by Jessica Squires Source: Socialist Worker URL: [link] Date: February, 2011 On January 20, Mohamed Harkat was served with a deportation order. The recent ruling of his security certificate as “reasonable” by the federal court was automatically converted into the order. The next step will be a danger assessment by the minister of immigration or his delegate. The court also ruled in mid-January that a constitutional appeal was permissible. Both processes will take some time, and will delay any eventual deportation. Harkat is now at risk of forced removal to torture in Algeria. The conditions that led Canada to grant Harkat refugee status have not disappeared; the danger to him if deported to Algeria has multiplied because of the allegations against him. Under international law, no deportations should take place to countries where there is risk of death or torture—a principle referred to as “no refoulement.” Amnesty International has stated that there is a significant risk of torture in Algeria. Even the US State Department states in its 2008 country report on Algeria that torture and impunity “remains a problem.” The government may seek so-called “diplomatic assurances”—promises of safe treatment—from countries to which it seeks to deport individuals. But Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have concluded that “diplomatic assurances” are empty promises. A February 2009 International Commission of Jurists report also calls on governments “not to rely on diplomatic assurances or other forms of non-binding agreements to transfer individuals when there is a real risk of serious human rights violations.” Despite this, in its most recent report to the UN Committee Against Torture, Canada claims it can rely on monitoring arrangements in situations where diplomatic assurances are secured. Numerous international examples show this claim to be false. If there is the possibility of torture with impunity, there is the probability of secrecy. Diplomatic assurances cannot be relied upon under any circumstances. A Supreme Court of Canada appeal in 2007 ruled the earlier version of the security certificate law unconstitutional. The coming appeal will again draw attention to the unconstitutionality of the Canadian security certificate process. Mohamed Harkat has never been charged with a crime. He denies all allegations. He is still waiting for justice. Mobilization is essential. The focus of the Justice for Mohamed Harkat Committee is presently the new Statement Against Security Certificates. It is urgent that union locals and federations, social justice groups, and mass membership organizations of all kinds, as well as individuals, endorse the statement, which calls for due process for those detained under certificates and subsequently denied their human rights. To endorse the statement, sign online or download and print for circulation, visit www.harkatstatement.com

© 2011 Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated).