfully, M-day never went into effect and the majority of Canadian citizens who were labelled communists, according to PROFUNC, never had to deal with this situation.

Many grievous actions can be performed under the cloak of national security. Unfortunately, when an act is carried out in the name of national security, some individuals believe it is justified. PROFUNC was in complete violation of Canadian citizen’s rights. All Canadian citizens have the same rights despite their political ideology . This, of course, extends to both followers of democratic and communist factions. Many people were unaware of PROFUNCs existence and that it was also approved by the Canadian government. The program was carried out for many years without public question, until PROFUNC was stumbled upon by a concerned official and subsequently cancelled by the government.

Who can be held accountable for these high policing operations? Is the prime minster of Canada responsible because he ultimately approved PROFUNC or rather members of the RCMP who simply speculated on communist activity to gather intelligence, which were treated as facts? With regards to high policing, it is very difficult to have accountability mechanisms in place. Operations regarding national security are generally done in secrecy, with little to no supervision. This operation continued for a number of years keeping a number of people within Canadian society and the government of Canada ill informed. PROFUNC clearly countermanded Canadian law and disregarded Canadian communist citizens rights. This is not permissible, even under the banner of national security and public safety. Intelligence is gathered by different means when comparing normal investigative policing and high policing. High policing relies on intelligence gathering that can not be used to arrest someone.

Retrieved From ;

  1. Mike Larsen says:

    This is an interesting and effective commentary. You conclude by noting that high policing relies on intel gathering that cannot be used to arrest someone. This is not correct. CSIS, an agency involved in high policing, does not possess powers of arrest and detention. However, CSIS intelligence, when relied upon by another organization, can provide grounds for an investigation, an arrest, a security certificate, etc.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s