Info

March and Rally for Mohamed Harkat

March and Rally Press Release

Who is Mohamed Harkat and why is he in jail?

Urgent Action Required

Justice for Mohamed Harkat flyer 

Mohamed Harkat; ‘Not a Criminal Case’ 

Vigil Press Release

Without Due Process

Mahjoub Bail

Jaballah Hearing

Words from Amnesty International

Dream

Secret Trials in Canada Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACTS:

Sophie Harkat (for interviews in French and English leading up to, during and following the march)

Tel: (613) 290-9144 (cell) or (613) 822-4445

Brenda Inouye, Direct Action Casework Ottawa (DACO)

Tel: (613) 237-1717 or (613) 231-4567

March and Rally for Mohamed Harkat

Ottawa - February 26, 2003 - On Sunday March 2nd at 2:00 pm, starting at the Human Rights Monument at Elgin and Lisgar in Ottawa, there will be a march and rally in support of Mohamed Harkat, who is currently in jail and faces deportation to Algeria where he could be killed. Mr. Harkat has been in Canada since 1995, and was given refugee status in 1997 after making the claim that he faced persecution from the Algerian government if he were to return. On December 10th, 2002 Mr. Harkat was arrested outside his home in Ottawa by undercover police. Since then he has been in jail without any charges under the allegation that he is linked to Islamic terrorist groups and activities.

Mr. Harkat denies any involvement with any terrorist organizations. Mr. Harkat's wife Sophie and his lawyer Bruce Engel believe Mr. Harkat is innocent. Mr. Engel has seen no evidence to support the allegation. Sophie Harkat says, "Mohamed is being mistreated because of all these allegations, and the treatment he has been receiving is unfair and horrible." Mr. Harkat is being held without any charges under a 'Security Certificate' authorized by Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Denis Coderre and Solicitor General Wayne Easter.

Sophie Harkat and local group Direct Action Casework Ottawa (DACO) are organizing the march and rally, as well as a larger campaign in support of Mohamed Harkat. The campaign calls for justice for Mr. Harkat and an end to the Security Certificate. Specifically, Mrs. Harkat and DACO demand that Mohamed Harkat:

1) Be released immediately

2) Not be deported

3) Be allowed due process: the right to a fair trial, the right to know what he is charged with, the right to hear evidence against him and the right to defend himself in court

They also demand:

4) That the secretive and unjust Security Certificate mechanism be abolished immediately

5) An immediate end to all deportations to Algeria and a return to the moratorium on removals to Algeria

According to one DACO member, "Mr. Harkat is being denied his rights as a human being under a racist attack against Arabic communities by the Canadian government."

More information will follow on a press conference and rally prior to Mr. Harkat's Pre-trial on Tuesday March 4th, as well as his Trial April 28, 29, May 1, 2, 2003. Mr. Harkat's pre-trial will be in Courtroom #2 at 9:30 am at the Palais de justice, 17 rue Laurier, Gatineau, Quebec.

JUSTICE FOR MOHAMED HARKAT!

NO ONE IS ILLEGAL!

A March and Rally to Demand Justice for Mohamed Harkat

and an end to the Security Certificate

=====================

2:00pm

Sunday, March 2nd, 2003

Human Rights Monument

(Elgin and Lisgar)

=====================

Mr. Harkat is being held in jail WITHOUT CHARGES, but

under the allegation that he is linked to Islamic

terrorist groups and activities. accusations which the

government has not supported with evidence. Now he

faces removal to Algeria where he could be killed.

Mohamed Harkat's trial is very important, because it

sets a dangerous precedent. by a government intent on

proving to the United States that it's doing something

about terrorism.

Today the government is denying Mr. Harkat's human

rights and his right to a fair trial.

Who will be next?

We Demand That Mohamed Harkat:

1) be released immediately

2) not be deported

3) be allowed due process - the right to a fair trail,

the right to know what he is charged with, the right to

hear evidence against him and the right to defend

himself in court

We also demand:

4) that the secretive and unjust Security Certificate

mechanism be abolished

5) an immediate end to all deportations to Algeria and

a return to the moratorium

contact info:

Direct Action Casework Ottawa

Ph: (613) 786 1015

email: [email protected]

LA JUSTICE POUR MOHAMED!

PERSONNE N'EST ILLEGAL!

"Venez marchez pour la justice. Aidez a sauvez une

vie...aidez a sauver Mohamed Harkat!"

=======================

14:00h

le dimanche 2 mars, 2003

le Monument des Droits Humains

(Elgin et Lisgar)

=======================

Mohamed Harkat est détenu en prison depuis le 10

décembre 2002, SANS AUCUNES CHARGES.

Seules des allégations le liant à des groupes et des

activités terroristes islamiques sont portées contre

lui. Aucunes de ces allégations n'a été supportées avec

preuve par le gouvernement canadien. Mohamed fait

face à la déportation en Algérie ou il sera confronté à

la mort.

Le procès de Mohamed est un précédent dans ce

domaine. Le gouvernement canadien tente de rassurer les

États-Unis et cherche à démontrer qu'il fait un effort

afin d'enrayer le terrorisme.

Le gouvernement brime les droits humains de Monsieur

Harkat, lui refuse le droit à un procès juste.

Qui sera la prochaine victime?

S'il vous plait, venez à la marche du 2 mars et

demandez :

1) qu'il soit immédiatement relâché;

2) qu'il ne soit pas déporté;

3) qu'il ait le droit d'entendre les charges

incriminantes posées contre lui;

4) qu'il ait également le droit de se défendre

équitablement devant un tribunal; et

5) que le mécanisme secret, le certificat de sécurité

soit aboli...

Pour information:

le groupe action direct d'Ottawa (DACO)

Ph: (613) 786 1015

email: [email protected]

Mohamed Harkat has been in Canada since 1995. In 1997, he was given refugee status after claiming that he faced persecution from the Algerian government if he were to return. Now he faces removal to Algeria where he could be killed. On December 10^th 2002, Mr. Harkat was arrested by undercover police outside his home in Ottawa. Since then, he has been in jail WITHOUT ANY CHARGES under a 'Security Certificate' authorized by Minister of

Citizenship and Immigration Denis Coderre and Solicitor General Wayne Easter. Mr. Harkat is being held under the allegation that he is linked to Islamic terrorist groups and activities. Mr. Harkat denies any involvement with any terrorist organizations. Both Mr. Harkat's

wife Sophie and lawyer Bruce Engel believe Mr. Harkat is innocent. Mr. Engel has seen no evidence to support the allegation. Sophie Harkat says, "Mohamed is being mistreated because of all these allegations, and the treatment he has been receiving is unfair and

Mr. Harkat is being denied his rights as a human being under a racist attack against Arabic communities by the Canadian government.

