So Go Ahead, Bail Out...
Mohamed Harkat, imprisoned on a security cerificate as a suspected terrorist with connections as a sleeper agent to al-Qaeda, has now changed his mind. CSIS evidently has a fairly well defined case, evidence held from public scrutiny in the interests of Canadian safety and security.
Canada has the option of returning Mr. Harkat to his country of origin, but he maintains if he is deported to Algeria he will be tortured. Canada could do what other countries like Great Britain and the United States resort to when returning suspected malefactors to their countries of origin; have the receiving country sign a note of agreement that torture will not be inflicted on the returnee.
During his incarceration Mr. Harkat's wife Sophie, agitated for his release, swore to his innocence, as a good wife would do. While Mr. Harkat was imprisoned we were treated to stories about the man languishing in prison, his mental and physical health at risk; his imprisonment represented cruel and unusual punishment for a citizen of Canada. Ms. Harkat pleaded and their lawyer made legal motions to assist in persuading a judge he did not represent a flight risk.
Mr. Harkat and his wife were informed that in the event he was released, it would be with particularly onerous bail restrictions. Upon which Ms. Harkat insisted that nothing could trump having her husband safe and secure at home with her and no restrictions would be too difficult for them to maintain. For his part, Mr. Harkat avowed that were he to be allowed to return home any restrictions imposed on his movement would be acceptable.
On May 23, 2005, Federal Court Judge Eleanor Dawson, citing unnecessary government delays in Mr. Harkat's security certificate case ordered him released, but with the imposition of some of the strictest conditions in Canadian history. Under his release terms Mr. Harkat wears an electronic monitoring device allowing authorities to track his movements. He must, additionally, be in the company of his wife or his mother-in-law at all times, including while being at home.
He is permitted three 4-hour local excursions out of their home every week, pre-approved by the Canada Border Services Agency. He is not permitted to leave the city of Ottawa. He cannot visit the airport, train station, bus depot or vehicle rental agencies; prohibited from computer or cellphone use. His mail is searched, his telephone tapped. Security cameras installed over his front and back doors monitor all visitors, also pre-cleared by federal authorities. Border agency employees track their movements.
These conditions, said the judge, were necessary components to his release from incarceration, required to neutralize the potential threat to national security that this man poses. The initial euphoria over Mr. Harkat's bail release has dissipated. Jail conditions in retrospect evidently weren't all that dreadful. His freedom and sense of well being at home are chafing under the critical terms of his bail release.
Mr. Harkat now pleads that there are now effectively three prisoners whereas before there was only one. The conditions through which Mr. Harkat's release was effected, so effusively and thankfully embraced at the time of his release are now deleteriously affecting the quality of their lives. Mr. Harkat, his wife attests, is unable to relax, always worried about his bail conditions. They insist that the conditions need to be watered down.
The entire point behind the conditions of his bail release were to ensure that he would be unable to engage in surreptitious behaviours inimical to the safety and security of this country. That he would be unable to make contact with other alleged conspirators, that he would be constrained from resuming the undercover activities which brought him to the attention of CSIS to begin with, as a threat to Canada.
Mr. Harkat wants to live a normal life. Ms. Harkat finds her constant supervisory role over her husband too personally arduous; she is unable under these conditions to resume her employment, do personal shopping, take part in political protests or any other activities relating to a normal lifestyle.
"I have a little bit of freedom, but not much," said Mr. Harkat. "It's house arrest. I can go nowhere. Even on a four-hour outing, I can't enjoy it because you have to consider the time, coming home, traffic, the weather. I am always thinking, 'how I'm going to get back home'". He denies any connection to terrorism.
Canadians live with the spectre of potential terrorism in view of recent historical events and those even now being played out on the international scene. So where to draw the line between individual human rights and the right of an entire country's population to safety and security? If there was sufficient evidence originally to obtain a security certificate against this man, there is reason for concern.
