Note: This piece was subsequently published on March 26, 2009 in the StarPhoenix. Available online here
Due process is a long-standing Canadian principle. It is enshrined in our legal tradition as a safeguard against the denial of liberty. It is a part of our liberal democracy that distinctly separates us from the dictatorships scattered around the world today. Yet, certain Canadians are being apparently denied their basic rights as citizens.
Consider the case of Abousfian Abdelrazik. Since 2003, Abdelrazik has languished in limbo in Khartoum, Sudan and currently lives in the lobby of the Canadian embassy. His ill-fated trip to Khartoum in 2003 to visit his ailing mother ended in secret detention under the country’s notorious domestic security agency, which newly de-classified documents show acted on the request of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS).
He was repeatedly detained for a total of nineteen months. No charges. No trial. No conviction. A Canadian citizen – arbitrarily detained at the behest of Canada, by a disreputable foreign regime whose president was indicted this month by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. Abdelrazik says he was tortured by his Sudanese captors, and has the scars to show it.
Sudan’s dismal human rights record speaks for itself. CSIS agents visited and interrogated Abdelrazik during his imprisonment. Documents reveal that Canadian diplomats in Khartoum were told to not provide him with his right to consular support during interrogations by Sudanese and American officials.
Today, Abdelrazik lives in virtual exile – denied the right to come back to Canada and to his family. Sudan says it has no reason to hold him and has cleared him of the suspicions laid out by CSIS. It even offered to fly him back to Canada.
Although the federal government has tried to get Abdelrazik removed from an international no-fly list, it has still raised road-blocks to prevent his return. When he did find ways to return, like arranging a flight out of Sudan, he was refused a passport. Why?
It is alarming to see Sudan more committed to releasing a Canadian than us. When we unlawfully outsource the detention and interrogation of one of our own to an authoritarian state, then we are going down a frightening path of injustice.
Another troubling case is that of Canadian Omar Khadr – a story well known to many of us. Captured as a child soldier in Afghanistan at the age of 15 and held for more than six years at the Guantanamo detention facility without conviction, Omar is the last Western citizen languishing in a place that exists outside the norms of law. His Canadian lawyer, Dennis Edney, has said Omar is a broken person.
Although U.S. president Barack Obama has frozen “trial” proceedings at Guantanamo and is slated to shut the facility down, we have yet to intervene and repatriate this young citizen. This stands in stark contrast to other Western nations like the United Kingdom and France, which have already repatriated their nationals.
For ourselves and our country, some important questions need to be asked. What has happened to the value of Canadian citizenship? Are we being parochial and selective in upholding the rights of our citizens?
And, perhaps most importantly, have we learned from the perilous mistakes that were brought to light during the Arar Inquiry? At this point, it does not seem like we have.
Our government must provide answers and address the unjust plight of Abdelrazik. Indeed, his case and that of Khadr demonstrate a harmful and dangerous erosion of fundamental justice and must not be taken lightly.
At the same time, our courts exist for a reason and they constitute the proper forum to mete out justice with transparency and due process. Canadian courts have successfully convicted those charged with terrorism under the Criminal Code. For example, Momin Khawaja of Ottawa was found guilty of such offences in October 2008 and and was recently sentenced to 10.5 years of jail time.
Yet, for over five years, no grounds or evidence have been offered regarding Abdelrazik. And for six years, the Americans have failed to create a just process for Khadr that is consistent with legal norms and international law.
There is no doubt that national security and collective safety are critical in times like these. But the inalienable rights and citizenship of every Canadian must be upheld and respected.
Let us stand by the timeless Canadian edifice that defines our values and separates us from the agents of chaos and the regimes of repression: the rule of law. In our cherished democracy, real security is the preservation of not only human life, but also of human dignity.
Kashif Ahmed of Law is Cool is a Board Member of CAIR-CAN. Note that this piece is provided for interest alone.
Re your quote from Dennis Edney that Omar Khadr is “a broken person.”
