Five lost years

Andrew Duffy, The Ottawa Citizen- Published: Saturday, January 26, 2008 Photo: Nathan Denette, The Canadian Press

How Benamar Benatta 'disappeared' after 9/11. The Canadian government sent him to the U.S. where he was accused of being behind the 9/11 bombings: 'The way they accused me, I thought my life was over'

Toronto's Benamar Benatta calls himself a forgotten victim of Sept. 11.

Mr. Benatta, 33, a former Algerian air force lieutenant, also has the dubious distinction of being the first victim of Canada's sometimes overzealous security response to the U.S. terror attacks.

Former Ottawa engineer Maher Arar is the best known victim of Canada's post-9/11 national security excesses. A secretive federal inquiry is now exploring what happened to three other Arab Canadians -- Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El-Maati and Muayyed Nureddin -- who, like Mr. Arar, say they were tortured in Syria based on faulty Canadian intelligence.

Mr. Benatta's plight predates the others, but remains little known. He has also been unsuccessful at winning an official review of his case.

So he has launched a $35-million lawsuit against the federal government for what he says was his illegal removal to the U.S. as a terror suspect one day after the World Trade Centre was levelled.

Initially, he was considered a potential conspirator in the attacks. And, although he was cleared of any connection to terrorism by November 2001, he would spend almost five years in U.S. custody, where he would suffer serious degradation and mistreatment, before being mysteriously returned to this country at the behest of Canadian officials.

"You just can't take somebody who's innocent and accuse him of being involved in the worst terrorist crime -- and then just close your hands and make like nothing happened," says Mr. Benatta, who now holds refugee status in Canada.

"I would like to have answers about why. Somebody out there owes me an apology. Canada just can't take an innocent person and send him away and forget about him for five years."

Mr. Benatta will visit Ottawa on Tuesday to relate his nightmarish saga to an audience at the Public Service Alliance of Canada Hall. The next day, he will march with supporters to the Prime Minister's Office to renew his demand for a public review of his case.

His story begins in Algeria where he was born on May 16, 1974, the youngest of 10 children. Mr. Benatta joined the military at 18, and after a year of basic training, was sent to university where he studied aeronautical engineering. After graduation, he returned to the military and taught aeronautics.

But Mr. Benatta says he became uncomfortable with the military crackdown in Algeria that followed the annulled 1992 general election won by an Islamist party.

"I opposed the methods employed by the military," he says. "There were civilians caught in the line of fire."

In December 2000, he travelled to the U.S. for training with a major U.S. arms contractor, Northrup Grumman. But Mr. Benatta had secretly decided to defect: he carried with him his life's savings and his university diploma. In April 2001, he abandoned his training program and fled to New York City.

Mr. Benatta, however, figured his chances of making a successful refugee claim were better in Canada, so in early September 2001, he made for the border.

"I had the impression that Canada had protection for human rights," he says.

At the Fort Erie border crossing, Mr. Benatta presented the false green card and social security card he had obtained in New York City. When an immigration official questioned him, he admitted they were fraudulent and claimed political asylum.

He was held in custody at the Niagara Detention Centre while Canadian immigration officials confirmed his identity. Mr. Benatta was in custody on Sept. 11 and remained unaware that the world had changed drastically that morning.

The next day, he was interviewed by two officials who did not identify themselves. According to Mr. Benatta, he was asked whether he could fly a plane -- he can't -- and about his military training.

Hours later, he was placed in the back seat of a car. Mr. Benatta thought he was going to a bigger detention facility in Toronto, but instead, he was driven across the Rainbow Bridge and handed over to U.S. officials.

Mr. Benatta insists he did not withdraw his refugee claim -- as Canadian officials would later contend -- and never acceded to his transfer to the U.S.

Indeed, he says he didn't realize he had crossed the border until he saw the uniforms on the men who took him into custody.

"No one told me we were going to the States whatsoever," he says. "They just put me in the back of the car."

Mr. Benatta first learned of the terror attacks on the evening of Sept. 12 during an interview with FBI investigators. He quickly realized he was being accused of participating in the deadliest attack on U.S. soil since Pearl Harbor.

"They said, 'If you co-operate now, we are going to give you a life sentence instead of death penalty,'" he says. "They did receive certain information that I am the one who trained the 19 people (hijackers) or orchestrated the Sept. 11 attacks. That's the information they give to me."

Four days later, Mr. Benatta was transferred to the Metropolitan Detention Centre (MDC) in Brooklyn, New York, where he was held along with 83 other "high interest" suspects in the FBI's investigation of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Most of the men had been detained on the strength of various immigration offences.

Mr. Benatta was held incommunicado and denied access to a lawyer; his family in Algeria thought he had disappeared.

Mr. Benatta says he repeatedly had his head slammed against the wall by MDC guards, who also shackled his legs painfully tight. He was left outside in the cold and punished for speaking to other prisoners by being denied food. The lights in his cell were kept on for 24 hours a day.

(Mr. Benatta's description of his abuse is consistent with the findings of a report by the U.S. Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General, which issued a damning assessment of the Brooklyn detention centre in December 2003. The U.S. Justice Department uncovered a videotape that, among other things, recorded repeated and degrading strip searches. The report recommended disciplinary action against 10 individuals for their "abusive" behaviour.)

Mr. Benatta was repeatedly interrogated by FBI agents assigned to the Terrorism Task Force.

"The way they accused me, I thought it was over," he says. "I thought they didn't find nobody who did it and they were just going to accuse me. They would present me to the people that I was the one who did it. I thought that was it: I thought my life was over."

But on Nov. 15, 2001, according to evidence later made public in U.S. District Court, the FBI officially cleared Mr. Benatta of any connection to terrorism.

Yet Mr. Benatta continued to be held in detention. He was subsequently charged with being in possession of false identification: his phony green card and social security number.

He remained incommunicado at the Brooklyn detention centre until April 30, 2002, when he was transferred to a jail in Buffalo, New York, and finally allowed access to a lawyer.

Two years after first being detained, Mr. Benatta's criminal case went before U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth Schroeder, who castigated federal prosecutors for their legal "shams" and "ridiculous" delays. The judge said Mr. Benatta had been denied his right to a fair and speedy trial.

Based on a recommendation from Judge Schroeder, the criminal charges against Mr. Benatta were dropped in October 2003.

But Mr. Benatta's ordeal was not over. Since he still did not have legal standing in the U.S., he applied for political asylum; he was kept in immigration detention because U.S. officials considered him a "flight risk."

After his bid for asylum was denied on April 7, 2004, he launched an appeal. He was told he could be released if he posted a $25,000 bond, but Mr. Benatta knew no one with that kind of money in the U.S.