Mr. Harkat does, in fact, have his options. He could always secure freedom by returning home to Algeria, solving his problem and ours.
Canada has the option of returning Mr. Harkat to his country of origin, but he maintains if he is deported to Algeria he will be tortured. Canada could do what other countries like Great Britain and the United States resort to when returning suspected malefactors to their countries of origin; have the receiving country sign a note of agreement that torture will not be inflicted on the returnee.
During his incarceration Mr. Harkat's wife Sophie, agitated for his release, swore to his innocence, as a good wife would do. While Mr. Harkat was imprisoned we were treated to stories about the man languishing in prison, his mental and physical health at risk; his imprisonment represented cruel and unusual punishment for a citizen of Canada. Ms. Harkat pleaded and their lawyer made legal motions to assist in persuading a judge he did not represent a flight risk.
Mr. Harkat and his wife were informed that in the event he was released, it would be with particularly onerous bail restrictions. Upon which Ms. Harkat insisted that nothing could trump having her husband safe and secure at home with her and no restrictions would be too difficult for them to maintain. For his part, Mr. Harkat avowed that were he to be allowed to return home any restrictions imposed on his movement would be acceptable.
On May 23, 2005, Federal Court Judge Eleanor Dawson, citing unnecessary government delays in Mr. Harkat's security certificate case ordered him released, but with the imposition of some of the strictest conditions in Canadian history. Under his release terms Mr. Harkat wears an electronic monitoring device allowing authorities to track his movements. He must, additionally, be in the company of his wife or his mother-in-law at all times, including while being at home.
He is permitted three 4-hour local excursions out of their home every week, pre-approved by the Canada Border Services Agency. He is not permitted to leave the city of Ottawa. He cannot visit the airport, train station, bus depot or vehicle rental agencies; prohibited from computer or cellphone use. His mail is searched, his telephone tapped. Security cameras installed over his front and back doors monitor all visitors, also pre-cleared by federal authorities. Border agency employees track their movements.
These conditions, said the judge, were necessary components to his release from incarceration, required to neutralize the potential threat to national security that this man poses. The initial euphoria over Mr. Harkat's bail release has dissipated. Jail conditions in retrospect evidently weren't all that dreadful. His freedom and sense of well being at home are chafing under the critical terms of his bail release.
Mr. Harkat now pleads that there are now effectively three prisoners whereas before there was only one. The conditions through which Mr. Harkat's release was effected, so effusively and thankfully embraced at the time of his release are now deleteriously affecting the quality of their lives. Mr. Harkat, his wife attests, is unable to relax, always worried about his bail conditions. They insist that the conditions need to be watered down.
The entire point behind the conditions of his bail release were to ensure that he would be unable to engage in surreptitious behaviours inimical to the safety and security of this country. That he would be unable to make contact with other alleged conspirators, that he would be constrained from resuming the undercover activities which brought him to the attention of CSIS to begin with, as a threat to Canada.
Mr. Harkat wants to live a normal life. Ms. Harkat finds her constant supervisory role over her husband too personally arduous; she is unable under these conditions to resume her employment, do personal shopping, take part in political protests or any other activities relating to a normal lifestyle.
"I have a little bit of freedom, but not much," said Mr. Harkat. "It's house arrest. I can go nowhere. Even on a four-hour outing, I can't enjoy it because you have to consider the time, coming home, traffic, the weather. I am always thinking, 'how I'm going to get back home'". He denies any connection to terrorism.
Canadians live with the spectre of potential terrorism in view of recent historical events and those even now being played out on the international scene. So where to draw the line between individual human rights and the right of an entire country's population to safety and security? If there was sufficient evidence originally to obtain a security certificate against this man, there is reason for concern.
Mr. Harkat does, in fact, have his options. He could always secure freedom by returning home to Algeria, solving his problem and ours.
Labels: Life's Like That
posted by Pieface | 10:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home