Proton VPN vows to resist Canadian surveillance demands under Bill C-22

Proton VPN General Manager David Peterson said the Swiss-based VPN provider will not comply with any Canadian surveillance demands stemming from the country’s proposed lawful access legislation, Bill C-22, pledging to challenge the law “by every means available.”

In a statement posted on X earlier this week, Peterson stressed that Proton VPN operates under Swiss jurisdiction and cannot legally comply with foreign surveillance orders without going through Swiss legal channels.

“Complying with foreign surveillance orders without a Swiss legal process is a criminal offense. Not happening,” Peterson wrote. “We’ll defend our Canadian users and never compromise them.”

The comments add Proton VPN to a growing list of technology and privacy companies publicly criticizing Canada’s controversial Bill C-22, which has already drawn opposition from Apple, Meta, and encrypted messaging platform Signal.

Critics have focused on Part 2 of the legislation, which would require electronic service providers to maintain technical capabilities allowing law enforcement and intelligence agencies to access data under authorized orders. While Canadian officials insist the bill is “encryption neutral,” its broad wording could effectively force companies to weaken encryption protections or build lawful access mechanisms into their infrastructure.

Peterson also responded to questions about whether Proton VPN could be compelled to log user activity under Swiss court orders. He stated that the company has previously received 411 Swiss legal requests seeking logs, but was unable to provide any data because it does not retain activity logs.

“There is no mechanism under Swiss law to demand that we start logging,” Peterson said, pointing to Proton VPN’s public transparency report.

Proton, headquartered in Geneva, is best known for its encrypted email and VPN services and markets itself as a privacy-focused provider operating under Switzerland’s comparatively strict privacy laws. Like Signal, the company’s business model relies heavily on maintaining user trust around data minimization and resistance to surveillance demands.

The latest remarks further escalate industry opposition to Bill C-22 as lawmakers continue debating the proposal. Signal recently warned it would withdraw from Canada entirely rather than weaken its encryption protections, while Apple and Meta have cautioned that the legislation could introduce systemic cybersecurity risks and create exploitable backdoors.

Canadian officials continue to reject those claims, maintaining that the bill does not mandate encryption backdoors or require providers to weaken security protections.