His appeal was denied in September 2004, which meant that Mr. Benatta faced the terrifying prospect of being returned to Algeria. He believed that as a military defector, he would be imprisoned and tortured if sent back.

He appealed his deportation and won a stay of that order in January 2005, but he was not released from custody.

It was about this time that Janet Dench, director of the Canadian Council for Refugees, heard about his ordeal and began to work for Mr. Benatta's return to Canada. The Benatta case had been brought to the attention of the United Nations by the American Civil Liberties Union; his plight had also been written about by the Washington Post.

Ms. Dench began to lobby the Canadian government to recognize its critical role in the case and to make things right for Mr. Benatta.

Canada, she told federal officials, had no legal basis for removing Mr. Benatta and had a moral duty to rescue him from U.S. custody.

"It's extremely, extremely disturbing when you find officials violating the law," she says. "It's one of the most basic things you expect: that the basic requirements of the law will be followed by our officials.

"And in many ways, it's worse when it happens in the heat of the moment, on the 12th of September, because that's exactly when you need laws to be scrupulously respected."

After what she describes as a "long, slow process," Ms. Dench's representations gained traction in Ottawa.

On July 11, 2006, the Canadian government sent the U.S. Department of Homeland Security a curious letter.

Written by a Canadian consulate official in Buffalo, the letter announced that Canada would offer Mr. Benatta a temporary resident permit to allow him re-entry into this country.

In his letter, obtained by the Citizen, Consul Randy Orr confirmed that Mr. Benatta had been detained in Canada on Sept. 5, 2001. His immigration file indicates that Mr. Benatta expressed a desire to seek refugee status in Canada, Mr. Orr said, noting there is no record of such a claim.

"On September 12," Mr. Orr wrote, "Mr. Benatta was returned to the United States. Information on the file indicates this was a voluntary withdrawal. However, there is no documentation to support this, such as a copy of the 'Allowed to Leave' form, as would normally be the case."

Ms. Dench says Canadian officials should be given full credit for coming to Mr. Benatta's aid. "It certainly wasn't a full restitution," she says, "but at least they had the guts to take some action to get him out of detention."

Dressed in a prison jumpsuit and shackled, Mr. Benatta was driven back across the border to Canada on July 20, 2006.

Chris Williams, a spokesman for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), said he could not comment on the Benatta case because it's before the courts. He refused to say if the federal government continues to believe that Mr. Benatta willingly went to the U.S. "We're currently reviewing the allegations and examining the claim," Mr. Williams said.

Mr. Benatta's lawyer, Nicole Chrolavicius, says the Canadian government bears some responsibility for what happened to him.

"They were the instigators of the whole event," she says. "They identified him as a suspect in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and then handed him over without any legal process whatsoever."

Mr. Benatta's case must be fully explored, Ms. Chrolavicius contends, because it stands as the first example of how the Canadian government moved "outside the law" after the terror attacks in New York and Washington.

"He was lifted completely out of the immigration realm, completely out of any thought of extradition, for example, lifted outside of any legal process and stuck in the back of a car and driven over the border," she says. "He was not deported, or removed, or refouled. He was transferred outside the scope of any lawful authority ...This was an illegal rendition."

Mr. Benatta's lawsuit alleges that Canadian officials later attempted to cover-up their misconduct by falsely suggesting that Mr. Benatta withdrew his refugee claim in Canada. The allegations in the lawsuit must be proven in court.

The federal government has yet to file a statement of defence in the case and is attempting to have the matter moved to Federal Court.

For his part, Mr. Benatta wants answers to some fundamental questions. Why was he sent to the U.S. without due process? What did Canadian security officials tell their U.S. counterparts about him? Why did Canadian officials act so rashly when he was already in custody? Why didn't Canadian security agencies do their own assessment of his alleged connections to 9/11? Why did the Canadian government not seek his return until 2006?

"Why throw me in the car like a package and deliver me like I'm nobody?" he asks.

Mr. Benatta now lives on social assistance in Toronto. He has been unable to get work, he says, because his name has been tied to terrorism. He also finds it hard to explain the five-year gap in his resume. He holds out little hope of resuming his career as an aeronautics engineer.

In November, Mr. Benatta finally won his claim for refugee status in Canada -- a milestone he regards as bittersweet.

"After seven years of fighting, that was a relief. I am very grateful to Canada to be provided protection here," he says. "But I can't get on with my life. Not yet."

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/observer/story.html?id=6cfbd053-d721-4146-9cb9-3e02e1558093&p=1

Charkaoui soutient que la preuve est biaisée

Photo La Presse

Karine Fortin

La Presse Canadienne

Ottawa

Les procureurs d'Adil Charkaoui, qui fait l'objet d'un certificat de sécurité depuis 2003 parce qu'on le soupçonne d'avoir été lié à des organisations terroristes, a argué jeudi devant la Cour suprême du Canada que la preuve contre lui était biaisée.

Me Dominique Larochelle, qui représente le ressortissant d'origine marocaine, a soutenu devant le plus haut tribunal du pays que les services secrets avaient brimé les droits fondamentaux de M. Charkaoui en détruisant les enregistrements et les transcriptions des interrogatoires menés dans le cadre de l'enquête sur lui.

L'avocate de M. Charkaoui affirme par ailleurs que l'enquête du Service canadien du renseignement de sécurité (SCRS) était biaisé et que le ministre de l'Immigration qui a signé le certificat de sécurité en 2003 ne disposait pas de tous les éléments nécessaires pour prendre une décision éclairée.

De l'avis de Me Larochelle, ces manquements justifieraient la révocation du certificat qui a valu 21 mois de détention à son client.

Plusieurs organisations appuient Adil Charkaoui et ont plaidé en sa faveur. C'est notamment le cas de l'Association du Barreau canadien, du Barreau du Québec et d'Amnistie internationale.

La plupart de ces groupes estiment que le SCRS devrait absolument conserver tous les documents, notes et enregistrements susceptibles de servir à incriminer une personne ou de justifier sa détention.

Pour l'avocate d'Amnistie internationale, Vanessa Gruben, il est actuellement impossible pour le juge chargé d'évaluer la pertinence d'un certificat de sécurité de savoir si les renseignements à sa disposition ont été recueillis en ayant recours à des méthodes légales.

Cette question est fondamentale puisque l'histoire prouve que les informations obtenues par des moyens illégaux tels que la torture ne sont pas toujours fiables, a-t-elle expliqué en substance.

