On Guard for Everyone

26 February 2007



Canada’s Supreme Court Strikes down Anti-Terror Law

The Supreme Court of Canada unanimously struck down an anti-terror law that allows the government to detain foreign suspects indefinitely relying on secret evidence. Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, writing on behalf of the entire court, put it, “Before the state can detain people for significant periods of time, it must accord them a fair judicial process.” One can only hope the next blast of cold air from Canada brings the same common sense to the American government.

The law in question allowed the government to hold foreigners indefinitely pending deportation by issuing what are known as “security certificates.” The accused are, under this law, unable to view the evidence against them. As the Chief Justice wrote, “The secrecy required by the scheme denies the named person the opportunity to know the case out against him or her, and hence to challenge the government's case.” That violates Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. “I would declare the procedure to be inconsistent with the Charter, and hence of no force or effect,” said Ms. McLachlin.

The case stems from the detention of three Muslim men. All are free to leave Canada whenever they wish, but each maintains returning home would be to risk detention, torture and quite possibly death. Two of the men had been released on bail with very tight conditions and restrictions. Adil Charkaoui of Morocco is alleged to have trained at an al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan. Hassan Almrei of Syria came to Canada on a false passport and was in an al Qaeda forgery ring – if the Canadian prosecutors are correct. Mohamed Harkat, an Algerian, is alleged to have lied about ties to al Qaeda and about helping Islamic extremists.

Maybe these guys are, indeed, guilty as sin. And maybe their deportation rather than conviction and imprisonment is a preferred outcome for the Canadian people. Still, a little proof would be nice. Last year, Mr. Charkaoui denied that he was guilty of anything and demanded a public trial on terrorism charges. A “put up or shut up” stand.

Of course, this runs into security issues and intelligence gathering secrets. However, the Supreme Court offered an interesting solution. The appointment of a special advocate would allow the accused to challenge the government’s case without blowing any intelligence assets or secrets. The court has given the government a year to legislate a solution. It shouldn’t take that long.

© Copyright 2007 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.


Home

Google
WWW Kensington Review







Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More