Citizenship and Immigration committee  A lot of other immigration matters don't have that same notion of criminality. That's what's unique here. This is immigration law trying to get at a criminal law concern. Other routine immigration enforcement matters around who comes in, who doesn't get to come in to Canada, and how that all gets worked out don't necessarily involve criminality.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  To my knowledge. I don't want to—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  They do. A number of countries do now.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No. There are very serious shortcomings there too, although in some instances they are pointed to as being a partial improvement on the Canadian system. It's a minimal improvement, if anything, and certainly doesn't address the real concerns.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  This is a concern right around the world. Certainly, off the top of my head, there are not other nations who, when proceeding under immigration proceedings, use the high standard of beyond a reasonable doubt necessary in criminal proceedings. I think the reason so many organizations are saying that criminal law is really what needs to be pursued here is a combination of the fact that this isn't just any old immigration proceeding....

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I can speak for my own organization. Amnesty International has done a lot of work, especially in these last five years. We have been focusing on this very worrying national and global debate about security and human rights, very much trying to underscore the point that you've just highlighted as well--the fundamental connection between security and human rights.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  They must be addressed, but in conformity with human rights obligations.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No, it's not about balancing rights here. It's about ensuring that rights are protected in the context of ensuring security. It's not about choosing one or the other. It's about doing both at the same time.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  There are different views among organizations. Amnesty International hasn't said necessarily to abolish the security certificate process. We have said it needs a wholesale reform to ensure that it meets international standards. We don't think a special advocate, modelled at least along the lines of the approach that has been taken in the U.K., addresses the concerns, because special advocates do not have the kind of relationship with the individual accused that's necessary to ensure effective defence.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  It doesn't surprise me to hear that there'd be a temptation to wait for the court. Obviously we have great hope and expectation that there's going to be an important and powerful ruling from the court. Amnesty International was one of the organizations that had intervenor status in those hearings.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Are you asking me?

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No, I wouldn't. I think they're inextricably bound. The security of the individual and the security of the nation go hand in hand. No one is suggesting that governments shouldn't be taking steps to address security concerns and shouldn't be doing so through punishment, through a penal process, or through criminal proceedings.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  There's no clear, absolute international standard that's been established. There is absolute consensus at the international level that standards are necessary and that detention can't be indefinite. Certainly the impact that indefinite detention has on any particular detainee does differ depending on their personal circumstances, their mental health, the conditions of detention, how much access they are or are not getting to their family, and a whole host of other circumstances.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  That shows complete contempt for Canada's international human rights obligations. All of the men who are held under security certificates in Canada right now, whether they're in detention or are released on restrictions, face serious, well-documented risks of severe torture in Algeria, in Morocco, in Egypt, in Syria.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Well, it is through a lawful process. If the RCMP has evidence, it may be evidence that they're not prepared to disclose to the public at large, but there are ways in which trials can be conducted that nonetheless ensure fairness for the individual concerned. It may mean that the public is not always going to have access to those proceedings, but that the individual and their legal team need access of a sufficient nature that they're able to mount an effective defence.