A security certificate is an anti-democratic and secretive device used to remove people from Canada. It strips vulnerable people of the right to due process and standard legal rights. A security certificate must be authorized by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and the Solicitor General. CSIS (Canadian Security and Intelligence Service), Canada's secret police agency, helped create the security certificate in 1990. CSIS puts together information to label people as possible threats and then the information is used to sign a security certificate.

The security certificate can be used against foreign nationals as well as permanent

residents. When it is being used against foreign nationals, or people trying to

immigrate to Canada, they are automatically detained. The hearing that takes place to

determine whether a person poses a threat to the country takes place without the person

charged being present. They are denied information on why they were arrested and

what their charges are. Even their lawyer is not allowed to know, denying access to fair

representation. Mohamed Harkat is in this unjust situation and FACES DEPORTATION

AND POSSIBLE DEATH. For what? He is not allowed to know!

For more information please contact: Direct Action Casework Ottawa (DACO) at

(613) 786-1015, [email protected], or contact Mr. Harkat’s lawyer Bruce Engel at (613) 235-6324.

Violent civil conflict in Algeria has been a reality since the early 1990s when Islamic political groups were gaining popular support in the country and the military backed Algerian government reacted by trying to overthrow the Islamic movement. Specifically, when the political party known as the Islamic Salvation Front, or FIS, w-on a multiparty free election in 1992, the Algerian government cancelled the results and began rounding up FIS members

and supporters. Since then, political struggles between certain Islamic groups and the Algerian military have led to massacres across the North African country. More than

150,000 lives have been lost and thousands of people have disappeared. This extremely violent situation is ongoing.

Many Algerians have fled Algeria. Since 1997, all Algerians living in Canada were protected from deportation by a moratorium on expulsions. In April 2001, however, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Denis Coderre lifted the moratorium, claiming that it was safe for people to return to Algeria. Now more than 1,000 Algerians living in Canada face deportation. The moratorium was removed as an economic strategy to encourage investments in Algeria. In fact, the moratorium was lifted at the same time that Jean Chretien was in Algiers (the capital of Algeria) promoting economic ties between Canada and Algeria

in the lead-up to the G8 Summit at Kananaskis. Meanwhile the Department of Foreign Affairs has issued a travel advisory warning Canadians not to travel to Algeria, due to ongoing civil conflict there. That travel advisory is still in effect.

CSIS: an organization empowered by the state to violate the rights of individuals. The signatories: Denis Coderre, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada, and Wayne

Easter, Solicitor General.

Write, call, fax and/or email those who are responsible and let them know that you want a full, open, public hearing for Mohamed Harkat. Let them know that we are following the

case and demand that the secret trials of the security certificate be abolished.

Minister, Citizenship and

Immigration Canada

House of Commons

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

Phone: 613-995-6108

Fax: 613-995-9755

Email: [email protected] and

[email protected]

Solicitor General

House of Commons

318 Justice Building

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

Phone: 613-992-2406

Fax: 613-995-7408

Email: [email protected]

P.O. Box 9732 Postal Station T

Ottawa, Ontario K1G 4G4

Phone: (613) 998-1679

Toll Free: 1-800-267-7685 (Toll free service is only available in Ontario)

Sunday March 2, 2003. 2pm. Meet at the Human Rights Monument at Elgin and Lisgar in Ottawa.

SHOW SUPPORT BY ATTENDING!

Pretrial: Tuesday March 4, 2003.

Trial: Apr. 28, 29, May 1, 2.

Be on the alert for gathering point locations.

There are considerable legal fees required in support of Mohamed's case. If you would like to donate, please contact Soha at 236-9188 or deposit funds into CIBC-St. Laurent account # 00496/82-08735 under Sophie Lamarche Harkat.

For more information please contact: Direct Action Casework Ottawa (DACO) at

(613) 786-1015, [email protected], or contact Mr. Harkat’s lawyer Bruce Engel at (613) 235-6324.

URGENT ACTION REQUIRED: NEW "SECURITY CERTIFICATE" SIGNED: OTTAWA MAN IN DETENTION, HELD WITHOUT CHARGE, NOT ALLOWED TO SEE "EVIDENCE" AGAINST HIM AS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MARKS INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS DAY