Un juge qui se baserait sur de tels renseignements brimerait les droits de l'accusé en plus de contrevenir à plusieurs traités internationaux ratifiés par le Canada, a-t-elle ajouté dans son exposé.

Le procureur général du Canada, représenté par Me Claude Joyal, a répliqué que le SCRS était une entité civile et, qu'en conséquence, sa politique de gestion de l'information devait être différente de celle d'un corps policier.

Il a expliqué que les employés du service pouvaient détruire les documents contenant des informations «inutiles» et «périphériques» dans le but de protéger la vie privée des personnes concernées.

Les renseignements obtenus par le SCRS deviennent en effet publics 20 ans après le décès des individus surveillés.

Il a assuré que cette pratique ne rendait pas les résumés biaisés pour autant.
Le Procureur général de l'Ontario, Me Michael Bernstein, a abondé dans le même sens. Il est allé jusqu'à comparer le SCRS à un hôpital et à une école «qui peuvent parfois se retrouver en possession d'information qui sera un jour utile à une enquête criminelle» mais qui ne sont pas tenus de conserver toutes leurs notes sur tout le monde.

La Cour a pris la cause d'Adil Charkaoui en délibéré. À sa sortie du tribunal, le Montréalais semblait très confiant.

«Je commence à respirer et j'espère que j'aurai justice», a-t-il confié aux médias qui l'attendaient dans le hall de la Cour suprême, à Ottawa.

Son avocate, Me Larochelle, s'est elle aussi dite très optimiste parce qu'elle estime
que le gouvernement a eu beaucoup de mal à justifier son comportement.

«Défendre l'indéfendable, c'est assez difficile. Défendre des politiques du gouvernement qui ne sont pas justifiées, qui ne tiennent pas compte des droits de la personne dans le cadre d'une procédure qui entraîne des conséquences aussi graves pour la vie de la personne, c'est une affaire qui est très difficile», a-t-elle insisté.

Harkat comparaît aussi

Mohamed Harkat sera lui aussi devant les tribunaux aujourd'hui. L'homme d'origine algérienne, mis en liberté sous conditions en mai 2006, a été arrêté mercredi alors qu'il prenait sa douche dans son domicile de la région d'Ottawa. L'Agence des services frontaliers affirme qu'il a violé ses conditions de mise en liberté. M. Harkat contestera cette décision devant la Cour fédérale.

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080131/CPACTUALITES/801310607/6488/CPACTUALITES

Video: Secret Canada - Security Certificates

To view Part I click HERE

To view Part II click HERE

Les tribunaux se pencheront sur les certificats de sécurité

Le mercredi 30 janvier 2008

Mohammed Harkat Photo PC

Presse Canadienne

Les certificats de sécurité qui permettent de détenir indéfiniment et sans procès des personnes soupçonnées de terrorisme seront à nouveau débattus devant les tribunaux, jeudi à Ottawa.

La Cour suprême se penchera en effet sur le cas du Montréalais Adil Charkaoui, qui reproche notamment aux services secrets d'avoir détruit les enregistrements de certains interrogatoires auxquels il s'est prêté, d'avoir mené une enquête biaisée et d'avoir omis de présenter certains éléments de preuve au ministre de l'Immigration qui émet les certificats.

L'enseignant d'origine marocaine estime que ces manquements justifient la révocation du certificat dont il est l'objet depuis 2003 et qui lui a valu 21 mois de détention.

La Cour fédérale, qui siège dans le même édifice, entendra pendant ce temps les avocats de Mohammed Harkat, qui a été arrêté mardi, alors qu'il prenait sa douche chez lui. Le ressortissant d'origine algérienne était en liberté surveillée depuis 2006.

Depuis sa sortie de prison, il doit notamment porter un bracelet électronique et être accompagné en tout temps de sa femme, de sa belle-mère, ou d'un autre gardien autorisé.

Les motifs de son arrestation demeurent flous, mais les autorités ont laissé entendre qu'il n'avait pas respecté toutes les conditions que lui avait imposées le tribunal. Ses proches soutiennent pour leur part qu'il est victime de harcèlement.

«Nous considérons que cette arrestation est un prétexte, un moyen d'entretenir l'hystérie contre le terrorisme au Canada.

Ça sert de justification au gouvernement pour adopter une nouvelle loi injuste», a insisté un ami de la famille Harkat, Christian Legeais.

M. Legeais était au Parlement mercredi en compagnie de proches des cinq hommes musulmans visés par des certificats de sécurité et du président du Conseil musulman de Montréal, l'imam Salam Elmenyawi.

Lors d'un point de presse auquel assistait Adil Charkaoui, ils ont officiellement demandé aux députés de tous les partis de voter contre le projet de loi C-3, qui modifie le régime des certificats de sécurité, jugés inconstitutionnels en février dernier.

La loi prévoit entre autres la nomination «d'avocats spéciaux» comme cela se fait déjà en Grande-Bretagne. Ces procureurs auraient accès au dossier secret du présumé terroriste et pourraient donc mettre en doute la pertinence et l'importance des faits allégués lors d'audiences à huis clos. Il ne pourrait cependant discuter de la preuve avec personne, pas même son client.

D'après les proches des personnes visées par des certificats, les changements proposés sont insuffisants et perpétueraient l'injustice et le racisme. «On ne veut pas une justice à deux vitesse», a insisté la mère d'Adil Charkaoui, Latifa Charkaoui.

À l'instar de groupe de défense des droits humains, les proches des personnes visées par un certificat veulent la disparition pure et simple de cette procédure.

Ils affirment qu'on devrait traiter les présumés terroristes «comme des citoyens canadiens» et leur faire un procès formel au lieu de les enfermer sans même leur dire ce qui leur est reproché.

Le Bloc québécois et le Nouveau Parti démocratique ont déjà laissé savoir qu'ils s'opposeraient à la nouvelle législation telle que formulée. Le sort du projet de loi dépend donc du Parti libéral qui n'a pas encore fait connaître sa position.

L'ancien régime disparaîtra automatiquement le 23 février prochain, qu'Ottawa ait réussi à le remplacer ou pas.

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080130/CPACTUALITES/80130226/1019/CPACTUALITES

Wanted: lawyers to defend accused terrorists

Richard Foot , Canwest News Service

Published: Monday, January 28, 2008

The federal government is having trouble recruiting an experienced pool of lawyers to work as "special advocates" on behalf of terror suspects under Canada's security certificate law.

So far, only 50 lawyers have responded to a month-long, national recruitment campaign by the Department of Justice, aimed at finding a list of experienced practitioners who can defend people facing deportation in secret judicial hearings.

