Regarding the cost of the SCC challange and any penalties that are involved. The SCC specifically did not order any actions to correct the Kahdr situation , they were of the opinion that the court should not be in the business of setting foriegn policy and that infact it was outside the courts juristiction. The Federal court judge made a decision that is impossible to enforce, as any actions are dependant on the actions of a soverign power.
Feds have 7 days to remedy breach of Khadr's rights
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
Correct. The position of the SCC is that Khadr has not got a fair trial in the USA by their standards: They're running a kangaroo court in Gitmo that follows neither the ordinary US civilian legal code, nor does it follow the military code. It's a new system they invented just for him to make sure that they get a conviction. It features things like judges being fired by military commanders if the judges issue rulings that favour Khadr.
The court ruled that the Govt. of Canada has a duty to protest against such things, and that the govt. of Canada has not done enough to ensure that Khadr is getting a fair trial in the US.
What SHOULD have happend is that Khadr should have been tried either under the uniform code of military justice OR under US civilian law. The problem is under any of those systems the charges against him would be thrown out on the grounds that the US government in fact massively infringed his rights: They tortured him, they withheld evidence, and did more or less every single thing that would make a normal judge angry.
I agree with you that treating him as a POW was another valid option--in which case the problem is the way they've treated Khadr would be completely illegal under the Geneva Conventions.
Yes they did: They ordered the Federal Govt. to draw up a plan explaining what it was going to do, one that met the criteria of the courts ruling. You're correct they left it up to the government to decide the specifics, but they insisted that the government act, and they laid out the criteria that the government's action would have to meet.
The government failed to do that, the same way it has failed Khadr throughout this process, failing in its duty to uphold our constitution, and failing in its obligation to obey the highest court in the land.
It's yet another example of the contempt that Harper has for democratic processes.
Agreed. He is guilty of Treason.
Fuck Omar Khadr and the rest of his terrorist family.
This is the first time in my life I can honestly say that I don't care what the SCC of Canada says now, or forever on the issue. I hope Harpo just tells them that he's not going to do what they tell him regardless. (The US gov't has done exactly this in the past.)
BTW, Kahdr fired his legal team (this makes 3 times I believe he's pulled this stunt) today.
I trust the Americans to give the terrorist scum bag a fair trial. End of story.
To all you who weep for Omar Kahdr, do you also think that the Canadian Gov't should go to the end of the world to get this guy back home?
http://www.welt.de/english-news/article2310962/Canadian-pedophile-convicted-in-Thailand.html
To all you who weep for Omar Kahdr, do you also think that the Canadian Gov't should go to the end of the world to get this guy back home?
http://www.welt.de/english-news/article2310962/Canadian-pedophile-convicted-in-Thailand.html
A nice concept and how does the SCC propose to accomplish this? Is this not one of those lovely backwards points where any real effect is with Canada's Allies - not with States that tell the Canadian Ambasador to take a flying leap off a short pier?
Entirely the case.
In theory you are right. The real world looks different, councel. Khadr is THE ONLY citizen of an allied country that has not been repatriated from Gitmo. All other friendly countries have requested the repatriation of their citizens, and the United States have happily agreed. Without a doubt, the USA would have accomodated Canada also.
Nice to know that you're in charge of US policy on these matters.
What we actually DO know is that Obama promised as a candidate to close Gitmo immediately upon taking office. As his first act, he ordered the closure of that facility within one year. A year and a half later, it is still very much open and Khadr has once again fired his lawyers just days before the tribunal was to begin.
If the US were interested in repatriating Khadr, they would have deported him to Canada, whether requested by Canada or not.
It seems that Khadr is more interested in trying his luck with the one or two judges on Canada's Federal Court who seem to like him over the law than with the system of Justice which he faces under US law.
And yes, these tribunals are following US law: several cases have gone to SCOTUS to confirm that and to refine the processes in use.
It would appear, after reading the rulings, that the Federal Court which was overturned by the SCC has once again exceeded the law as established by the SCC. I would not be surprised by an appeal to the SCC and to a further ruling from the SCC confirming their earlier ruling that foreign affairs are a matter for Government, not Courts, to administer.
Is it your opinion that Canada can exert no pressure on the United States?
Plainly Canada can't force compliance with international standards, but there are a variety of things that Canada could do to make life miserable for the United States, and there are a variety of things Canada could do or not do that would make life a lot nicer for the United States.
The SCC expects the Govt. of Canada to advance the rights of its citizens to the best of its ability.
It would be quite uncomfortable for the US if Canada were to recall its diplomatic staff, for example, it would throw a giant glaring spotlight on a horrendously undemocratic legal process. That's an extreme step, one that would hurt Canada too, certainly a last resort--but it would be effective. I can't imagine the undemocratic kangaroo court surviving long after that, it would essentially stay in the headlines until the issue was resolved.
