Mr. Speaker, the remarks of my colleague from Burnaby—Douglas were thoughtful. He is very passionate about human rights. I know for him it is very important to speak on this issue.
I agree with much of what he has said about the bill. It seems to circumvent the criminal justice system, which the Supreme Court decided was unconstitutional and a violation of human rights.
With that in mind, I have received many emails, letters and phone calls from constituents. I have one from a young woman who is very concerned about the proposed special advocate model. She says that it does not provide guarantees for a fair trial and it allows individuals to be deported to countries where they face serious risk of torture. She also says that any process to respond to individuals who are accused of being a threat to the security of Canada must conform to international human rights principles. My constituent has asked me to please vote against the bill.
She adds some points that were put forward by Amnesty International. These are human rights principles to guide the immigration security certificate reform. Could my hon. colleague from Burnaby—Douglas comment on some of the things contained within those principles, such as no complicity and torture, or other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment, no impunity?
Does my colleague agree that criminal proceedings should be in Canada when removal or transfer is not possible? Does he agree that disguised extradition, equal fairness, full answer in defence and injury to international relations is no excuse and detention is a last resort?
He talked about Mr. Almrei. I know my colleague has him visited in the Kingston centre. One of the things says about detention as a last resort is:
In immigration-based security procedures detention must be the last resort. Detention is justified only where the application of other less intrusive measures have been fully considered and rejected by the state. Where affected persons have been detained, that detention must be subject to fair, prompt and regular review by an independent and impartial court. Immigration detention should not be prolonged and can never be indefinite.
I am concerned that Mr. Almrei's detention seems to be indefinite because he does not fit the model that we have prescribed on him. Would my colleague comment on some of those things?