AMNESTY or TRAVESTY?
The Harper government had moved to take the Omar Khadr case to the Supreme Court of Canada. If successful the decision would overturn two lower court rulings that Ottawa must ask Washington to release Khadr from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and hand him over to Canadian authorities.
Amnesty International and federal opposition parties strongly condemned the government's decision. These groups complained that the action would surely further blemish Canada's international reputation when it came to defending human rights.
 |
| Khadr being treated on battle field |
Why was he in Afghanistan? Home grown terrorism should be totally unacceptable!
 |
| Alleged photo of Khadr handling explosives |
On September 29, 2012 Khadr was repatriated to Canada. He will serve the remainder of his sentence in Canadian custody. He has six years remaining on his eight-year sentence but, under Canadian law, was eligible for parole in mid-2013.
Khadr was classified as a prisoner who should be held in maximum security, due to his murder conviction. This has delayed his application for parole, as prisoners in maximum security are never given parole.
Canada's new Minister of Public Safety declared, “Omar Khadr pleaded guilty to very serious crimes, including the murder of American army medic Sgt. Christopher Speer. The government of Canada will vigorously defend against any attempted court action to lessen his punishment for these crimes."
(He lost his Quebec seat to an NDP in 2011)
"Our position regarding Mr. Khadr remains unchanged. In fact, it is the same policy held by two previous governments. Omar Khadr has been accused of serious crimes." These include murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, material support for terrorism and spying.
Khadr has rights, as do all Canadians. These should not extend into the realm of betraying one's County. With rights come responsibility, willingness to accept consequences for choices and respect for the law. Khadr showed none of these!
Dennis Edney, Khadr's Canadian Lawyer
Khadr was being held with other detainees. Edney, described the prison area as a "cage" in which his client was chained to the floor.
Khadr was being held with other detainees. Edney, described the prison area as a "cage" in which his client was chained to the floor.
He claimed Mr. Khadr was blind in one eye and slowly losing sight in the other. Prison officials denied requests for glasses for security reasons.
"This is a government that is mean spirited," said Mr. Edney, who had two visits with Mr. Khadr. Mr. Edney suggested there were racial overtones to Ottawa's decision, given that the same government sent a private plane to Mexico to bring home Brenda Martin, who was convicted of fraud-related charges.
"Was that because she was an Anglo-Saxon?" he asked.
Here comes the race card! Why do some defence lawyers lack basic intelligence? Edney was comparing the Khadr crimes to that of white collar crime. SERIOUSLY?
Mr. Cannon strenuously objected to previous suggestions that racism was a factor in this case. His analysis was far more compelling in this case than that of Alex Neve, secretary-general of Amnesty International Canada. Neve stated that Ottawa's stand was particularly contentious given Mr. Khadr's AGE at the time of the alleged offences.
Khadr was over 15! He was not a 'child soldier' He was old enough to understand that a hand grenade kills people and that he was betraying any Canadians who gave their lives in the Afghan war.
"It's been noted all around the world by many that Canada has taken such an extreme stand in this case, and there's no question it has tarnished Canada's important and hard-earned reputation as a country that is prepared to stand up for human rights," Mr. Neve said. "The wanton way in which very serious human-rights concerns in this case were just wholly disregarded have been noted by governments and human-rights organizations and the general public right around the world."
The Opposition
Opposition MPs issued similar condemnations, with Liberal MP Dan McTeague described the decision to appeal as "appalling".
Dan McTeague, one of about a dozen staunchly pro-life Liberals who lost their seats in the May 2011 federal election, looks forward to the revitalization of the once powerful Liberal Party.
NDP MP Joe Comartin accused the government of having a "masochistic streak." Mr. Comartin, a lawyer, said that in his view, there is not enough evidence to charge Mr. Khadr, let alone convict him.
Lawyers don't make judgements on evidence, they present it to a judge or judge and jury. Also Comartin would have had no idea what evidence actually existed.
David Rittgers, political analyst with Washington based Cato Institute
David Rittgers, who served in Afghanistan as a U.S. Special Forces officer and is now a policy analyst with the Washington-based Cato Institute, said the Americans had more evidence in the Khadr case than they did for most other Guantanamo detainees. As a result, Mr. Rittgers said he suspected U.S. officials wanted the case to continue in a US military proceeding or a federal court. "I suspect that American authorities will be reluctant to release Mr. Khadr to Canada," he said. I guess he was incorrect.
Earlier Appeals Court Decisions
When the Court of Appeal's decision was released, two of the three judges agreed with Mr. Khadr's lawyers that Canada must request Mr. Khadr's return because Canadian officials violated his Charter rights in 2003 and 2004 by interrogating him at Guantanamo while he was under duress, and then sharing that information with the Americans.
However, the third judge, Marc Nadon, sided with the government's argument that only the Prime Minister and his cabinet - rather than the courts - should have the power to make decisions affecting foreign policy.
QUESTION: Is Omar Khadr deserving of Canadian Citizenship?
QUOTE: "If we love our country, we should also love our countrymen.-Ronald Reagan
LEMONS TO:
Amnesty International, who believe that no matter how evil a man or his actions are, he still has rights.
CLIP OF THE WEEK:
No comments:
Post a Comment