It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rights abuses by U.S. grounds for denying extradition, court rules

page: 1
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Rights abuses by U.S. grounds for denying extradition, court rules


www.thestar.com

A Toronto judge was justified in freeing an alleged Al Qaeda collaborator given the gravity of human rights abuses committed by the United States in connection with his capture in Pakistan, the Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled.

Judges are not expected to remain passive when countries such as the U.S. violate the rights of alleged terrorists, the court said Friday.

Its 3-0 ruling upholds a decision last August by Justice Christopher Speyer of Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice to stay extradition proceedings involving Abdullah Khadr, 30, who is wanted in Boston on charges of procuring
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
It’s a pretty stinging indictment when nations start refusing to extradite criminal suspects to the United States because of the governments’ human right’s abuses and record.

Many might assume looking at the title of the article that it’s some third world nation like Bolivia with a leader trying to make an ‘anti-US’ political statement.

Sadly no, it’s our neighbor not to the south, but our neighbor to the north Canada, one of our ‘partners’ in the so called war on terror.

Others might be quick to dismiss this as the ruling of some firebrand or radical judge to be overturned on appeal.

No, more embarrassing this is the decision of the 3 Judge Canadian Appellate Court upholding an earlier Judge’s ruling.

Suspected of selling munitions to Al Qaeda the Canadian Court fears extraditing him to the United States means he will be tortured, held indefinitely without charge, denied due process without legal representation, and if tried at all tried in a Secret Court.

As the nation continues it’s slide into everything we claim to be trying to rescue the world from, some might say you have to fight fire with fire.

Who wouldn’t say that are the founding fathers who are no doubt rolling over in their graves over things like the Patriot Act, Homeland Security Act, and Foreign Intelligence Service Act.

While our forefathers might have to take it all lying down from the grave, and far too many Americans are too, it seems the only people who are still adhering to American standards are people in other nations.


www.thestar.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Good that the judge recognised the u.s human rights violations and denied the u.s extradition request.. Sadly the u.s will just have C(aught) I(n the) A(ct) do an extraordinary rendition and the victim will still end up tortured by the u.s...



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
I don't blame them for this decision. This country used to stand strong by it's justice system. The term "innocent until proven guilty by a court of law" has apparently been thrown out the window and replaced with "guilty until you can prove your innocence".
edit on 5/7/2011 by SpaDe_ because: wrong saying




posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Expat888
 


Well that's the interesting thing, the US Government paid the Pakistani Intelligence Agency (ISI) $500,000 to kidnap the man in Pakistan and to detain and torture him, and deny him access to the Canadian Consulate there, as the man is a Canadian citizen.

The US and Pakistan held him in a secret prison for 10 months and sought Canadian cooperation to put him through the rendition process, and the Canadians refused, bringing him back to Toronto eventually once being able to get custody from him from the US and Pakistani Authorities holding him.

There ruling is based on wanting to seperate the Canadian Goverment and it's belief in the uniform rule of law and their principles from those of Pakistan and the US.

Good on them, while the Canadian Court is well aware that they might be freeing someone guilty of some kind of crime, they still believe that it's only through the uniform application of laws and upholding them that prevents moral decay and tyranny.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpaDe_
I don't blame them for this decision. This country used to stand strong by it's justice system. The term "innocent until proven guilty by a court of law" has apparently been thrown out the window and replaced with "guilty until you can prove your innocence".
edit on 5/7/2011 by SpaDe_ because: wrong saying



Wow you sure can say that again, and debating some of the self admitted law encorcement officers here on ATS, it's become amply evident at least in their eyes, that suspects are no longer just suspect, but guilty, guilty, guilty in the eyes of the law if you run afoul of it in anyway.

They are forever talking about how suspects have broken the law and deserve to be subjected to various forms of brutality and when you mention it's up to a Jury of their peers to determine if they broke the law, they really do act like this is Greek or Martian.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by Expat888
 


Well that's the interesting thing, the US Government paid the Pakistani Intelligence Agency (ISI) $500,000 to kidnap the man in Pakistan and to detain and torture him, and deny him access to the Canadian Consulate there, as the man is a Canadian citizen.

The US and Pakistan held him in a secret prison for 10 months and sought Canadian cooperation to put him through the rendition process, and the Canadians refused, bringing him back to Toronto eventually once being able to get custody from him from the US and Pakistani Authorities holding him.

There ruling is based on wanting to seperate the Canadian Goverment and it's belief in the uniform rule of law and their principles from those of Pakistan and the US.

Good on them, while the Canadian Court is well aware that they might be freeing someone guilty of some kind of crime, they still believe that it's only through the uniform application of laws and upholding them that prevents moral decay and tyranny.




The canadian government is correct and took the right stand.. Unfortuneatly the u.s government considers itself to be above the law and has a habit of disregarding international laws and conventions - unless it serves u.s interest then they will follow it until theyve done/gotten what they want. Until more countries speak out the u.s will continue to act with impunity and disregard international laws / conventions. Any other country would be facing sanctions/military invasion if they acted like the u.s ...



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Expat888
 


There is no doubt about it, the way the United States is operating if it were a smaller, and not so well armed nation, controlling much of the world's oil (from controlling it at the source in foreign nations) and deeply in bed with the International Banking Cartel, we would be the pariah nation we keep claiming nations that more or less mind their own business and stick within their own borders are.