Those 50 applications may be enough from which to find a list of advocates, but they represent only a tiny fraction of the 57,000 practising lawyers in Canada.

Last week, as a result of the poor turnout, the Justice Department extended the application deadline from Jan. 15 to Feb. 1.

"Given the nature of what it is lawyers are being asked to do, it doesn't surprise me that there hasn't been an overwhelming response," says Lorne Waldman, a Toronto lawyer who represented wrongly accused terrorist Maher Arar.

Waldman says many lawyers are deeply conflicted about participating in the controversial system. On the one hand, they feel a duty to ensure people have the best legal defence possible. On the other hand, they consider the law an affront to civil liberties and don't want to lend it legitimacy by taking part.

Some, he says, are worried about being labelled as traitors by colleagues if they participate in the system - an epithet that was thrown at lawyers in Britain who took part in a similar process.

Both the Canadian Bar Association and the Federation of Law Societies of Canada have criticized the proposed security certificate law as unconstitutional.

Security certificates are an extraordinary immigration tool that allows the government to detain and deport foreigners and permanent residents who are considered a threat to national security.

Suspects aren't allowed to see the evidence against them, or participate in the secret judicial hearings to determine their fate.

Three accused terrorists challenged the system at the Supreme Court of Canada, which last year said the law was unconstitutional - but necessary in an age of terrorism - and gave Ottawa one year to reform the law to bring it in line with the Charter of Rights.

The Conservative government hopes to do that with legislation to create special advocates - independent, security-cleared lawyers - to act on behalf of accused persons.

The government says the advocates will be allowed to see the evidence against suspects, but cannot discuss it with them without a judge's explicit permission.

Many critics say that kind of restriction does not satisfy the Constitution and will not allow special advocates to properly defend those accused under the law.

A similar system in the United Kingdom has been harshly criticized by politicians, lawyers and human rights advocates in that country, and also made it difficult for the British government to retain a list of special advocates.

In Canada, "the low number of applications for special advocate positions may stem from concerns about the proposed security certificate legislation, Bill C-3," says Vanessa Gruben, a law professor at the University of Ottawa. "There are concerns among the legal community that the model proposed in Bill C-3 falls short of the constitutional standard set by the Supreme Court."

Waldman says no defence lawyer wants to work in a system that "fundamentally abrogates" the right of an accused to know the evidence against them. He also says that to be effective, special advocates will need skills and experience in the immigration field, plus an understanding of the national anti-terror apparatus.

"It'll be extremely demanding work," he says. "I've talked to some of my close colleagues about whether they're applying. There's a lot of concern about how it's going to operate. But there's also a sense that qualified people should apply, because if we're going to make the system work, we have to have lawyers with experience and commitment on that list."

The current security certificate law will expire next month, unless Parliament passes the new legislation before Feb. 23.

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=c6e2dd8d-cfac-4bbd-9d39-b21067b174ba&k=5234

Liberté conditionnelle rompue pour un présumé terroriste algérien

Le mardi 29 janvier 2008

Mohamed Harkat. Photo PC

Agence France-Presse

Ottawa

Un Algérien soupçonné de terrorisme a été remis en détention, après avoir été accusé d'avoir contrevenu aux termes de sa libération conditionnelle, a indiqué son avocat à l'AFP.

À consulter aussi Lisez d'autres articles sur ces sujets : Peines (88%) Prison (87%) Mohamed Harkat (84%) Actes de terrorisme (76%) Agence France Presse (75%) Me Paul Copeland (71%)

Mohamed Harkat a été arrêté chez lui mardi après-midi et emmené dans les locaux de l'agence canadienne des services frontaliers, à Ottawa, d'où il devait être placé dans un centre de détention, en attendant une décision de justice à son sujet, a déclaré Me Paul Copeland à l'AFP.

Il doit être présenté, dans un délai de 48 heures, à un juge de la Cour fédérale qui décidera de son sort.

Selon son avocat, la principale violation qui lui est reprochée est le fait que sa belle-mère, qui est une des garantes du respect des conditions de sa liberation, n'habitait plus en permanence dans la même maison que lui et sa femme.

M. Harkat n'avait cependant jamais été laissé seul dans la maison, a assuré Me Copeland.

«Sa femme était avec lui à la maison lorsqu'il a été arrêté, alors qu'il prenait sa douche», a-t-il dit.

L'avocat avait par ailleurs prévu, avant même l'arrestation de son client, de présenter lundi prochain une demande au tribunal pour que les conditions de sa libération soient assouplies afin de permettre à sa famille de mener une vie normale.

Mohamed Harkat avait été arrêté en décembre 2002 en vertu d'un «certificat de sécurité», une procédure qui permet aux autorités de détenir sans procès des étrangers soupçonnés de terrorisme sur la base d'informations secrètes.

Il avait obtenu en juin 2006 sa libération conditionnelle, mais devait porter un bracelet électronique, demeurer sous la supervision de son épouse ou d'autres membres de la famille et demander l'autorisation pour effectuer des déplacements ou rencontrer une personne.

Mohamed Harkat est soupçonné par le Service canadien de renseignement et de sécurité (SCRS) de faire partie d'une cellule dormante d'Al-Qaeda.

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080129/CPACTUALITES/801291681/5032/CPACTUALITES

Journalists must answer questions about leaked report in Charkaoui case

The rights of a Montreal man accused of being a terrorist override journalists' privilege to protect their sources, according to a Federal Court ruling issued Friday.

Joël-Denis Bellavance and Gilles Toupin will have to answer questions about how they obtained leaked documents from a retired Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) agent that formed the basis for an article they wrote in June alleging Charkaoui once had conversations about a plan to hijack a plane and fly it into a building in Europe.

The journalists, both reporters for Montreal newspaper La Presse, must answer questions from Charkaoui's lawyers, who want to know more about the source who leaked the CSIS documents.
Noël ruled in favour of Charkaoui, stating that "the administration of justice and Mr. Charkaoui's fundamental rights have primacy over journalistic privilege and protecting sources."

Charkaoui, a Moroccan-born father of three, has been accused of being an al-Qaeda sleeper agent, and is subject to a ministerial security certificate issued in May 2003 that severely restricts his movement and activities.The CSIS documents obtained by Bellavance and Toupin were the main source of information for an article published on June 22, 2007 that alleged Charkaoui attended two al-Qaeda training camps and discussed a bomb plot with Hashim Tahir in June 2000.

The article alleged the leaked document was the basis for the 2003 security certificate against Charkaoui, based on information provided by the source.

