Hikvision Appeals Canada's National Security Order Under ICA

On July 7, 2025, Hikvision Canada Inc., the Canadian subsidiary of the Chinese surveillance technology firm Hikvision, announced its intention to legally challenge an order issued by the Government of Canada requiring the cessation of its operations in the country. This order was a result of a national security review conducted under the Investment Canada Act (ICA), highlighting the Canadian government’s increasing scrutiny of foreign investments deemed potentially harmful to national security.

The order, which was issued on June 27, 2025, mandates Hikvision to wind down its business operations within Canada, citing national security risks associated with its continued presence. According to Mélanie Joly, Canada’s Minister of Industry, the order compels Hikvision to cancel all sales, terminate employees, and halt all marketing activities within 120 days. The government has advised federal departments to refrain from using Hikvision products and has urged Canadians to discontinue their use as well.

The case is particularly notable due to its timing; Hikvision has been operating in Canada since 2015. According to the Federal Court documents filed by Hikvision, the national security review was initiated only after the company failed to notify the government of its operations as required under Section 11 of the ICA. Had Hikvision complied with this requirement at the time of its establishment, the timeline for a national security review would have expired 45 days post-notification.

The scrutiny of Hikvision's operations is part of a broader trend, as the Canadian government has increasingly invoked the ICA’s national security provisions. In the fiscal year 2023-24, Canada received over 1,200 ICA applications, with only 26 subjected to extended national security reviews. Past actions have included divestiture orders targeting companies like TikTok Technology Canada Inc. and China Mobile International Canada Inc. (CMI), both of which were instructed to cease operations due to similar concerns.

Hikvision argues that the order is unreasonable and lacks substantiation, claiming that the government has focused excessively on the company's Chinese ownership rather than on specific threats to national security. The company has filed for a judicial review, seeking to overturn the order and arguing that the government's actions were procedurally unfair and disproportionate. As an interim measure, Hikvision has requested a stay of the order while the court considers its challenge. The Attorney General of Canada has agreed to allow Hikvision to continue operations pending the court's decision.

Experts in national security law suggest that this case could set a precedent regarding the government's authority to review existing foreign investments. Dr. Emily Carter, an expert in international trade law at the University of Toronto, stated, "This case underscores the evolving landscape of national security reviews in Canada, particularly regarding previously established foreign businesses. The implications for future foreign investments could be significant."

The Hikvision case raises important questions about the balance between national security interests and foreign investment. As the Canadian government continues to refine its approach to foreign investments, stakeholders in various sectors are advised to remain vigilant and proactive in addressing potential compliance issues under the ICA.

The outcome of Hikvision's challenge could reshape the regulatory environment for foreign investments in Canada, particularly for companies with ties to countries perceived as security risks. Investors and businesses are encouraged to consult with legal experts early in their planning processes to navigate the complexities of the ICA and mitigate potential risks effectively.