Politic?

This is a blog dedicated to a personal interpretation of political news of the day. I attempt to be as knowledgeable as possible before commenting and committing my thoughts to a day's communication.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Plausible Denial

Seems like it's become a new game, (as in con-) to file suit against the Government of Canada for wrongful detention, wrongful accusations, wrongful due diligence, wrongful action targeting mainly individuals whose connections and/or whose activities and observed predilections point them out as those whose ideologies may be inimical to the country's health and longevity.

Well, of course, there are valid instances of government agencies at various levels failing the test of justice, holding suspects culpable for crimes they did not in fact commit.

And in those instances of wrongful suspicion, detection, accusation, trial and judgement resulting in long, unjust incarcerations, compensation for the torment of wrongful imprisonment, the anguish of isolation from loved ones, lost years of one's useful life, must be paid.

And in those instances monetary compensation truly is inadequate, since cash cannot buy back time lost and forever gone, relationships withered, never to be regained, self-respect injured, psyches forever traumatized.

Here, however, is another case entirely, where a Canadian visiting her country of origin claims to have been failed by the Government of Canada and its agencies. Suaad Hagi Mohamud's interview with a Canadian consular official in Kenya for the purpose of establishing her true identity in a dispute over various officials' belief that she was not the authentic holder of the passport she proffered, did not resolve the issue to her satisfaction.

In that interview, she was unable to respond to questions that anyone in her position, as the original and true passport holder would know and answer without hesitation. The most casual bits of information about the city she lived in, the company she worked for, commonly-shared local site identification were unknown to her. As was the identity of someone who guaranteed her immigration status; her son's birth date, and place of birth.

Yet she claims, and with enthusiastic backing from a demographically-supportive public, that her credibility cannot be questioned, that she is who she is. She very well may be, but it is the duty of a public servant whose expertise is in that area, to determine by simple questions and answers - not totally reliant on the other facts of the case, that she only resembled her passport photo - whether her claims were justified.

It hasn't been entirely unknown that passports are handed to near relatives to be used fortuitously for entry to Canada, whereupon the original passport holder makes a claim for loss by inadvertence of their passport, to be issued a replacement. Illegal entry to the country is a commonplace occurrence, and the sale and/or misuse of passports is also lamentably common.

So, the fact that Ms. Mohamud feels entirely justified in demonstrating her ire with the manner in which she felt she was unjustly treated by a government which owes her much as a citizen, by suing it - us, the taxpayers in fact - for $2.4-million as compensation for "callous and reckless treatment of her while she was abroad", is rather rich for the tastes of most Canadians.

Labels: , , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

() Follow @rheytah Tweet