Original author: Janice Tibbetts
Source: The Ottawa Citizen
URL: [link] (subscribers only)
Date: June 07, 2006


Under a shadow of revived anti-terrorism sentiment, the Supreme Court of Canada will spend three days next week examining one of the most controversial laws in the country involving terror suspects -- whether they can be detained indefinitely, without charges and without knowing the case against them.

The accusations of a homegrown terrorist plot are hardening Canadian attitudes toward terror suspects across the board and the alleged security threat could even be on the minds of the Supreme Court judges as they wrestle with balancing constitutional rights and public safety, experts said yesterday.There were also cautions that the appeals before the Supreme Court involve a distinctly different issue than the one surrounding the 15 Canadian terror suspects who appeared in court yesterday.

At issue in the Supreme Court is whether three non-citizens, who are suspected of having terrorist ties, can be held in jail without charges indefinitely and deported based on secret evidence that they have no means of challenging.

Faisal Kutty, vice-chairman of the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the judges will be put in a "tight situation" as they try to balance constitutional rights and national security at a time when Canadian attitudes are hardening toward terror suspects.

"Judges have been on the record saying 'we're human too.' What's out there impacts them too," he said.

Clayton Ruby, a Toronto lawyer and champion of civil liberties, said he does not believe the Supreme Court judges will be influenced at all by recent events, regardless of what the public thinks.

"I think they take into account what's happening in the real world, but so far you've got charges and they know the distinction between charges and conviction."

The central dilemma before the Supreme Court is how far the federal government can go in restricting civil liberties and freedoms. The security certificates, permitted under the Immigration Act, have been widely described as one of the most draconian measures implemented by the federal government.

Adil Charkaoui, a Moroccan-born permanent resident of Canada who is accused by authorities of being an al-Qaeda sleeper agent, is the lead appellant in the three cases. He is challenging virtually every aspect of the certificates on the grounds that they're a flagrant violation of several sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Canada's international human rights commitments.

Mr. Charkaoui is a father of three who has been a resident of Canada for more than a decade. He was arrested in May 2003 and released on bail with strict conditions almost two years later.

The court will also consider the cases of Mohamed Harkat, an Algerian-born gas station attendant from Ottawa who was jailed in December 2002 as an alleged al-Qaeda suspect without any charges being laid against him, and Hassan Almrei, a Syrian-born refugee who has been detained since October 2001, often in solitary confinement.

All three men face deportation under the certificates, possibly to face torture in their home countries.

The certificates, signed by two federal cabinet ministers, give the government the right to hold suspects indefinitely without charges as judges decide whether they pose a threat to Canadian security. Under the law, judges rely on secret evidence from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service that is not shared with the suspects, preventing them from mounting a defence.

Alexi Woods, a spokeswoman for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said the cases of the three men and those of the Canadians charged yesterday with engineering a terrorist cell are starkly different.

The Canadians, who have been charged under the Criminal Code, will have full access to the case against them, she said, adding that she believes the public -- and certainly the judges -- will be able to differentiate.

"I have faith in our Supreme Court," she said.

Mohamed Boudjenane, the executive director of the Canadian Arab Federation, agreed, saying: "Judges and the Supreme Court are supposed to be very independent from what the public thinks, or the timing."

© 2006 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc.. All rights reserved.

______________
Len Bush
National Representative National Union of Public and
General Employees
15 Auriga Drive, Nepean, ON, Canada, K2E 1B7
(613) 228-9800 / (613) 228-9801 (fax)
[email] / [link]