Another severe, but not quite as extreme step, would be for Canada to fine the United States for its transgression and freeze some US assets inside Canada as restitution.
There are far milder steps that would have various levels of effect: So far the Govt. of Canada hasn't even gone as far as the Secretary General of the United Nations has--he at least lodged a diplomatic protest. It's a sad day when the UN SG is a better advocate for the rights of Canadian citizens than the Canadian government!
You're aware that the West African child soldiers are generally enthusiastic participants?
The whole point of the child soldier law is that children are impressionable and easily manipulated by adults into enthusiastically doing horrible things--like building IED's and hurling grenades at American soldiers.
You are 180 degrees wrong, the child soldier convention acknowledges this fact and calls out for psychological rehabilitation intended to reverse the brainwashing and facilitate normal reintegration into society. It outright recognizes these sorts of problems and proposes solutions!
Not meant to encompass enthusiastic participants? It was DESIGNED just for such cases.
No need for dramatic action. Canada just has to ask. Khadr is THE ONLY citizen of an allied country that has not been repatriated from Gitmo. All other friendly countries have requested the repatriation of their citizens, and the United States have happily agreed. Without a doubt, the USA would have accomodated Canada also.
I think Canada should find out what the fuck is taking so long but I don't think Canada should try to get Kahdr released simply because other prisoners have been released.
Were any of them facing murder charges?
I think most of them were simply rounded up for being suspected of vague terrorist ties and activities.
Like I said, a couple of more bombs to make sure the job was thoroughly finished could have saved a lot of time, money, and hassle.
If Kahdr had been found dead in the rubble, would anybody give a shit?
Even though Kahdr may have just killed one of them and Kahdr asked to be put out his misery, the US troops saved his life.
They acted very professionally.
I know POWs have rights under the GC but is it mandatory to take a suspected enemy combatant into custody?
Would it have been a crime if they simply let him be?
Were any of them facing murder charges?
I think most of them were simply rounded up for being suspected of vague terrorist ties and activities.
Like I said, a couple of more bombs to make sure the job was thoroughly finished could have saved a lot of time, money, and hassle.
If Kahdr had been found dead in the rubble, would anybody give a shit?
Even though Kahdr may have just killed one of them and Kahdr asked to be put out his misery, the US troops saved his life.
They acted very professionally.
I know POWs have rights under the GC but is it mandatory to take a suspected enemy combatant into custody?
Would it have been a crime if they simply let him be?
But see that's where you fail to see what is happening. No one wants him back. Not the Government and not the vast majority of Canadians. Let him rot and then send him to Afghanistan. He seems to like it there.
Oh, is that so. You come out from under your rock and proclaim that you speak for the vast majority of canadians. Shisssshhhh, back under the rock.
Which is a longshot different from most Canadians want to continue the farcical 'trials', or most Canadians believe he is being fairly treated, or most Canadians think fair and legal treatment of everyone according to law is one of our defining values.
That sorta resonates w/ the Semrau trial doesn't it? Battlefield decisions are mortal and hard and made with little time for reflection. While we should expect, and we get, the highest standards from our soldiers in the field, we also owe some understanding of their difficult situation.
But Gitmo's far from the field, and unlike Semrau what actually happened when Khadr was captured still hasn't been subject to any court proceedings—after eight years. We 'civilized, democratic, rule of law, Western nations should be able to do better than that.
If we can't we should give up the bullshit about freedoms and justice for all.
But to answer that last question: Whatever the legalisms of 'enemy combattants' vs. 'enemy soldiers' and such, the principle is that as field conditions permit, you render the same medical attention to those you had been fighting who are in your hands as you do to your own fighters. The exact wording of that in Geneva and other Conventions is what makes leaving the wounded to die specifically a "crime" and interlnational and military lawyers happy.
I believe CTV did a poll awhile back and 80% did not want him back in Canada. I don't speak for them, but I am one of them.
No actually it was designed for that purpose it was envisioned and designed to rehabilitate children who had been kidnapped and forced to kill their own family members in order to force the acceptance that the "Army" that recruited them are the only family that existed. The forced murders also caused a feeling of exile from civilization, you killed your sister even if you go back thy will kill you for that. The indocrination that Kahdr underwent was a religious indoctrination , he was doing the right thing because GOD through the Imam or in this case his father told him he was doing gods work. UNtil he rejects that principle he will never be rehabilitated.
You can only rehabilitate somebody who wants at some level to be helped.
Again you are assuming that the way you require a law to be enforced and is the way it is to be done. Unfortunatly the real world does occasionally get in the way of your perfect little place.