Mohamed Harkat, accepted in Canada as a refugee in 1997, faces danger to his life if deported to Algeria. Like others before him, Mr. Harkat and his lawyer face a stacked court, not allowed to know the case against him for "security reasons." Please write to the two ministers who signed the certificate, Solicitor General Wayne Easter, and Immigration Minister Denis Coderre, and demand that a full, open, public hearing of all the facts be allowed. Let them know we are following this case and demand that the secret trials of the security certificate process be stopped. It appears that this arrest could be motivated in part by a desire of the Canadian government to prove to the Bush administration that it is "serious" about security issues. For those who sometimes feel (not without justification!) that letters to the government are thrown into the waste basket, remember that CSIS and the security apparatus in Ottawa are very paranoid about any type of oversight, whether governmental or from the public. The act of writing these letters, demanding an end to an unjust process and for full disclosure of whatever facts may or may not exist in the Harkat case, makes the spooks quite jittery and can only have a positive effect. More background follows the addresses below: MINISTERS AND ADDRESSES Wayne Easter, Solicitor General House of Commons 318 Justice Building Ottawa K1A 0A6 (613) 992-2406 Fax: (613) 995-7408 Email: [email protected] Denis Coderre, Immigration Minister House of Commons Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6 (613) 995-6108 Fax: (613) 995-9755 [email protected] [email protected] Background: Mohamed Harkat, aged 34, is an Algerian refugee who has lived in Canada since 1997, when he was accepted as a convention refugee, having fled persecution in his native Algeria. Amnesty International's 2002 report on Algeria notes "No independent investigations [have been] carried out into the thousands of killings, massacres, 'disappearances', abductions and reports of torture since 1992. Torture continued to be widespread." Mr. Harkat was arrested as police with guns drawn swarmed over him while he was checking his mail last Tuesday, December 10. The irony here, among others, is that Dec. 10 is International Human Rights Day. According to the Ottawa Citizen, "He has no idea why he's been arrested in that manner," says Bruce Engel, the Ottawa defence lawyer who had been helping Mr. Harkat try to obtain permanent-resident status in Canada after months of delays. "He's very, very eager to learn why, and what accusation the government has against him and why they claim he's a terrorist. He knows nothing about it. I know nothing about it. He has no idea how this error could have been made." Mr. Engel said Mr. Harkat first approached him more than a year ago after his bid for permanent residency in Canada was repeatedly delayed. "We made inquiries just to find out what was going on, and we really weren't getting anywhere. Letters back and forth. They said there was security clearance they were waiting for, and verification of certain aspects of his file, et cetera, et cetera. One month turns into three months, three months turns into nine months, nine months turns into over a year. No response to recent letters that I've sent. Then he gets arrested two days ago. I am as surprised as anyone." Mr Harkat held down three part-time, minimum wage jobs in Ottawa, often working upwards of 20 hours per day at two gas bars and a pizza delivery place. As one friend asks in an Ottawa Citizen article, how would Mr. Harkat have time to be a security threat given the fact that he literally struggled round the clock to pay the bills. Sophie Lamarche, who plans to mark her second anniversary of marriage to Mr. Harkat January 2, told the Ottawa Citizen, "I think it's inhuman to go through this whole process," she said. "I'm almost ashamed to be a Canadian right now." Mrs. Harkat said her resolve to see her husband cleared of all accusations was strengthened after she visited him at the Regional Detention Centre on Innes Road. She said it hurt to see the man she loved "tied up" and behind glass. "I'm like a widow," she said. "One day I have a husband and the next day I don't." WHAT IS A SECURITY CERTIFICATE, AND WHO IS CSIS? Imagine that you have been arrested, held without charge, told you are a threat to Canada's national security, and neither you nor your lawyer is allowed to know why. You face deportation back to your country of birth, where you face possible arrest, detention, torture and execution. This is done in the name of defending "democracy." Imagine as well that the spy agency which puts together the document labelling you a threat is a scandal-ridden group that has, according to a recent expose on CSIS (Covert Entry by Andrew Mitrovica), "routinely broken the law, treating the rights and liberties of Canadians as no more than a nuisance...[it is] riddled by waste, extravagance, laziness, nepotism, incompetence, corruption and law-breaking." There is a culture of impunity at CSIS, whose agents often refer to a Ways and Means Act: "if you have a way to get things done, the means -- legal or not -- are justified." CSIS, RACIAL PROFILING, AND THE DEATH OF DEMOCRACY When all civilian flights were rerouted to Canada on September 11, 2001, hundreds of individuals of Middle Eastern and Arabic heritage were seized from those planes and forced into Canadian jails. After spending sometimes weeks behind bars, most were released, but we still have not been told who was jailed, why they were jailed, how many were swept away, and how many are still there. That such an act of mass disappearing can take place in a "democracy" is frightening. That we are not told details of this round-up shows the extent to which a democratic system is not working. The "Security Certificate" But such abuses of democratic process, especially when they relate to people who do not enjoy the privileges of white skin, are logical outcomes of a system which engages in the medieval-style "security certificate" process, begun in 1990 with the help of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS. (CSIS is a Canadian secret police agency, what one journalist calls a Canadian combination of CIA and FBI. It was founded in 1984 after the disbanding of the RCMP Security Service, an organization riddled with massive corruption, criminal scandals, and a long record of civil rights violations. Billed as a "civilian" spy agency, CSIS essentially recruited many of the members of the discredited RCMP Security Service.) On the word of CSIS, individuals can be declared a security threat, arrested and held without bail, denied an opportunity to see evidence against them (or to have their lawyers see that evidence), and deported to a country where they could face prison, torture and execution. There is no judicial check against the formidable power the "security" agencies have in such situations, making the courts an investigative tool of CSIS without any judicial balancing to protect the rights of the individual in question. CSIS: Incompetence, Bias and Abuse The flimsy nature of the information that grounds the security certificate is reflected in criticisms of CSIS made by its oversight committee, the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC), which is traditionally a committee that tries its best not to be too critical of CSIS. Nevertheless: * SIRC's 1999-2000 report raises questions "about some beliefs the Service has about the nature of the threat. We are of the opinion that these beliefs are sometimes overdrawn." * The SIRC report points out one instance, likely illustrative of many more, in which a CSIS application for warrant powers contained "a number of overstatements." * In another case, "information put forward was more than a decade old and the information adduced was derived from one source's 'feelings.' * "One source's speculation was quoted. Some assertions that the target engaged in 'suspicious activities' appeared to us to be misleading or exaggerated." * "For another person targeted, [CSIS] failed to include in the affidavit significant information of which it was aware which contradicts its own position on the person." * In yet another case, a hyperactive CSIS treated as a threat activity that "seemed to be routine diplomatic behaviour," while in another case, "with little corroborating information, CSIS ascribed intelligence gathering motives to apparently normal consular contacts." * SIRC concludes we need the best possible national security advice "unencumbered by unfounded speculation." Finding Someone to Blame CSIS is a Cold War relic which must produce threats to justify its existence. It operates in an alarming vacuum with little or no oversight, yet its often faulty, incompetent, and biased word is used as the basis for the signing of security certificates that can destroy the lives of the victims and their families, and place more nails in the coffin of democracy. Torture and secret detention in Algeria (from Amnesty International's 2002 report) Torture remained widespread. Cases of secret and unacknowledged detention continued to be reported. The government and judicial authorities systematically denied all knowledge of the detainees until after they were brought to court or released. Many of those detained in this manner were subjected to torture or ill-treatment. Dozens of civilians, including children as young as 15, were reported to have been tortured or ill-treated following arrest by members of the security forces in the context of demonstrations during April, May and June in Kabylia. Beatings with fists, batons and rifle butts appear to have been common at the time of arrest and in detention. Some detainees alleged that, while in the custody of the gendarmerie, they were undressed, tied up with wire and threatened with sexual violence; others alleged that they were whipped or slashed with sharp implements. * FayÁal Khoumissi spent some 10 months in secret detention before his family learned that he was being held in El-Harrach Prison in Algiers. He had been arrested in November 2000 in the centre of the district of El-Harrach by four armed men in civilian clothes and travelling in an unmarked car. He was taken to a security force base, where he alleged that he was shot in both legs, given electric shocks to his ears and genitals, beaten with an iron bar on his back and genitals, and forced to swallow large amounts of dirty water through a cloth placed in his mouth. He was then treated in hospital before being presented before the judicial authorities and remanded in custody on charges related to ''terrorism''. His family only found out about his detention when they were contacted in September by a former detainee who had met FayÁal Khoumissi in prison and was subsequently released.

Sophie Harkat, her family, community members in Ottawa, Toronto, Peterborough and Guelph are working hard to rally support for Mr. Harkat’s stay in Canada and right to a fair trial. People are also writing letters in support of Mr. Harkat to CSIS, Citizenship and Immigration Canada and the Solicitor General, as well as sending letters to Mohamed himself.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACTS:

Pour publication immédiate Communiqué

1. qu'il ne soit pas expulsé
2. l'application régulière de la loi: le droit à un procès juste, le droit de connaître l’accusation qui pèse sur lui, le droit d'entendre les preuves incriminantes et le droit de se défendre devant un tribunal,
3. l'abolition immédiate du mécanisme secret et injuste du certificat de sécurité,
4. que cessent immédiatement les expulsions vers l'Algérie et que soit remis en place le moratoire

Les informations sur le lieu et la date du procès de Monsieur Harkat suivront.

MOHAMED HARKAT GOES TO TRIAL NEXT WEEK ON ALLEGATIONS, HE DENIES, THAT HE IS INVOLVED WITH TERRORISM

Harkat's trial begins in Montreal on Monday, April 28. He is not accused of any crime, but must prove to the Federal Court of Canada that he does not pose a security threat to this country. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and Citizenship and Immigration Canada have branded him a member of Osama bin Laden's network - a "sleeper-cell" agent, living an ordinary life until he can be of use to the world's most wanted terrorist - and therefore a danger to Canada.

But rather than trying him on terrorism charges, the government wants to deport Harkat back to Algeria. They can do this by employing a rarely used "security certificate," based on secret CSIS intelligence and then signed by Citizenship and Immigration Minister Denis Coderre and Solicitor General Wayne Easter if they feel the intelligence proves the subject is guilty of "being a member of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in [terrorism]," as stated in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (italics added).

The certificate is deplored by lawyers and civil liberties organizations because it denies its subject, Harkat in this case, the right to see any of the evidence against him. All Harkat or his lawyers are aware of is a summary of the charges provided by the Federal Court, which conclude "Harkat is an Islamic extremist; a supporter of Afghani, Pakistani, and Chechen extremists; was and is a member of the Bin Laden Network; and, that Harkat's role in this terrorist network is exemplified by his actions and intentions." How the Service came to their conclusions is left out because, well, they're pretty sure Harkat knows what they're talking about.

Bruce Engel, Harkat's lawyer, is not impressed: "He's being threatened to be removed from the country unless he can prove that this certificate is unreasonable, and we're to do so without receiving all the information on which the certificate's based.

"It's an unfair procedure because they can technically, summarily remove someone from the country without presenting any information to them and we're left to have to trust the authorities," he said over the phone.

Harkat came to Canada in 1995 using a falsified Saudi passport and was granted refugee status in '97 because, he said, his life was in danger if he remained in Algeria. He told CSIS during one of several interrogations that he was once a member of the Groupe Islamique Armée before they became militant in 1992. He applied for permanent residency in March1997 but heard nothing about his application until his arrest.

Last month, the judge in Harkat's case ruled that releasing the evidence against him would hurt national security, so Engel's been left to scrape around for just about anything to protect his client. Firstly, Engel hopes to prove to the judge that CSIS has screwed up in the past on cases like Harkat's so its word should be treated with skepticism. He also has a hunch that he knows who has either wrongly fingered Harkat or lied to the authorities.

"Our theory is that there are some individuals that may have reported him and he will comment on that," said Engel.

Harkat's situation is almost identical to that of Mahmoud Jaballah, an Egyptian refugee claimant with alleged links to bin Laden. He was accused of "crimes against humanity," had a security certificate slapped on him 22 months ago, and has been in solitary confinement in Toronto ever since. Two weeks ago, the federal Immigration and Refugee Board denied Jaballah's refugee claim. But the federal judge, horrified by the harsh confinement, is mulling over a time limit on deportation.

"It's almost a circumstance that, in this great city of Toronto, we have the equivalent of Guantanamo Bay," said Judge W. Andrew MacKay.

Amnesty International's position on both the Jaballah and Harkat cases is that deporting the men to Egypt and Algeria, respectively, could mean torture. Until 2001, Canada had a policy of not allowing successful refugee claimants from Algeria to be sent back. But in April of that year Coderre said that country is now safe and about 1,000 Algerians living in Canada face deportation.

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien was in Algeria promoting Canadian exports around the same time the moratorium was lifted.

Alex Neve, secretary general of Amnesty Canada, said because of the hostile environment in Algeria, "the immigration route" of dealing with Harkat should be dropped. Instead, "If they do feel there is evidence to support the allegation that he has in some way, shape or form been involved in supporting terrorist activities, then legal proceedings should be launched in Canada."

If Harkat loses his federal case, Engel said he'll tell a deportation hearing about the consequences of being sent back to Algeria. Regardless of the outcome, Engel condemns the entire security certificate process.

"I certainly appreciate the need to protect the citizens of our country, and nobody wants to be endangered by terrorism ... but we have rights and freedoms pursuant to our Charter. We're supposed to be living in a democratic society, and if you're accused of something, you ought to be given a full opportunity to properly respond."

Sophie Harkat is holding a vigil on Saturday, April 26 at 7:30 p.m. at the Human Rights Monument at the corner of Elgin and Lisgar streets in support of her husband.

taken from the Ottawa Xpress, 03/04/24

Welcome to the Occupation:

Machine-Gun Toting RCMP Occupy Toronto Courthouse During Bail Hearing for Muslim Man Who Has Never Been Charged or Convicted of ANY Crime

(Report from Matthew Behrens of Homes not Bombs)

Residents of Toronto up early on Saturday morning might be forgiven for thinking they were either on the set of Arnold Schwarzenegger shoot-’em-up flick or in the middle of a growing police state.

Traffic reports warned drivers of a police motorcade making its way through downtown streets, accompanied by about 15 motorcycles, related police vehicles, and a helicopter flying overhead.

The eventual stopping place for this motorcade was the Courthouse at 361 University Avenue, where two acts of criminalization were taking place: in one courtroom, jurors were deliberating on whether or not three members of the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty should be thrown away for resisting the deadly policies of the Ontario government.

In another, and this was the reason for the sudden display of police force, was a bail hearing for Mohamed Mahjoub, a convention refugee from Egypt who has been in jail since June, 2000, much of it in solitary confinement, on a CSIS security certificate.

Anyone who wishes to attend the bail hearing must have a strong stomach for heavily armed tactical RCMP units--some sixty officers are stationed throughout the building--many dangling submachine guns as they stroll through the halls of injustice. Some are so loaded up with weapons of mass human destruction it’s a wonder they can move and, as we watch some of them go into the men’s room, an even greater wonder that they are able to answer nature’s call.

Backpacks are not allowed, despite the presence of x-ray machines (many thanks to OCAP supporters who watched over a long row of backpacks on the courthouse steps!). Some people are told they are not allowed upstairs unless they are a witness. Muslim men, even one whose beard consists only of five o’clock shadow, are subjected to facial scrutiny.

Those who "pass" this stage are given a special court pass, escorted to an elevator operated by yet another court officer, and then taken in small groups to the seventh floor of the courthouse. Once there, they are escorted down a hallway with heavily armed RCMP stationed here and there, and then through another airport-style security screening system.

Remember, this is all for a man who has never been charged or convicted of anything. People who attend the trials of white guys who have murdered their wives are not subjected to such abuse.

This show of force is completely unnecessary for "security reasons," as Mahjoub is already bound with chains around his waist, leg irons, and handcuffs throughout the hearing. None of this was on display when Mahjoub’s original hearing was held. It has not been in such powerful evidence at similar security certificate hearings at 361 University (though there still has been a significant step-up in security for those hearings).

On the other hand, though, the display of force is completely necessary from a political angle. The judge at the bail hearing, the media, those coming to support, have to be convinced that Mahjoub somehow poses a danger to the public, and what better way than to have scary looking officers, some with their ever-ready hands on the trigger of their submachine guns, do the rounds of the courthouse. The idea that Mahjoub might be released on bail is distasteful to CSIS and the RCMP, so creating an atmosphere of fear is their way of trying to prevent this from happening.

It is part of a propaganda barrage that begins with ridiculous hints in the media that a man responsible for the assassination of Anwar Sadat is in court, and continues as the four corners of the courtroom are jam packed with the biggest display of self-important looking white men and women since Clint Eastwood’s last "protect the president" film. These guys are dressed to the nines, all with wires going into their ears, and serious, "this could be the end of the world" gazes on their faces.

Again, someone chancing upon this whole scene is not exactly sure whether this is real life or a Hollywood film shoot. In the end, it doesn’t matter, for the effect is the same. All that firepower is likely to loosen the bowels of any judge entering the court. It immediately places the question of the day--whether Mr. Mahjoub meets the same requirements set out for anyone else seeking bail--far beyond the mere facts of the case onto another plain.

The RCMP and CSIS are telling this judge: if you release this Muslim man, chained and surrounded by men with machine guns, you will be held responsible if he acts out. Don’t make any wrong moves.

But facts do not matter in such proceedings. Appearances do. And in a society where the evildoer-du-jour is the Muslim male, Mahjoub is not only up against the wholesale shredding of civil rights which, in the case of the security certificate, has been ongoing since 1992. He also must face a deeply ingrained racism repeated daily in Hollywood films, "responsible" newspapers, and the daily, polite round-the-water-cooler racism of Canadian society: sure, they may look nice and peaceful, and the one at the corner store gives my kids free gummy bears, but, ya never know...

The assertion that facts do not matter is not a lefty conspiracy theory. It is the basis of the security certificate. Under that certificate, neither Mr. Mahjoub nor his lawyer, Rocco Galati, was allowed to see the heart of the "evidence" against him. All they are given is a "summary" of allegations and beliefs put together by a CSIS whose agents display an alarming amount of ignorance, bias and, when the occasion is called for, out and out perjury. On the basis of this, Mahjoub could be deported to Egypt, where he is certain to face arrest, torture, and murder.

Even the Security Intelligence Review Committee( SIRC)--a weak-kneed "oversight" committee which generally concludes CSIS is a bunch of hard workin’ boys doin’ their best to protect Canada against evil forces lurking somewhere out there--has raised concerns about their, er, um, truthfulness.

SIRC reports have raised concerns about "some beliefs the Service [CSIS] has about the nature of the threat. We are of the opinion that these beliefs are sometimes overdrawn." SIRC also is concerned that in some instances, CSIS applications for warrant powers contained "a number of overstatements"; that in another case, "information put forward was more than a decade old and the information adduced was derived from one source's 'feelings’; that "One source's speculation was quoted. Some assertions that the target engaged in 'suspicious activities' appeared to us to be misleading or exaggerated."

SIRC continues, "For another person targeted, [CSIS] failed to include in the affidavit significant information of which it was aware which contradicts its own position on the person." In yet another case, a hyperactive CSIS treated activity that "seemed to be routine diplomatic behaviour" as a threat while in another case, "with little corroborating information, CSIS ascribed intelligence gathering motives to apparently normal consular contacts."

Against such a backdrop of past abuses, how is a judge to rely on secret evidence presented by an organization which has no qualms about sending a refugee back to a country to face torture and death based on someone’s "feeling"? If CSIS deliberately hides information which contradicts its own theory, then the presence of a defence lawyer questioning this would be pretty inconvenient. So the secrecy stuff comes in pretty handy when your agenda is not so much security as it is political: create a scare, deport some easily demonized Muslims to justify your growing budget, and keep the Yankees on your sunny side.

On the basis of the spring 2001 secret trial of Mahjoub (secret in the sense that anything deemed injurious to national security--or, more importantly, anything which a good lawyer would be able to show is not fully or even partially proven--would be heard behind closed doors with no opportunity to examine the merits of that "evidence" by the defence), the certificate was upheld by a federal court judge.

In a rambling, illogical, and sloppy decision, Mr. "Justice" Nadon delivered a finding that the security certificate was "reasonable" one month after the attacks of September 11, 2001. His decision relies in part on post 9/11 newspaper articles from such "unbiased" sources as the National Post.

Nadon notes in upholding the certificate that Section 40.1 (security certificate) proceedings require "proof of the existence of ‘reasonable grounds to believe certain facts’ as opposed to the existence of the facts themselves."

So some feelings, some beliefs, some allegations from a very discredited spy agency, delivered behind closed doors without an opportunity of reply, have kept Mahjoub in solitary for 34 months and could be the basis for sending him back to a painful death in Egypt.

The allegation against him is that he may be a member of Al Jihad, which CSIS says "advocates the use of violence as a means of establishing an Islamic state in Egypt." If we’re concerned about such an organization, perhaps by the same measure, we could just as easily indict a member of the Bush administration for its use of violence to establish a U.S.-occupied state in Iraq.

Mahjoub denies that he has ever been a member of AJ and in fact condemns their use of violence. Nadon, relying on the incredibly inaccurate, completely discredited post 9/11 press, uses the fact that Mahjoub worked for a short time on a Sudanese farm owned by Osama bin laden in the early 1990s as additional "evidence," yet at this time, the relatively unknown bin laden was on the CIA payroll. He was America’s good friend.

Mahjoub freely admitted this past employment when he came to Canada as a refugee, and neither CSIS or anyone else tried to prevent his entry at that time. Why CSIS and a federal court judge should make political hay over it years later is evidence, again, of how much guilt-by-alleged-association (even when that association occurred at a time when the person associated with was on "our side") is all one can rely on when the "facts" don’t measure up. (George W. Bush, on the other hand, did not close his association with bin laden until October, 2001, when it was decided that the Bush and bin laden families, for appearances sake, should no longer share in the profits of the Carlyle Group, a largely military industry investment organization in which both had major investments).

All these elements form the backdrop to the bail hearing on Saturday morning, May 10. Members of the community, including respected imam Dr. Ali Hindy, are there to provide the $50,000 surety. Thanks to the efforts of community members linked to Homes not Bombs, $10,000 cash bail was also raised.

The Crown’s case against bail rests on the testimony of Kathleen O’Brien, a hard-nosed, no-nonsense director of security review for Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) who apparently loves her job. In clipped tones, O’Brien explains she has received two assurances from the Egyptian government that if deported to Egypt, Mahjoub will be treated well. She explains that once submissions have been received from Mahjoub, a decisionmaker at CIC will balance the evidence and make a decision to either deport or allow Mahjoub to stay. CIC’s enforcement branch, if given the go-ahead, would charter an aircraft and ensure Mahjoub’s "safe return" to Egypt (an oxymoronic conclusion if ever there were one.)

Rocco Galati, Mahjoub’s lawyer, questions O’Brien, and she is all bureaucrat, quoting this section and that, a 40.1 and a section 77, as she tries to avoid the eyes of the man sitting in the orange jump suit, chains around his body, whose life hangs in the balance. To Mr. Mahjoub, his wife Mona, their two young children, these are life and death decisions, a fact which seems lost on the government bureaucrat who can quote these rules and regulations but whose answers show not a hint of compassion, concern, or care. Her job is moving human chattel from one jail to another. Don’t stress her out with details about human rights violations and the fact that human flesh, when exposed to electrical shock or interminable beatings, is fragile indeed.

But her emotional detachment breaks down under questioning from Galati about Mahjoub’s human rights. Her answers, once confident and assured, are now peppered with phrases like "I don’t think we would," and "I don’t believe so," when Galati asks whether or not Mahjoub would be taken away from Canada before all legal proceedings have been exhausted. Such imprecise answers are cold comfort for Mahjoub, his family and friends in the court.

Galati asks what evidence O’Brien has that Mahjoub has engaged in attempts to subvert the government of Egypt from a base in Canada. She says she is satisfied that such evidence exists from having read the Nadon decision (which presents not a shred of evidence that such an allegation is true). When Galati pushes her on this, the Crown objects and states that "for reasons of national security," O’Brien should not be required to testify "whether such information exists."

Whether such information exists? So it IS possible, then, that none of it does, in fact, exist? Galati asks why submissions regarding deportation of Mahjoub, sent to the department in January, 2002, have yet to receive a response. Well, we hear, things are busy at the department. Busy indeed, but while they are busy, Mahjoub sits in solitary confinement at Metro West Detention Centre an additional 13 months.

Galati attempts to examine the nature of the "assurances" provided by the Egyptian authorities that Mahjoub will not be harmed if returned. They come in the form of two letters, one from the Egypotian ambassador to Canada and the other from a leading Egyptian general. If the wording of the letters sounds familiar, it’s because they are exact duplicates of letters that were used as similar human rights "assurances" in the case of another security certificate victim currently in prison, Mahmoud Jaballah. Those letters were presented in Jaballah’s own hearing on April 11; a name was blacked out on them, apparently that of Mr. Mahjoub. One month later, the letters regarding Mr. Mahjoub also have a blacked out name, apparently that of Mr. Jaballah.

"Two for the price of one," Galati states in reference to the fact that the authorities cannot even compose two separate letters for two separate individuals. One letter’s credibility is called into question because Mahjoub’s name is spelled completely wrong. "Has anyone inquired to see if this person referred to in the letter is in fact Mr. Mahjoub or someone else?" Galati asks. "No," comes the reply.

On the basis of such sloppy work someone can be sent to the torture chamber. Galati’s questioning on the flimsy nature of these alleged assurances is cut short by the judge. The use of such "assurances" is an important matter for questioning, as Amnesty International reports that Egyptians sent back from Sweden with far stronger "assurances" were still tortured and murdered.

Galati comes to the crux of the matter. Would you still deport Mahjoub if you had no clear assurance that he would not be tortured or killed? What is most painful is the long silence as O’Brien considers the question, and what would hopefully have been an automatic "No!" is instead a weak, "I don’t believe so."

Galati points out that if Mahjoub had been charged and convicted of association with terrorists under the anti-terrorism law passed in 2001, he would have received a 5-year maximum sentence, with parole in 18 months. Mahjoub, not even convicted of this, has already served almost double that time.

Galati argues that Mahjoub should be released just as Abdellah Ouzghar has been freed on bail. Ouzghar WAS convicted in absentia of a "terrorism-related" offence in France (allegedly providing travel documents) and is facing extradition, but was released on bail in December 2001 by Justice J. Nordheimer, who stated strongly, "I would hope that the vast majority of reasonably informed, right-thinking members of our community would agree that, notwithstanding (the Sept. 11 attacks), every citizen of this country is still entitled to their basic constitutional rights and freedoms," including the right to bail.

The Crown, relying on outdated case law, argues that if the legal motions presented by Mahjoub disappeared, the process would be speeded up. In other words, hand over your rights to what little due process is available under such circumstances, and you wouldn’t have to spend so much time in jail. Galati responds, "You can’t be an arsonist with the constitution," and that the continued detention of Mahjoub constitutes an "indefinite gulag."

Galati argues that Mahjoub meets the criteria for bail--he has roots in the community, reliable people to keep watch over him, has no prior record, and continued indefinite incarceration would constitute a gross abuse of human rights. These are well established facts.

The judge reserves her decision for "a few weeks."

As we leave the courtroom, we wonder what will happen. Galati’s handling of the case is eloquent, solid and makes perfect sense even to those unacquainted with the intricacies of case law. The crown’s case was pretty much non-existent.

It seems, and we hope, that any reasonable judge would release Mahjoub to the loving arms of his family.

But the whole day has been an exercise in convincing us that this has nothing to do with reason or law or rights or facts or, even, the allegedly independent role of the judge.

Rather, the day’s purpose has been to show that the people making the decision on the freedom or continued detention of Mr. Mahjoub, among others, are not judges acting on facts that are fully presented in an open hearing, but the submachine-gun-toting RCMP officers demanding we vacate the courthouse as soon as the case adjourns.

Welcome to the occupation.

Homes not Bombs

PO Box 73620, 509 St. Clair Ave. West

Toronto, ON M6C 1C0

[email protected]

Jaballah Family Awaits Word on Potential Release from 22 Months in Solitary Confinement

Man Arrested Without Being Charged or Knowing the Alleged Case Against Him Being Held on CSIS "Security Certificate"

"Canadians would be greatly concerned if the facts of this case were widely known." Federal Court Justice Andrew MacKay, on the case of Mahmoud Jaballah

TORONTO, ONTARIO--Any day now, the family of Mahmoud Jaballah – a mother and her six children – will know whether they can embrace their father and husband for the first time in over 22 months. At least that’s if Federal Court Justice Andrew MacKay returns his decision, promised within 10 days to two weeks of a hearing on April 11, on whether Jaballah can finally be released from the torture of solitary confinement at the Metro West Detention Centre in northwest Toronto.

It was on Friday, April 11 that the troubled MacKay shocked reporters, spectators and, perhaps, even himself when he stated that "in this great city of Toronto, we have our own Guantanamo Bay," a reference to the illegal detention camp run by the U.S. where untold numbers of Afghans and others are held in violation of a slew of international laws.

MacKay made the comment as he considered an abuse of process motion by attorney Rocco Galati to release from prison Mahmoud Jaballah, an unfairly targetted man who has spent almost two years in solitary confinement since his August, 2001 arrest on a CSIS security certificate. Under the certificate, you are not allowed to know the case against you, and your attorney is left with little or no "evidence" to cross examine, because the core of the case is kept secret for reasons of "national security."

Jaballah has the rare distinction of someone who was able to beat the odds against this medieval practice, as seven months after he was arrested on a security certificate in March, 1999, Federal Court Justice Bud Cullen quashed the certificate, freeing Jaballah. Attorneys for Jaballah claim that CSIS officers perjured themselves on the stand during that hearing and "otherwise stretched the realm of credulity into an Alice in Wonderland sphere where judicial reality was suspended."

Indeed, CSIS officer "David," who cannot have his full name used, apparently threatened to have Jaballah arrested by the RCMP if he refused to cooperate with CSIS. "David" denied this happened while on the stand, but what he didn’t know was that Jaballah’s then 12-year-old son, Ahmad, had been able to quietly tape-record these threats, including the one in which Jaballah was told by the CSIS agent, "If you think that going to jail is not going to hurt you, you’re wrong."

As an example of the sheer incompetence of the men from CSIS whose word can rip families apart and cause such suffering as that experienced by the Jaballah family, among others, is reflected in the following exchange, originally printed in Saturday Night.

behi

"David,", a self-described expert on Middle East terrorism, was asked by Jaballah’s lawyer, Rocco Galati, what constituted an Arabic country, to which "David" replied, "More often than not, countries in the Middle East."

Galati then asked whether Iran were an Arabic country.

"I would say it is Arabic, but I’m not an expert in Iranian affairs," David said.

"You are completely wrong, Iran is as far from being Arabic as Germany is," Galati replied.

Galati continued, "If I suggested to you that your experience is anemic and that you need some re-education, what would you say to me?"

David said, "I would say that the Service goes to great effort to make sure that their people are properly trained and culturally sensitized. We do have training in that area."

Galati followed up by asking, "Can you name me the Arabic countries along the North African coast?"

David could not.

"Could you tell me the population of Egypt?" Galati asked the "expert" "David."

David could not.

The Cullen decision was based largely on the credibility of Jaballah’s witnesses, not the in-credibility of CSIS.

But that was the first security certificate.

In August 2001, Jaballah was arrested again in a take-down bust (unnecessary because CSIS and RCMP knew Jaballah’s home address, but this form of arrest helps to intimate the community at large). CSIS admitted that fall that it had no new case against Jaballah, only a new interpretation of the same case which was already found by Cullen to be not credible. The second certificate came on the heels of what attorney Rodger Rodrigues describes as an "internal, disgruntled CSIS report disapproving and contemptuous of Cullen, J’s decision."

Following an in camera (behind closed doors) hearing in which neither Jaballah nor his attorney, Rocco Galati, was permitted to attend, Justice MacKay stated in terms of "information obtained in confidence from governments or institutions of foreign states...it is determined that the information is relevant but should not be disclosed to Mahmoud Jaballah, his counsel or to any other person on the grounds that disclosure would be injurious to national security or to the safety of persons," adding that "The Security intelligence report and any other evidence or information presented in camera, ex parte shall be sealed and be kept separate from the public records of the court."

In other words, the basis of a secret trial.

MacKay has been sitting on the second security certificate since de declared in February 2002, that he would have a decision within four to six weeks. Months passed, and in August, a pre-removal risk assessment (PRAA) undertaken by the Canadian immigration dept. concluded that Jaballah would be "tortured or killed" if returned to Egypt, the logical outcome of a certificate being upheld.

The federal government has bee scrambling to get "assurances" from Egyptian authorities that Jaballah would be safe if returned to Egypt, despite the fact that the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that such assurances from non-democratic regimes without due process are meaningless (Suresh decision).

Indeed, on April 11, Galati addressed the fact that the feds, since August of 2002, had been able to get only 2 "assurances" from Egyptian authorities, both of which were essentially worthless. All the while, Jaballah had been sitting in solitary.

One, from the Egyptian ambassador, referred to a "human rights charter" under which Jaballah would be respected, but there is no such charter, and there is no assurance given with respect to detainment, torture or the death penalty. "I could get a better assurance from Monty Python," Galati explained, as he pointed out the second "assurance" came from Egyptian army general Omar Suleiman, in line to succeed Mubarak at the head of the Egyptian regime, and member of an armed force repeatedly condemned for human rights violations.

Galati points out that while the immigration minister, Denis Coderre, says he needs more time to determine whether Jaballah is a threat (which Coderre seems to have determined by signing the security certificate in the first place!), a decision regarding Jaballah’s fate should have been made within 7-10 days of the PRAA decision.

Rodrigues, in an affidavit, points out that while Reyat Singh, convicted as an accessory to the Air India bombing which killed 329 persons, received recently a 5-year sentence, with parole after 18 months (or the equivalent of 5.5 days per life taken, IF he finishes the five years behind bars), "Mr. Jaballah, who is NOT accused of ever having been engaged in ANY act or commission of any offence, but only of ‘being associated’, has spent, to date, over two years of ‘dead time’ which under Canadian sentencing law is the equivalent of a six-year sentence, which is MORE than the maximum he could have received under the Criminal Code of Canada had he been charged and convicted of being associated with a terrorist organization, under the new provisions pursuant to C-36, passed and proclaimed into law January 2002."