In his ruling, Noël wrote that the document — Former Terrorist Training Camps in Afghanistan: Major Sites and Assessment — does exist, but is not part of the body of secret evidence used by the federal government to issue the security certificate.

Charkaoui's lawyers wanted to see the document because they have been denied full access to evidence the government used to justify the certificate.

Charkaoui has acknowledged he had hired Tahir to work in a pizzeria, played soccer with him and saw him regularly at a mosque, but has denied he was involved in a plot to fly a plane into a building.

Bellavance has already appeared at one of Charkaoui's trials to answer questions about the document. During his testimony, he refused to reveal the identity of his CSIS sources, citing journalistic privilege.

Charkaoui is involved in several court cases fighting his security certificate, which could lead to his eventual deportation to Morocco.

Later this year, the Supreme Court will hear his appeal contesting security certificate proceedings launched against him, in which he argues CSIS used tainted evidence to detain him.
The top court struck down ministerial certificates in February 2007, ruling they violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

But the ruling was suspended until next month to allow the federal government sufficient time to recast its security laws.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2008/01/18/qc-charkaoui0118.html

Activists protest security bill

JAN RAVENSBERGEN, The Gazette

Teams of activists launched a one-day blitz of 17 Montreal-region Members of Parliament Friday morning to underline their opposition to new security-certificate legislation which could be given third reading as early
as next week by the House of Commons.

The round of visits is expected to culminate at 3 p.m., with a visit to the St. Laurent-Cartierville riding office of Stéphane Dion, Liberal Opposition leader.

About 50 people are on the road as part of the effort, said Mary Foster, an organizer with Coalition Justice for Adil Charkaoui.

"It's going to be up to the Liberals to stop this" new bill, Foster added, given the current balance of power in the Commons. The Conservative government has a minority and both the Bloc Québecois and the New Democratic
Party have been indicating their members will vote against the bill.

Last February, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered the federal government to come up with a new law governing security certificates by Feb. 23, 2008.

Bill C-3, the legislation that resulted, was introduced by the Conservatives Oct. 22.

"Notably," according to the Coalition, the bill "will continue indefinite detention without charge, secret hearings without the detainee or their lawyer present, use of unreliable evidence obtained under torture, house
arrest, deportation to torture and a two-tiered system of justice."

Representatives of the Canadian Bar Association have told a Commons committee studying C-3 that they believe some provisions of C-3 would not be ruled constitutional.

More: www.jerome.koumbit.org/adil

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=8df9c7bb-7312-471d-a685-f349612e3665&k=64040

A 'serious' concern with fairness

Nov 04, 2007 04:30 AM
Thomas Walkom

In 1996, a 41-year-old Colombian trade unionist applied at the Canadian embassy in Mexico City to immigrate to Canada. Amparo Torres was well-known in the region. She was a founding member of the Union Patriotica, a coalition of leftist political parties created a few years earlier at the behest of Colombia's then president in order to bring an end to decades of guerrilla warfare. She had also been kidnapped by one of the country's right-wing death squads.

Unlike most of the "disappeared" who suffered that fate, she survived and fled to Mexico.

Torres was up front with the Canadian embassy. She didn't hide her politics (she's a Communist) or her family affiliations. Her brother Jorge is a leader of the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC), Colombia's largest, oldest and deadliest guerrilla faction. Her ex-spouse, Luis Urbano, had by 1996 joined FARC and become its international spokesman.

But she herself, she told Canadian officials, did not belong to FARC.

As a high-profile political refugee, she was almost certainly vetted by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (although CSIS won't confirm that). The upshot was that Canada welcomed her as a permanent resident.

She settled in Toronto and got a job in a travel agency. Two sons, now both Canadian citizens, attended university. She married. She continued to be active politically and give speeches.

After one speech, CSIS agents interviewed her about her views. They seemed satisfied.

Then came 9/11 and the war on terror. To a new Colombian government determined to crush its guerrilla opponents, the U.S.-led crusade was a godsend. Normally sensible countries were now in a tizzy over terrorism.

In 2003, Canada officially listed FARC as a terrorist body. A few months later, Torres found CSIS was investigating her again.

This time, she says, agents interviewed her friends and associates. She says they told her boss that if she continued to work there, the company might be proscribed as a terrorist front. Torres was fired.

She hired a lawyer; CSIS replied by upping the ante.

In May 2005, she was informed that a member of the immigration and refugee board, a quasi-judicial tribunal, had begun hearing evidence in secret to determine if she should be deported to Colombia. The hearing is still going on

To Torres, all of this is a nightmare. Neither she nor her lawyer, Raoul Boulakia, are allowed to know the substance of the allegations against her. All they know, on the basis of an edited summary, is that CSIS claims to have "reasonable grounds" to believe that she belongs to a terrorist organization.

Torres has been able to successfully counter some of what the government has presented during open sessions of the hearing. But she can't dispute the meat of the CSIS argument because she simply doesn't know what it is.

So far, the courts have refused to derail the hearing, although on Monday, federal court judge Anne Mactavish ruled that there is potentially a "serious" concern about its fairness.

"This process forces me to constantly remember all the abuses and tragedies I try not to dwell on," writes Torres in her court affidavit. "I live with fear of being deported, tortured and killed.

"It is a constant reminder of my plight in Colombia as it repeats themes of my disappearance in Colombia: . . . being a victim of slander or evidence I am not allowed access to . . . having a life I am trying to establish wrecked; being powerless compared to state actors who act with complete impunity."

Stéphane Dion interpellé

Des organisations de défense des droits de la personne ont manifesté samedi après-midi à Saint-Laurent, dans le nord-ouest de Montréal, où se trouve la circonscription du chef du Parti libéral du Canada, Stéphane Dion.

Les manifestants ont demandé au chef libéral de s'opposer au projet de loi C-3 sur les certificats de sécurité. En vertu de ceux-ci, le gouvernement peut détenir et de juger des immigrants qui ne sont pas citoyens canadiens sans que ces derniers aient accès à la preuve détenue contre eux.

À la suite d'une décision de la Cour suprême, le gouvernement Harper s'apprête à modifier la loi et à permettre ainsi à des avocats spéciaux de voir cette preuve. Toutefois, les personnes qui sont l'objet d'un certificat de sécurité n'auront toujours pas accès à cette preuve.

Adil Charkaoui, lui-même visé par un certificat de sécurité et actuellement en liberté surveillée, était présent à la manifestation. Il a lancé un appel à Stéphane Dion: « On lui demande de se joindre au Bloc québécois et au NPD, de voter contre cette loi injuste. On lui demande tout simplement de jouer son rôle de chef de l'opposition officielle. »

Au total, quelque 200 personnes ont participé à la manifestation, parmi lesquelles on retrouvait des militants d'extrême gauche, de musulmans et de militants des droits de la personne.

