Supreme Court Holds Off From Setting New Precedent, For Now
Friday was an extremely busy day and things did not all go Stephen Harper’s way. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, held in part an appeal brought forth by the Prime Minister in regards to the ongoing detainment by the US of Canadian citizen Omar Khadr. Previously, a Federal Court had agreed with Mr. Khadr’s petition to the court that his rights guaranteed under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms had been violated, and ordered the government to begin to seek his repatriation. This ruling was upheld at the Federal Court of Appeals, leading to the appeal by the Government which was ruled upon on Friday. The Court held that the rights accorded to Mr. Khadr under the Charter have been violated but that directly ordering the government to seek his return to Canada was not appropriate, at this time. In sum, the Court decided to “grant Mr. Khadr a declaration that his Charter rights have been infringed, while
leaving the government a measure of discretion in deciding how best to respond.”
So, while the government does not have to immediately seek the return of Mr. Khadr, they are expected to respond in some manner to the Courts ruling that his Charter rights were and indeed continue to be violated. The Globe and Mail described the Courts ruling as a challenge to the Harper government saying that “a legal fist lies beneath [the ruling's] velvet glove.” In it’s ruling, the Court cited both the consistency of “the separation of powers and the well-grounded reluctance of courts to intervene in matters of foreign relations” but also noted that “courts are empowered to make orders ensuring that the government’s foreign affairs prerogative is exercised in accordance with the constitution.” All of this is to say that the matter of the ongoing detention of Omar Khadr is not over. I previously suggested that perhaps President Obama was looking for Prime Minister Harper to help him out in one small matter by seeking the return of Mr. Khadr. And why not? All other western nations, concerned with what we now know were entirely credible allegations of abuse and torture at Guantanamo sought, and received the return of any of their citizens being held in the black site. There is no reason that Canada should not, even at this late time, follow suit.
Related Posts
- Olympics and all that Thursday evening saw a divided panel come together for a public forum on security and civil liberties during the 2010 Olympics at the SFU Harbour Centre. The forum was organized by the Impact on Communities...
- Stephen Harper: Tactician Extraordinaire [/caption] Amidst reflecting on the year gone by, looking forward to the coming one and forming resolutions that will more often than not be forgotten by February, the end of 2009 also brought the opportunity...
- Landis admits doping and fingers Armstrong [/caption] NEW YORK —Disgraced American cyclist Floyd Landis has admitted to systematic use of performance-enhancing drugs and accused seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong...
- Arizona preparing appeal of immigration ruling [/caption] PHOENIX – Arizona is preparing to ask an appeals court to lift a judge's ruling that put most of the state's immigration law on...

facebook is broken and won’t let me send messages to anyone.
oh well.
interesting you blog about mr. khadr without mentioning how he was technically a child soldier. it makes him a victim twice over.
so if harper can already ignore international laws (see below) why not also ignore our own?
**************
previous thread:
its more important to say that assimilation should be voluntary. it happens on its own over time.
this is the point in the issue where my feelings also get a little fuzzy.
after generations of forced assimilation, how does a culture (consisting of many smaller different cultures) have an identity?
when you identify yourself as a part of canadian culture, is anything aboriginal included in that identity?
I ask you this because, I’ve been removed from canadian mainstream culture so long, I just can’t see it from the inside. Though as a self-identified activist for the last 7 years, I view the canadian identity and its relationship with aboriginal culture as a token sentiment at best. Actual policy, and racist undertones (racism debate fit for a whole other thread) in our daily lives tell a different story.
good reply! i appreciate your willingness to let the facts talk rather than being rigid in your politics. this skill is also something many of my colleagues need to acquire.
with that said here are more thing to read:
“This is the first time that Canada has sought to be exempted from a human rights standard adopted by the (UN) General Assembly”
http://www.amnesty.ca/take_action/actions/ip_un_declaration.php
“More than 100 Canadian lawyers and other experts say government has no grounds to continue to oppose UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”
http://www.amnesty.ca/index_resources/open_letters/un_ip_declaration_experts_letter.pdf
Also when it comes to contemplating first nations issues and how it fits into our lives today. The Pinky Show brings up great points time and time again:
Hawaii vs US Imperialism: (25:01) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nqDkCzwXeY
The 1893 Columbian Exposition: (14:22)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wzyRepJuvM
Students Against Rice Eaters (1:47)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1VfY-uPMWI
i don’t know where you get all the time to blog. the only reason i have enough time to have such well thought out responses is because i’ve been commuting to ottawa to work. the days are long so I spend my evenings online instead of going out.