Jaballah,. currently held at Metro West Detention Centre, is not the only person undergoing such torture. Among others are Muhammad Mahjoub has been in prison since June 2000, Hassan Almrei almost 18 months in jail, and now Mohamed Harkat in Ottawa, who was arrested on December 10, International Human Rights Day, and who has been held without charge or bail since that time. All are held on security certificates, without being charged with anything, and facing potential deportation to countries where their lives would be in grave danger.

And anyone who tries to help these individuals receive a fair hearing or make bail is considered suspect, as members of the surrounding community fall under CSIS/RCMP surveillance, harassment and intimidation.

One such act of intimidation, among many, is directed against Dr. Al Hindy, the spiritual leader of the Salahaddin Mosque in Scarborough. While returning from an annual pilgrimage to Mecca in January of this year, Hindy was detained in Cairo’s airport by the Egyptian secret service at the request of CSIS, whereupon he was blindfolded, handcuffed, and thrown into a van with blinds drawn and taken to an undisclosed location where he was held and interrogated for some 34 hours. In a sworn affidavit, Hindy said "during the interrogation it was made clear that I had been detained at the request of CSIS with a request from CSIS that I NOT be released.

"During the interrogation I was told and threatened as to why I was assisting those accused such as Mahjoub and Jaballah. I was specifically told NOT to act as surety for Mr. Mahjoub, nor extend any assistance to either Mahjoub nor Jaballah and that by virtue of my extending any assistance in their Court proceedings I came under suspicion from CSIS.

"During the interrogations reference was made to certain persons, Canadian citizens, who were made to disappear. Then they stated, ‘right now, you are here. But if you were kidnapped and sent to Guantanamo Bay, then not even Rocco Galati could help you.’

"During the interrogations, they asked if we had given Mr. Galati any money for Mr. Jaballah and how much? They insisted I not make any speeches in the mosque critical of US foreign policy."

Hindy also noted that "it was made clear to me that it was CSIS who had forwarded a file to them requesting my detention and non-release alleging that I was a ‘dangerous person.’

Fortunately for Hindy, his family is fairly well connected, with friends who have high-level contacts within the intelligence service in Egypt, and an uncle who is former Egyptian ambassador to China who used to golf with former President George Bush and an aunt who socialized with Barbara Bush. Once Hindy’s wife hit the phones, things changed during the interrogation, but Hindy acknowledges if you are detained in Egypt, "you need to be innocent AND have connections. Being innocent is essential, but not sufficient" to avoid long-term detention and torture.

Hindy notes that the RCMP contacted him two days prior to the April 11 hearing because he wanted to discuss Hindy’s affidavit (how they obtained it is not clear, nor legal).

But the intimidation and string of "coincidences" does not end there. Anyone coming to court to attend the Jaballah hearing is subject to airport-style security screening (whereas those attending multiple murder trials waltz in and out of the court, unchecked).

On April 11, the court chosen for the hearing is far too small to accommodate everyone who wants to attend, even though Jaballah’s hearings normally bring in a fair-sized crowd of supporters.

In another "coincidence," the Toronto Star that morning has printed an excerpt from the refugee board which rejects Jaballah’s refugee claim, alleging that Jaballah is a terrorist--not even Jaballah or his family knows of this until it is pointed out in the paper.

And in another "coincidence," as Toronto police talk about ratcheting up their own role in the repression of refugees and immigrants, for the first time the head of Metro’s counterintelligence and anti-terrorism squad, Steve Irwin, happens to "drop by" and stand at the back of the courtroom with a cohort, checking out who is in the spectator section. A few weeks earlier, police association head Craig Bromell states the police need to form an immigration unit to track down those "illegally" in Toronto. "We need somebody to go after these people," Bromell told the Toronto Sun on March 13.

If you would like to be kept up to date on the Jaballah case, as well as upcoming hearings for Mahjoub and Harkat, please contact Homes not Bombs at [email protected]

(this report prepared by Matthew Behrens of Homes not Bombs)

No matter the case, no matter the circumstances, justice and human rights must prevail. Human rights and security concerns are not contradictory goals. It is a strong commitment to human rights that offers us the best security in the end. Mohamed Harkat’s case offers the government a valuable opportunity to clearly demonstrate that it is committed both to protecting rights and protecting security. Sadly, the response to date leaves rights far behind.

Amnesty International is of the view that in Algeria Mr. Harkat faces the risk of serious human rights abuses, including torture, because of the allegations that he has been involved with or supported armed Islamic groups. This is based on our ongoing monitoring of the human rights situation in the country. Amnesty International therefore opposes any action taken to deport Mr. Harkat to Algeria at this time.

Amnesty International is concerned as well that the security certificate process being used in this case does not meet international human rights standards. We have stated that the process is heavily weighted in favour of the detaining authorities, does not substantively examine the lawfulness of the detention, and does not afford the detainee an effective opportunity to challenge the lawfulness of his or her detention.

Given the flaws in the security certificate process, and the risk of torture that Mr. Harkat faces in Algeria, Amnesty International urges the government to refrain from any further action under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Instead, if the government considers that there is evidence that Mr. Harkat may have been involved in activities that provide support to armed groups such as al-Qaeda, we would urge that criminal proceedings be launched in Canada, pursuant to the Anti-terrorism Act.

It is not too late to ensure that justice prevails.

Dream, dream, dream

Dream about a better day

Looking outside, I see music in my mind

Where the world of conscience ends

there’s no freedom I can find

So I dream…

Dream, dream, dream

Dream about a better day

Please, please tell me what I’ve done

My life is shattered now

But I’m not the one you want

Still I dream…

Dream, dream, dream

Dream about a better day

I used to think that justice here was blind

Your constitution’s words create illusions in my mind

You call me guilty now

And invent the truth to hide behind

So I dream.

Dream, dream, dream

Dream about a better day

Do you know what you’ve become

You talk about the rule of law

But you break those rules for some.

And I dream, still I dream.

Dream, dream, dream

Dream about a better day.

Looking outside I see music in my mind

Where the world of conscience ends

There’s no freedom that I can find.

So I dream, dream dream.

Dream, dream, dream (repeat and fade)

MEDIA ADVISORY

SECRET TRIALS IN CANADA:

Direct Action Casework Ottawa invites you to an evening of discussion, strategy and resistance.
For more infomation, please contact Direct Action Casework Ottawa at (613) 786 1015 or [email protected].