Le PLC avait indiqué, lors du dépôt du projet de loi C-3, qu'il n'avait pas l'intention de s'y opposer.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/Montreal/2007/11/17/003-manif-certificats_n.shtml

Photo-reportage: http://photos.cmaq.net/v/nobillc3/

Protesters denounce Bill C-3 legislation

A group of more than 100 protesters took to the streets of Liberal leader Stéphane Dion's riding in St. Laurent yesterday - complete with marching band - asking him to oppose Bill C-3, the recently introduced security-certificate legislation. The proposed legislation "responds to none of the core concerns" raised in a public campaign, said organizers with the Coalition Justice Adil Charkaoui. The marchers delivered an open letter to Dion, signed by 45 groups, laying out a broad array of criticisms of the approach adopted by the minority Conservative government.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=19cf6600-9d8a-4f72-a0fc-297fefb26207

To view photo essay: http://photos.cmaq.net/v/nobillc3/

Adil Charkaoui supporters march

Hundreds of people marched through the streets of Levis on Saturday to show their support for Adil Charkaoui, before attending an Amnesty International Conference. The suspected terrorist was not allowed to attend, but later addressed his supporters via teleconference. Charkaoui was arrested in 2003 under a security certificate and accused of having links with Al Qaida. After spending nearly two years in prison without being charged he was released, but is still subject to a curfew and electronic surveillance.

http://montreal.ctv.ca/cfcf/news/cfcf#news_16612

New Security Certificate

The text of the new law is available HERE

Government revives security certificates

Top court axed anti-terrorism law. 'Special advocates' could see secret evidence

RICHARD FOOT and JULIET O'NEILL, CanWest News Service

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day speaks to journalists in the foyer of the House of Commons yesterday

Eight months after the Supreme Court declared one of Canada's main anti-terrorism laws unconstitutional, the Conservative government has reintroduced the provisions, with changes it says would protect the rights of terrorism suspects.

Legislation unveiled yesterday would preserve the controversial security certificates, but create "special advocates" - lawyers, acting on behalf of the accused, with access to the secret information the government uses to detain and deport them.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day hailed security certificates as "an important tool to protect Canadians from terrorist threats," but acknowledged "the process should protect rights and freedoms in Canada."

Liberal justice critic Ujjal Dosanjh said his party would support the legislation, Bill C-3, in Parliament, thereby avoiding a defeat of the minority government and a federal election.

Dosanjh also said the Liberals would approach the government's planned reintroduction of preventive arrests and investigative hearings, two other anti-terrorism measures that his party rejected this year, "with no preconceived notions or bias."

The government's failed attempt to extend the measures for three years divided the Liberals last winter and sparked weeks of angry debate in the Commons.

Preventive arrest allows an arrest without warrant and three days of detention in a terrorism case. Investigative hearings allow judges to compel individuals to testify in terrorism investigations.

The two provisions expired under a sunset clause in March, and all three opposition parties defeated the government's bid to extend them. Critics said the move hobbled RCMP plans for investigative hearings into the Air India disaster.

Government House leader Peter Van Loan said Sunday the government would reintroduce the two measures through the Senate, even though most legislation starts in the Commons. Yesterday, officials declined to explain the unusual tactic or to say when it might happen.

For now, the government is moving ahead with changes to the security certificates regime - an extraordinary legal measure that allows the government to arrest, imprison and deport foreign nationals or permanent residents suspected of links to organized crime, or who may pose a security risk to Canada.

Introduced in the Immigration Act in 1988, the provision was strengthened after the 9/11 attacks to give authorities a fast and efficient way to remove terrorism suspects from Canada, without having to lay charges in the criminal justice system.

Last year, such certificates were challenged in the Supreme Court by three Muslim men who were accused of terrorist links and awaiting deportation.

In a unanimous ruling written by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, the court said the certificates violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in two ways.

However, the court also acknowledged the necessity of such measures, noting "one of the most fundamental responsibilities of a government is to ensure the security of its citizens."

The court suspended its ruling for a year, specifically telling Parliament to fix the law and bring it in line with the Charter before February 2008.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=d57afc3f-2ac8-4379-ba81-b2ce41b44e76

Canada to appoint advocates for terrorism suspects

Randall Palmer, Reuters

Published: 0 minutes ago

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada intends to appoint British-style special advocates who will be granted access to secret evidence to defend foreigners suspected of terrorism, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said on Monday.

Day introduced a bill that would create the special advocates to meet the demands of the Supreme Court. The court ruled in February that "security certificates" under which the foreign suspects are held are unconstitutional unless someone can challenge any evidence the government may be keeping secret.

The minister dismissed the idea that Canadian security could be jeopardized by the bill or that friendly countries would hesitate to share intelligence if the advocates were able to see the information.

"Many other jurisdictions have similar types of processes in place, so we don't see a problem," Day told reporters.

The certificates apply to six men currently, five Muslim Arabs and one from Sri Lanka. One of the six is in jail and the others have been released with restrictions on their movements as long as they stay in Canada. They are, however, free to leave the country.

Canada has tried to deport the men but they protest their innocence and have said they would be tortured if sent home.

Their lawyers have complained that they have not been able to defend their clients adequately without seeing the evidence against them.

The Supreme Court suspended its judgment for a year, giving Parliament until next February to pass a suitable replacement.

One of the terrorism suspects, Algerian Mohamed Harkat, said in a statement on Friday: "A modified security certificate allows indefinite detention, harsh bail and the use of secret evidence."

Day pointed out that the Supreme Court upheld the use of security certificates as long as the process was modified.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=d9b055be-bfe7-4f1a-b4c6-006e841ef73b&k=95166

Monitoring device to stay, judge rules

Charkaoui also must adhere to all conditions 'to ensure any danger is neutralized'

JAN RAVENSBERGEN, The Gazette

Published: 6 hours ago

Adil Charkaoui, a Montreal man accused by the federal government of being an Al-Qa'ida sleeper agent, will have to keep wearing a global positioning system device that has monitored his every move since early 2005, a judge ruled yesterday.

"The request for Mr. Charkaoui's provisional liberation without conditions is denied," Federal Court Judge Simon Noël concluded in a 26-page judgment favouring the government.

In addition to wearing the device on his ankle, Charkaoui, 34, will have to continue to adhere to 15 other conditions "to ensure any danger is neutralized," the judge said.

Noël left the door open for less strict conditions later.

