by Mohammed Adam
Source: The Ottawa Citizen
URL: [link]
Date: January 27, 2011


OTTAWA — Even as the federal government was aggressively pursuing security certificate cases against Mohamed Harkat and others in court, senior officials were quietly reviewing the system and considering alternatives, newly released access to information documents show.

Highlighting the dilemma facing the government on the controversial security certificate system, the documents show that a number of high-level inter-departmental meetings were held in 2009 and last year to consider changes. The working groups, which included assistant deputy ministers, discussed:

• Alternatives to Removal (of people considered a threat, from Canada).

• Diplomatic Assurances (from countries that they will not torture returned detainees.)

• Evaluation of the Security Certificate Initiative and

• Alternatives to Removal Options in the Criminal Law, an attempt to explore criminal code provisions that could be used against those who pose a threat to the country.

Large sections of the documents from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, obtained by York University researcher and PhD student Michael Larsen, are heavily redacted. But it is clear that the meetings were seeking new ways to deal with people held under the security certificates.The working group examining alternatives to removal for instance, was given nine to 10 months to complete its work and offer some options. What the group recommended is unknown.

The recommendation of the group dealing with how to treat with assurances on torture from countries with histories of torturing people, is blacked out. But the documents note that while Canada has obtained such assurances before from Egypt, China and Sri Lanka, “to date, Canada has not been able to rely on such assurances to deport individuals to countries where they might otherwise face substantial risk of torture.”

The documents, however, note that in the United Kingdom, the House of Lords, the highest court in the land, allowed a deportation to Algeria after a memorandum of understanding against torture was negotiated by the British government.

This is of particular significance to Harkat because he has been served with a deportation order to Algeria, where he says he would be tortured and potentially killed.

Norm Boxall, one of Harkat’s lawyers, said Thursday that welcome as the review is, it is following the same pattern that Harkat’s hearing took by keeping people in the dark. He made it clear that whatever the government is contemplating, Harkat’s lawyers will have no confidence in any assurance obtained from the Algerian government that it will not torture their client if he were returned to the country.

“Our view is that diplomatic assurances from governments that torture are not worth the paper they are written on,” Boxall said.

“What’s the word of a torturer worth?”

Security certificates are used to detain non-Canadians who are considered a danger to the country, but critics have long maintained that criminal law could easily be used. The only reason the government has sidestepped the criminal justice system is because it wants to conduct hearings in secret and be able to use questionable information. The documents seem to acknowledge the viability of criminal law in such cases, noting that “there is a wide range of offences that may criminalize the behaviour of those who pose a security threat to Canada.”

Larsen, a researcher at the York University Centre for International and Security Studies, said he asked for the documents because he wanted to bring the secret review into the public domain. Decisions that affect the fundamental rights of people and relations with foreign governments, should be made in the light of day so Canadians can participate if they wish. He worries that the government will make the decisions in secret and then rush them through without proper debate.

“These are not state secrets. It looks as if they are looking for alternatives and there’s no harm that can come from transparency. I am worried that a lot of it won’t be made public,” he said.

“I want a public debate.”

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

© 2008 - 2009 Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved.