under s. 83.28 of the Criminal Code (Re), [2004] 2 S.C.R. 248, 2004 SCC 42, discussing the need for a separate and independent judicial role in relation to investiga-tive procedures under the Anti-terrorism Act, S.C. 2001, c. 41, which permits compelled statements for investigative purposes under judicial super-vision).
Aujourd'hui, les conspirateurs complotent en vue de commettre des actes de terrorisme ou des meurtres ou d'importer des drogues interdites. La société a raison de s'inquiéter car deux ou plu-sieurs personnes agissant de concert peuvent par-venir à des résultats nuisibles qu'une personne seule ne pourrait jamais obtenir.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), struck down a statute forbidding a person to "advocat[e] ... the duty, necessity, or propriety of crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful f methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform", in a prosecution of a Klansman who showed a film that was