"It could be that in the future certain of his preventive conditions will be amended," he said.

"The court has always invited the parties to discuss this with the goal of arriving at an agreement that could be ratified" by a judge.

The Moroccan-born Charkaoui, a permanent resident of Canada, requested outright revocation of all conditions in June.

He has been fighting possible deportation.

Charkaoui could not be reached for comment yesterday.

"Of course, he is disappointed," Johanne Doyon, one of his lawyers, said late yesterday. He intends to appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal, she added.

Charkaoui remains unable to travel outside Montreal without Noël's permission.

Among the other conditions, he is still required:

- To be supervised at his work, as a primary-school teacher.

- To be accompanied at all times by specified people when outside his home.

- Not to use the Internet or cellphones.

Charkaoui was imprisoned in May 2003 under a federal security certificate. He stayed behind bars, because of government allegations that he was a sleeper agent for the Al-Qa'ida terrorist network, until his conditional release Feb. 17, 2005.

He has repeatedly demanded that all evidence against him be made public.

In an August hearing, his lawyers argued that Ahmed Ressam - a Montrealer convicted in 2001 of plotting to blow up Los Angeles International Airport - has retracted allegations against Charkaoui.

But in his ruling, Noël said he could not conclude Ressam had lied on two separate occasions in January 2002, when Ressam told the Canadian Security Intelligence Service he recognized Charkaoui's picture and knew him as Zubeir Al-Maghrebi.

Ressam remains jailed in the United States.

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in February this year that the security-certificate process used against Charkaoui violated the federal Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and gave Parliament a year to draft a new approach.

Because of the Supreme Court ruling, Charkaoui's lawyers argued before Noël, any conditions imposed on Charkaoui are illegal.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=8919999e-5636-40e1-8443-55f108de589c

Charkaoui demande à nouveau la liberté

Adil Charkaoui

Le Marocain Adil Charkaoui se retrouvera devant les tribunaux, lundi, pour demander la réouverture de son dossier et l'abandon des restrictions qui lui sont imposées depuis 2005 en vertu d'un certificat de sécurité.

Le présumé terroriste montréalais compte faire valoir devant la Cour fédérale que les conditions qui encadrent sa liberté sont invivables et injustes dans la mesure où il clame depuis 2003 son innocence.

Les avocats de M. Charkaoui, soupçonné par Ottawa d'être un agent dormant d'Al-Qaïda, tenteront de convaincre la justice canadienne de prendre en considération une lettre de rétractation de son principal dénonciateur, le terroriste Ahmed Ressam.

M. Ressam, incarcéré aux États-Unis pour avoir tenté de faire exploser, en 1999, l'aéroport de Los Angeles, en Californie, a fait parvenir, voilà quelques mois, une lettre au Journal de Montréal dans laquelle il dit avoir menti aux enquêteurs canadiens en identifiant Adil Charkaoui sur une photo prise dans un camp d'entraînement d'Al-Qaïda en Afghanistan.

C'est d'ailleurs en se basant en partie sur ce témoignage que les services secrets canadiens auraient justifié leur demande pour mettre Adil Charkaoui sous les verrous en 2003.

Et le mois dernier, les procureurs du gouvernement ont affirmé que si Ahmed Ressam reconnaissait avoir menti une première fois, il pourrait tout aussi bien avoir menti de nouveau en essayant de disculper M. Charkaoui.

Adil Charkaoui, emprisonné pendant 21 mois avant d'être libéré sous de strictes conditions, en 2005, demande, entre autres, à pouvoir enlever le bracelet GPS qui lui est imposé jour et nuit depuis sa sortie de prison. Ottawa exige aussi à ce résident permanent d'origine marocaine d'être accompagné en tout temps lorsqu'il sort de chez lui et de ne plus utiliser Internet.

Un procureur du gouvernement fédéral a expliqué, toujours le mois dernier, que les conditions « invivables » qui sont imposées à Adil Charkaoui n'ont pas empêché ce dernier, outre de porter sa cause devant la Cour suprême canadienne, de finir ses études, de se trouver du travail comme professeur de français et d'aller visiter de la famille à l'extérieur de Montréal.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/National/2007/09/24/001-charkaoui-cour-lundi.shtml

Gitmo North's Last Prisoner in Limbo After 6 Years

by Michelle Shephard
The Toronto Star
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/253291
September 5, 2007

BATH, Ont.– Hassan Almrei strolls from his cell wearing a pressed
cream shirt, dress pants and polished black shoes. If not for the
barbed wire behind him, the 33-year-old Syrian could be on his way
to a corporate board meeting, not an interview with a journalist
as the remaining detainee in a prison dubbed "Guantanamo North."

Almrei has fought a series of public and legal battles to get to
this point. Over the six years of his detention he has stopped
eating, sometimes for weeks at a time, to pressure the government
to grant him privileges like wearing a watch, or stopping the
daily strip searches.

"I don't think I should have to go through nine or 10 hunger
strikes while I'm in prison to know what time it is, to have shoes
on my feet," he said during an interview with the Toronto Star
inside the prison.

Last summer, he was able to make his first phone call to relatives
in Saudi Arabia. "I haven't been able to call them for years. I
had to go on a hunger strike just to call my mom and tell her,
`Look, I'm alive'. "

There are no other prisoners in the $3.2 million specially
designed prison on the grounds of Millhaven's maximum-security
penitentiary near Kingston – only Almrei, who was arrested one
month after the 9/11 attacks for alleged connections to Al Qaeda.
He has never been charged with a criminal offence. Four other
suspects were released on stringent conditions.

A bail decision is pending any day now for Almrei, who came to
Canada from Saudi Arabia in 1999 as a landed immigrant and ran an
unsuccessful pita restaurant in Yorkville before his arrest.

But he faces one obstacle in his release that the other suspects
didn't have. Almrei is not married, nor does he have any family in
Canada. That means despite support he has received from a number
of high-profile Canadians, and his willingness to wear a GPS
monitoring bracelet, he can't offer the security of a
24-hour-a-day supervisor.

When the Kingston Immigration Holding Centre opened last year,
Almrei's supporters called it Guantanamo North. But Almrei himself
is quick to note the differences between his confinement and the
imprisonment of 355 terrorism suspects at the U.S. base in
southeastern Cuba. "It's a million times different than Guantanamo
Bay, of course it is, and you know what, I'm lucky to be detained
in this country. I'm not denying that. (But) they're not talking
about the colour of the clothes, it's the principle. The principle
of Guantanamo Bay."

And like the legal quagmire that is Guantanamo, there is no
foreseeable end to Almrei's case.

