Good afternoon. My name is Clare Crummey.
In my submissions today I will be outlining three anti-terrorism Criminal Code offences that I believe Omar Khadr could be charged with if returned to Canada.
First, Omar is alleged to have planted improvised explosive devices in areas where U.S. soldiers were expected to travel. I believe this could be an offence under section 431.2 of the Criminal Code, enacted to implement the international convention for the suppression of terrorist bombings. The essence of this offence involves placing an explosive device, such as IEDs, in a public area with an intent to cause injury or destruction. No proof of actual detonation or injury is required.
Second, Omar is alleged to have received a month of weapons and land mines training with al-Qaeda. He is also alleged to have converted land mines into IEDs and conducted reconnaissance and surveillance of U.S. forces in support of al-Qaeda efforts to target these forces. If true, these allegations could be an offence under section 83.18 of the Criminal Code, which makes it an offence to participate in or contribute to the activity of a terrorist group. The definition of “participating” or “contributing” in the Criminal Code is very broad. It includes receiving terrorist training and making oneself available to commit a terrorist offence. Under this provision, the prosecution would also have to prove that Omar's training or reconnaissance was for the purpose of enhancing al-Qaeda's ability to carry out terrorist activity.
Terrorist activity is defined in the Criminal Code in a two-part definition. I won't be going into the definition in my submissions, but in the brief we submitted to this committee we set out how laying IEDs in a public place would fall within this definition of terrorist activity.
If the prosecution can prove that Omar received land mine training or had conducted reconnaissance, the prosecution should then be able to establish that those activities were for the purpose of enhancing al-Qaeda's ability to carry out terrorist bombings by laying IEDs.
Finally, section 83.2 of the Criminal Code states that:
Every one who commits an indictable offence...in association with a terrorist group is...liable to imprisonment for life.
This provision does not create a separate offence, but it makes any other offence in the Criminal Code, such as murder or the explosive device offences, a terrorism offence. All terrorism offences apply to acts committed by Canadian citizens abroad. It also increases the sentence to imprisonment for life.
Ordinarily, Criminal Code offences only apply to acts committed within Canada. This provision would make it possible to charge Omar with any offence in the Criminal Code for acts committed in Afghanistan if it can be proved that the act was done in association with al-Qaeda. For example, Omar is alleged to have converted land mines to IEDs. Section 83.2 makes it possible to charge him with an offence under section 81 of the Criminal Code, which makes it an offence to make or possess an explosive substance with an intent to endanger life or cause serious property damage.
In sum, I believe that viable criminal charges could be brought against Omar under any of these offences if he is returned to Canada.
Thank you for your attention. I will now pass it over to my colleague Miguel.