In late January, Edney was quoted by Michelle Shephard as saying that Omar Khadr is “a calm and peaceful person.” http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/575286
I argued for months that Omar Khadr should be repatriated:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlvs0o7DZAQ
and that Stephen Harper is ignoring the SCC ruling on Khadr last May:
http://fakirsca.blogspot.com/2009/02/life-and-times-of-omar-khadr.html
I agree with you that CSIS has serious issues and CSIS head Jim Rudd is calling for an investigation into Abdelrazik’s case: http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/606062
But I am no longer convinced that Omar Khadr should be repatriated. It may be that CSIS knows something we don’t about the environment to which Omar Khadr would be returning.
I personally heard Mr. Edney speak about the plight of Omar Khadr, as he guest lectured at my Law school. And he indeed did say that Omar was a “broken” person because of the physical mistreatment meted out and his psychological state.
Environment to which he would be returning in Canada? That justifies keeping a Canadian citizen in legal limbo with no due process?
Dennis Edney says he has a “rehabilitation” plan for Omar, supported by many Canadian organizations and specialists. If CSIS has concerns, they should lay them out. But I suspect this doesn’t have anything to do with our respective security agencies.
They certainly have a tough job, but the Rule of Law is absolutely clear and necessary. The rights of Canadian citizens must be upheld and respected.
I am not disputing that Dennis Edney has told you that Omar Khadr is a “broken person.”
Nevertheless, Dennis Edney has also said in other places that Omar Khadr is “a calm and peaceful person,” “a lovely person.” Michelle Shephard is an award-winning journalist, and the author of a book on Omar Khadr, “Guantanamo’s child.” I have met her, and I really doubt that she mis-quoted Edney. I have given the link to Michelle’s story in my previous comment. So there is the reality, whether you like it or not: Dennis Edney has given different descriptions of Omar Khadr in different places.
Make of that what you will.
I agree with you completely that law and morality would dictate that Omar Khadr should be repatriated. Nevertheless, I think there is a problem that we are not being told about. You say the government should tell us – there may be a difference between knowing and being able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt – which is what the government would have to do if it was to make its concerns public.
Dennis Edney’s “Rehabilitation Plan” names no names except that of King’s College:
“An Oversight Committee will include but not limited to institutions and organizations representing the legal system, medical system and community, the educational system and community, the public service system and community, and the spiritual institutions and community representing several major faith based traditions.
“This Oversight Committee will guide, direct and supervise the work of specialist professionals comprising the Khadr transition team. The transition team will bring together physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, temporal and spiritual counselors, specialists in rehabilitation and reintegration of child soldiers, professionals versed in treating post traumatic stress, teachers and educators, and other professionals as requested and required by the Oversight Committee.
“To illustrate, the Khadr Transition team would include educators who would deliver a custom–designed schooling curriculum for Omar (which will be designed by King’s University College, Edmonton, Alberta, at their expense, and delivered in a home schooling enviroment) to bring him to the level of passing standard Canadian achievement tests.
“The spiritual team would include leading clerics of the Muslim faith who belong to the mainstream of Canadian Muslims who are the majority that categorically denounces and opposes terrorism and radicalism; to impart to Omar the core message of humility, public service, peace and co – existence that is at the heart of Muslim teaching.
“We see Omar living separate and apart from his family in another family setting until the Oversight Committee is advised by the Transition Team that Omar has developed the strengths to re-enter everyday life in Canada. This approach has the understanding and approval of Omar’s immediate family.
“Much of Omar’s financial living costs will be borne by Canadian Muslim Organizations.”
(From Dennis Edney’s February 2009 letter to Stephen Harper.)
Who would be on Dennis Edney’s “Oversight Committee? Which “Muslim organizations” would be looking after Omar Khadr and bearing the costs?
It’s all very vague.
Let me just say once again, that you are right: there is no concern of CSIS that could justify abrogating the law and the morality pertaining to Omar Khadr’s case. But it’s unfortunate that our government does not feel it can be honest with us about what the real problem is with repatriating Omar Khadr. Clearly the problem is not the law. The law is clear, as I have said in my blog post, given in my previous comment. Perhaps if the nation knew what the problem is, then it could be addressed and resolved. I am convinced that there is a problem the government is not telling us about, and that it has to do with CSIS concerns about the environment to which Omar Khadr would be returning. Whatever the problem is, it cannot be resolved until it is openly addressed.