Six months ago, the Supreme Court stuck down key provisions of the
immigration law that keeps him behind bars. National security
certificates had been used in rare cases to deport non-citizens
deemed a risk to Canada. But the court ruled the law was
unconstitutional because it allows the government to rely on
secret evidence from Canada's spy service, without giving
defendants a chance to refute the allegations. Parliament was
given a year to amend the law before it's declared invalid.

If Almrei's most recent attempt to get bail is denied, he'll
remain in prison until Parliament enacts a new law – and he could
again face deportation under the new system.

Hanging over the proceedings is the unresolved question as to
whether Canada will knowingly deport non-citizens to face torture
in their home countries. All five of the men – from Syria, Egypt,
Morocco and Algeria – say they will be tortured or killed if
returned, and in some instances the Canadian government has agreed
that's likely.

A 2002 Supreme Court decision ruled deportations could occur only
in "exceptional circumstances," but did not elaborate. That
question is expected to again go before the Supreme Court, which
means months, if not years more before the issue is decided.

"After six years in prison without being charged with any single
crime, I think the Canadian people, the Canadian public, should
come to the conclusion themselves ... that after all these years,
they cannot come (up) with one single ... real crime to show the
public this is dangerous to the public," Almrei said. "I think the
public should say enough is enough, that's it."

In a July bail hearing, a spy with the Canadian Security
Intelligence Service said the government believes Almrei supports
Al Qaeda's ideology and there is classified evidence that proves
it. "The Service's position is we are not willing to take a chance
with this person being out unsupervised and free to resume his
activities, given that we have no evidence that he has shed his
prior beliefs," the agent testified.

While disillusioned by the federal government, Almrei said he has
only grown to love his adopted country more during his incarceration.

"Even though I'm in jail now, people may think I have some anger,
or sorry I came to this country, (but) even if I knew before I
came this is what would happen to me, I still would have come to
this country. Why? After all these years behind bars I came to
know many, many Canadian people, which I really have respect and
admiration for them. I feel it's worth it."

Almrei checks his new watch. The 90 minutes are done. He saunters
back to his cell for another day behind bars.

Security Certificates and Detention: the government responds

In mid-July, the government issued its response to the Parliamentary Committee on Public Safety’s sub-committee report on the Anti-Terrorism Act and security certificates. It affirms the government’s intention of continuing to use security certificates. Although the Supreme Court’s central finding in the Charkaoui case was that the security process violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the report suggests that the Court simply ruled that “the Government could do more to protect the rights of the individual”. The report also states that the government is continuing to review the idea of a ‘special advocate’ procedure and will table legislation on this issue in the near future.

In late August, the government also issued its response to the Parliamentary Committee on Citizenship and Immigration’s report on detention conditions for security certificate detainees. The response rejects most of the recommendations, including significant ones such as using criminal prosecutions rather than immigration procedures, having the Correctional Investigator oversee the Kingston facility, and having a complaints mechanism for Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). The government reported some changes in line with recommendations such as: improved telephone access, better canteen facilities, and suspending the head count. The only recommendation it welcomed is the call for adequate resources for police and intelligence services.

The government response to the report on the Anti-Terrorism Act and security certificates response is available at: http://tinyurl.com/2ylkq8

The government response to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration’s report on security certificate detention is available at: http://tinyurl.com/2bctk4

The CCR has published a position in follow up to the Charkaoui decision, available at http://www.ccrweb.ca/documents/Certificates07.pdf

For media coverage of the report on the Anti-Terrorism Act and security certificates, see:
‘Tories launch bid to restore anti-terror powers’, The Globe and Mail, 19 July 2007. Available online at: http://tinyurl.com/2sfs8t

For media coverage of the report on security certificate detention, see:
‘Sex, cooking not allowed for detained terrorism suspects’, The Globe and Mail, 28 August 2007. Available online at: http://tinyurl.com/28tcfc

-Canadian Council for Refugees E-Chronicle Vol. 2 #5, 4 September 2007

Les certificats de sécurité et la détention : le gouvernement répond

À la mi-juillet, le gouvernement a publié sa réponse au rapport sur la Loi antiterroriste et les certificats de sécurité du sous-comité du Comité parlementaire sur la sécurité publique. Le gouvernement affirme son intention de continuer à utiliser les certificats de sécurité. Alors que la conclusion principale de la Cour suprême dans le cas Charkaoui était que le processus de sécurité viole la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, le rapport mentionne que la Cour a simplement suggéré que « le gouvernement peut faire davantage pour protéger les droits de l’individu ». Le rapport mentionne également que le gouvernement continue de revoir la proposition d’une procédure de « recours à des avocats indépendants » et déposera un projet de loi sur cette question dans un avenir rapproché.

À la fin août, le gouvernement a également publié sa réponse au rapport du Comité permanent de la citoyenneté et l’immigration sur les conditions de détention des détenus en vertu d’un certificat de sécurité. La réponse rejette la plupart des recommandations, dont des recommandations importantes telles que l’utilisation de poursuites criminelles plutôt que de procédures d’immigration, la surveillance du centre de détention de Kingston par l’enquêteur correctionnel et la mise en place d’un mécanisme de plainte pour l’Agence des services frontaliers du Canada. Le gouvernement a annoncé quelques changements en lien avec les recommandations tels que : un meilleur accès au téléphone, de meilleurs services de cantine, et la suspension du dénombrement quotidien. La seule recommandation que le gouvernement a accueilli avec enthousiasme est la demande de ressources adéquates pour les services de police et de renseignements.

La réponse du gouvernement au rapport sur la Loi antiterroriste et les certificats de sécurité est disponible à : http://tinyurl.com/yquajo

La réponse du gouvernement au rapport du Comité permanent de la citoyenneté et de l’immigration sur les centres de détention et les certificats de sécurité est disponible à :
http://tinyurl.com/354hnq

Le CCR a publié une position suite à la décision Charkaoui, disponible à
http://www.ccrweb.ca/documents/Certificats07.pdf

La couverture médiatique en anglais du rapport sur la loi antiterroriste et les certificats de sécurité est disponible à :
‘Tories launch bid to restore anti-terror powers’, The Globe and Mail, 19 juillet 2007. http://tinyurl.com/2sfs8t

La couverture médiatique en anglais du rapport sur les centres de détention et les certificats de sécurité est disponible à:
‘Sex, cooking not allowed for detained terrorism suspects’, The Globe and Mail, 28 août 2007. http://tinyurl.com/28tcfc

- Chronique du Conseil canadien pour les réfugiés Vol. 2 #5, 4 septembre 2007