Evidence of meeting #18 for Public Safety and National Security in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was torture.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Dominique Peschard  President, Ligue des droits et libertés

9:55 a.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Thank you.

Mr. Peschard, if we hope to end up with a unanimous report, at some point we will have to agree on certain basic facts.

This is one of the basic facts in the evidence that we have studied: people only realized several years later that their rights had been violated by Canadian authorities, and generally speaking without the government's knowledge. We in the Bloc Québécois can readily state that we have never had any ambition to be in power in Ottawa and that we have never been in power in the past.

The fundamental idea we wish to address here is the following: following the study of these events by commissions of inquiry, the latter have made recommendations to ensure that these events would never take place again, and more generally that they would never take place again without the minister and the government being aware of them.

I believe that some people will turn to you, to your human rights and freedoms organization, to find out how they can have reinstated certain rights that they feel were violated.

I will give you an example: someone comes to you and says that they have been wrongly perceived to be a terrorist. This man has just learned that he can no longer travel to Canada by plane, that it would be dangerous for him to go to the United States or even to another country. The RCMP tells him that they believe he is a terrorist, that he has ties to terrorists and that they would like to hire him as a double-agent. He answers that he is not a terrorist, that he doesn't know any terrorists, and that he doesn't wish to become a double-agent. He says that he has a wife and children, and that even if he did know any terrorists, this would be dangerous work that he wants no part of. He explains that that when he went to Pakistan, he only visited family and that, even if he had met any terrorists, he wouldn't have known it. He would now very much like to benefit from the same rights as all Canadians.

What organization could he turn to to rectify this situation? Moreover, if the recommendations of Justices O'Connor and Iacobucci were implemented, would there be any organizations he could turn to to expose the fact that he was unfairly treated because he was falsely labelled a terrorist, when in fact he is not a terrorist and has no desire at all to be one?

April 30th, 2009 / 9:55 a.m.

President, Ligue des droits et libertés

Dominique Peschard

Right now, we believe that this man has nowhere to turn to. It's exactly one of the things that has to be resolved.

In our opinion, the oversight mechanism must be empowered to receive this type of complaint and take corrective action. Indeed, for us to head in this direction, the oversight mechanism must be credible so that those who find themselves in this situation are confident that this recourse is available to them.

9:55 a.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

There is another case that you yourself raised. It is the case of Abousfian Abdelrazik. I'm talking about the person who's currently being detained in Sudan. According to what we know, the Sudanese believe that he is a terrorist. After having tortured him, they finally convinced themselves that he was not a terrorist. Canadian authorities, following an investigation, are also convinced that he is not one. Yet, the minister has said that his name is on the UN list of terrorists. Nobody knows why.

However, this should not prevent him from returning to Canada. The minister told us that he cannot return for reasons of national security. We are unaware of these reasons of national security. Since the minister does not want to disclose the reasons, and things have been swept under the rug before, everyone will just assume that there is a reasonable explanation, like the fact that he is a foreign-born Canadian citizen, which consequently, would turn this issue into one of racism.

If we had a parliamentary oversight committee, something that has been suggested for years and was promised by Paul Martin, before he was elected Prime Minister, would there be a way for parliamentarians, bound to confidentiality rules, to check whether or not the minister is guilty of racism in this case, or if indeed there are good reasons relating to national security?

10 a.m.

President, Ligue des droits et libertés

10 a.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Mark Holland

We only have enough time for a brief answer, please.

10 a.m.

President, Ligue des droits et libertés

Dominique Peschard

As I stated in my previous remark, Parliament has an important role to play in making sure that Canadians' rights are respected. However, to inform Canadians, there must be an oversight mechanism that can gather and analyze the required information.

10 a.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Mark Holland

Thank you very much and thank you for taking the time to be here today.

At this point in time we're going in camera to deal with future business for the committee.

Thank you again, Mr. Peschard.

[Proceedings continue in camera]