Original author: CTV.ca News Staff
Source: CTV.ca
URL: [link]

(also several video news clips at that link)
Date: June 13 2006


The Supreme Court of Canada heard arguments Tuesday that the federal government is violating the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by holding foreign terror suspects indefinitely using security certificates.

The security certificates allow the government to detain the suspects without having to publicly disclose evidence, even to defence lawyers.

"Cases should be heard fully and publicly by an independent and impartial court," Johanne Doyon, lawyer for Moroccan-born Adil Charkaoui told the court.Doyon is one of several lawyers involved in the three day hearing arguing that the certificates violate the Charter of Rights as well as Canada's obligations under international human rights. Currently, five men are detained under the certificates and are facing deportation. They are accused by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) of having links to the al Qaeda terrorist network. All deny the accusations. Under federal law, their hearings were held in private with only vague summaries of the evidence against the men provided to defence lawyers. Three of the men -- Charkaoui, Algerian-born Mohamed Harkat and Syrian native Hassan Almrei -- are being represented at the hearings. Harket was recently granted bail and is due to be released this week. Charkaoui has also been released on bail. Almrei is still in jail with two others -- Egyptian-born Mohammad Mahjoub, fellow Egyptian Mahmoud Jaballah -- who are not involved in this legal challenge. Charkaoui, 32, compared the jailing to that taking place at Guantanamo. "We're here after three years of struggle because we want justice," he said outside the courtroom. "I'm asking the same rights as any human being in this country... we cannot allow Guantanamo in Canada." While all of the suspects' lawyers claim the security certificate initiative should be removed since it violates the Charter of Rights, they vary on what tactics should replace it. Doyon argued that all evidence should be made public but lawyers for Harkat and Almrei suggested adopting the hybrid system used in Britain. Under the system, security-cleared lawyers would attend the hearings under the title of "special advocates" and would be able to challenge allegations made by the government. "I think there has to be a special advocate (in the Canadian system)," Harkat's lawyer, Paul Copeland told the court. "Without a model of that sort, it violates fundamental justice." The "special advocates" suggestion was well received by Justices Ian Binnie, Rosalie Abella and Louis LeBel who all asked for more information on how the system worked. Debate also sparked over what options Canada has if terrorist suspects claimed they would be tortured if sent back to their native lands. "Would it be that anyone, no matter how dangerous or how terrible, would have to be left here?" Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin asked. Almrei's lawyer John Norris said that may be the only solution (for detainees to be left in prison) in "intractable cases." But he claimed that in most cases they should be permitted to be released under strict conditions and a watchful government eye. Mahjoub's wife, Moona el-Fouli, commented on the influence that the recent terrorist suspects' arrests in Toronto may have on the hearings. "It happened at a specific timing and I believe it is a big political act happening here," Elfouli told CTV Newsnet Tuesday. "I don't think it will affect the case but judges are human beings and can be affected by what's going on." "Those 17 being charged -- I hope they have a fair trial where as my husband and those charged haven't had a fair trial and I would like that for them too." She said the ordeal has been difficult, especially for her family. "It's a complete stress and a complete dilemma," el-Fouli said. "My eight-year-old wrote a statement to the media saying 'You are not only jailing my family you are jailing our hearts too.'" 'Two-tier' justice

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day supports the use of security certificates, and said he hopes the Supreme Court will uphold their use. The minister stressed that those held under security certificates have options to either appeal, or to accept the deportation order. "They can choose to be subject to the security certificate. That means you'll have your full appeal, but you have to be maintained in detention; or you can go back to your country of origin," Day said Monday night on CTV's Mike Duffy Live. "As a matter of fact . . . the whole time the appeal process goes on, at any time they're free to leave and return to their country of origin." The security certificates are based on information provided by CSIS. They are signed by the public safety minister and the immigration minister. Once they're signed, they are referred to a Federal Court judge who assesses the reasonableness of the certificate. That is done in private, with only a summary provided to the defendants. Matthew Behrens, head of the Campaign to Stop Secret Trials, said the security certificates are dangerous because the judge is not determining whether the evidence against the defendant is correct, but if the security certificate is warranted. "On the basis of that, we're detaining people indefinitely for as long as six years, and in the process of trying to deport them to countries where we know they will be tortured or killed," Behrens told CTV's Canada AM on Tuesday. Behrens said there shouldn't be "two tiers of justice -- one of citizens and one for non-citizens." "If you're guilty of a crime, you should be charged and brought before a court, allowed to see the case against you and answer it. "That's all these men are asking for." The SCC isn't expected to make a decision for a few months. © 2006 CTV Inc. All Rights Reserved.