Home | Industry Information | Business News | Browse by Publication | I | International Law Update

Supreme Court of Canada decides unanimously that, despite Parliament's sincere efforts to protect national security while assuring detained suspects' constitutional rights, its certificates of inadmissibility procedures violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by denying subjects' fair access to evidence against them and by causing longer detentions for foreign nationals than for permanent residents.

Publication: International Law Update
Publication Date: 01-FEB-07
Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access

Article Excerpt
The Canadian Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S. C. 2001, c. 27 (IRPA), tries to resolve the tension between national security and individual liberty in the immigration context. It authorizes the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the MCI), and the Minister of Public Safety and a...

View more below

Read this article now - Try Goliath Business News - FREE!   
You can view this article PLUS...

  • Over 5 million business articles
  • Hundreds of the most trusted magazines, newswires, and journals (see list)
  • Premium business information that is timely and relevant
  • Unlimited Access

Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News - Free for 7 Days!
Tell Me More   Terms and Conditions

Purchase this article for $4.95

Already a subscriber? Log in to view full article

...Emergency Preparedness (MPSEP) (collectively "the Ministers") to issue certificate of inadmissibility that leads to the detention of a permanent resident or foreign national believed to be a threat to national security. The certificate and the detention are both subject to review by a judge.

This process, however, may deny the named person some or all of the information on which the certificate or the detention rested. The question is whether the solution that Parliament has enacted conforms to the Constitution, and specifically to the guarantees in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These provisions protect against unjustifiable intrusions on liberty, equality and the freedom from arbitrary detention and from cruel and unusual treatment.

Appellants before the Supreme Court of Canada are Mr. Adil Charkaoui, a permanent resident, plus Messrs. Mohamed Harkat and Hassan Almrei, foreign nationals who had been recognized as covered by the Refugee Convention. All these Appellants were living in Canada when authorities arrested and detained them. At the time of the decisions on appeal, all had been in custody for some time since 2003, 2002 and 2001 respectively.

In 2001, a judge of the Federal Court determined Mr. Almrei's certificate to be reasonable; another determined Mr. Harkat's certificate to be reasonable in 2005. No court has yet determined the reasonableness of Mr. Charkaoui's certificate. Canadian authorities released Messrs. Charkaoui and Harkat on certain restrictive conditions in 2005 and 2006 respectively, but the Government has told Mr. Harkat that it plans to deport him to Algeria. Mr. Almrei remains in detention. In these three cases, the detentions stemmed from allegations that the individuals posed a threat to Canadian security due to their links to terrorist activities.

The Appellants argue that the IRPA's certificate scheme is unconstitutional. They contend that it violates five provisions of the Charter: the Section 7 guarantee of life, liberty and security of the person; the Section 9 guarantee against arbitrary detention; the Section 10(c) guarantee of a prompt judicial review of detention; the Section 12 guarantee against cruel and unusual treatment; and the Section 15 guarantee of equal protection and equal benefit of the law. They also allege violations of unwritten constitutional principles.

The Canadian Supreme Court's principal rulings are as follows. First, the procedure under the IRPA for determining the reasonableness of the certificate of inadmissibility does infringe Section 7 of the Charter, and the infringement is not demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under Section 1 of the Charter. Second, the detention of permanent residents or foreign nationals under the IRPA infringes Section 9 of the Charter, and the infringements are not demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under Section 1 of the Charter. Third, the IRPA in whole or in part or through their combined effect, does infringe Section 10 of the Charter and the infringement is not a reasonable limit prescribed by law which can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under Section 1 of the Charter. A unanimous Court, therefore, allows the appeal.

The question at the Section 7 stage is whether the Government has, in substance, observed the principles of fundamental justice...

NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.



Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.

Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication name or publication date.

About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company analysis or best practices in managing your organization, Goliath can help you meet your business needs.

Our extensive business information databases empower business professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible, authoritative information they need to support their business goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting, company research or defining management best practices - Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.