The hypocracy of it all is beyond glaring, and while I fear many Americans, too many Americans get off on it from an egocentric perspective, it's going to take other nations doing exactly what Canada has done to not just curb the United States seemingly endless ambition to dominate the globe and it's resources by force of arms and propaganda, but to hopefully wake Americans up to the increasing and startling hypocracy of our systems and Government.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Judges in Canada are appointed and not elected. Judges of the Supreme Court of Canada, the federal courts, the appellate courts and the superior-level courts are appointed by the Queen-in-Council (by the Crown on the advice of the Federal Cabinet). Thus, judges of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice are chosen not by Ontario's provincial government but upon the recommendations of Her Majesty's Canadian Government. Meanwhile, judicial appointments to judicial posts in the so-called "inferior" or "provincial" courts are made by the local provincial governments.
en.wikipedia.org...

This could relate to your thread on the left-right paradigm. Might the decision have been different with a "more conservative" panel? I'm not familiar with the incident, but I'm quite certain there are some in Canadian politics who would support the extradition and, if in position to influence the aassignment of judgeships, would aid in the appointment of judges who have demonstrated a similar ideology.

Justice is supposed to be blind. Unfortunately, much like seeing eye dogs, there are those who lead justice where they want it to be taken.

I really don't see this as an unadulterated indictment of U. S. policy. As usual, I suspect this has more to do with politics of the moment, than justice.

(This is not to say I support the alledged actions of the circumstances of this guy's apprehension.)



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Good for the judge.

Why comply with a lie?



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



“We must adhere to our democratic and legal values, even if that adherence serves in the short term to benefit those who oppose and seek to destroy those values,” said Justice Robert Sharpe, writing on behalf of Justices John Laskin and Eleanore Cronk. “For if we do not, in the longer term, the enemies of democracy and the rule of law will have succeeded,” he said. “They will have demonstrated that our faith in our legal order is unable to withstand their threats.”


Wow, this is one of the most admirable things i have read in a long time. I do wish our own country would not have lost the ability to think like this, and to act according to a higher standard that we supposedly set forth for ourselves.

This guy gets my applause.


Heck, we might even need him on the SCOTUS.

He is SPOT on, 100% accurate.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Its 3-0 ruling upholds a decision last August by Justice Christopher Speyer of Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice to stay extradition proceedings involving Abdullah Khadr, 30, who is wanted in Boston on charges of procuring


I believe he's the brother of Omar Khadr, who's been held at Gitmo since he was taken in at the age of 15. A child soldier.
en.wikipedia.org...
He probably should have been handled differently, considering his age when going into Gitmo. Plus, there was evidence that he was tortured.



Suspected of selling munitions to Al Qaeda the Canadian Court fears extraditing him to the United States means he will be tortured, held indefinitely without charge, denied due process without legal representation, and if tried at all tried in a Secret Court.


The US government also took this Cdn citizen, and sent him to Syria for torture.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.independent.co.uk...

Campaigners have demanded that the Bush administration be held accountable for the illegal seizure of a Canadian citizen who was handed over to Syrian authorities and subsequently tortured. They said the case of Maher Arar, who was cleared by a Canadian public inquiry of being any threat to that country's national security, exposed the faults of President Bush's "war on terror".



The inquiry concluded that there was no evidence that Canadian officials participated in or agreed to the decision to send Mr Arar to Syria. But it recommended that in future cases information should not be provided to a foreign country where there is a risk that it could lead to a person being tortured.


Mr Arar, a software engineer, is living in Kamloops, British Columbia, where his wife teaches at a university. Mr Arar said he has struggled to find work since he was released from Syrian custody as employers did not want "the publicity" associated with hiring him. He said being officially cleared could help him return to a normal life. "I know that once you are branded with something, as a killer or a terrorist, it's going to stay for life," he told the CanWest News Service prior to the report's release. "There's always doubt in people's minds, right?"


His settlement for our country handing him over to the US to be taken to Syria, was 10 million dollars.
He had done absolutely nothing wrong. Completely innocent.
I'm hoping we never send anyone else anywhere to be tortured.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Just like the OBL fairy tale where USA drops into another country unannounced, shoots dead an unarmed man who is 'suspected' of a crime or crimes, steal the body and throw it in the ocean.

Then head home for a party.

Theres justice for ya, who needs courts and judges and all that claptrap. Just shoot em on sight who cares anyway.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by WTFover
 


I hear you my friend, but the plain truth is many of our justices, judges and magistrates are elected too. On local county levels and municipal levels they are often elected, but on a state and federal level they are appointed.

When it comes to the Appeals Courts they are always appointed.

In fact the department heads of the US Government often responsible for formulating policy (as opposed to laws) like designating foreign nationals of other sovereign nations as "Enemy Combatants" are likewise appointees and not elected.

Two important things to consider is this was an appeals court and a three judge pannel making the ruling.

Further that while the actions of the American Government are increasingly an embarassment to more and more Americans, most of these actions are based on policies that either weren't part of the legislative process, but the executive process (meaning only one man decided on them) or were part of a psuedo democratic legislative process where 645 congressional and senatorial representatives decided for 400,000,000 million Americans.

When you break that down, that's more or less 1 person deciding for 620,155 people.

If you call that a democratic process, that would be a misnomer, since the founders called it a representative republic.

That we are given the 'privelege' of deciding which 1 person will represent 620,155 of us and get to make and impose rules on us, that won't take our calls, read our letters or emails personally, because they are too busy smoozing and dining and golfing with the corporate lobbyists who's companies profit off of all these laws and wars is hardly democracy or a democratic process.

Yes it's increasingly giving us a bad name, these policies, these laws, but are we really well served being defensive about the mistakes that just 1 person out of 400,000,000 made or 1 person out of 620,155 made in the misguided name of national pride, when these very same entities are not simply bankrupting us morally, but financially as well.

I don't think so, and an increasing number of Americans don't think so either, and when it comes to speaking up and out about the phoney baloney war on terror and its absuses against other nations and Americans at home, the government and the complicit media is presently going out of it's way to slander and negate those voices.

Is this the system we really want to be defending and that proud of we feel compelled to, in order to avoid the criticism and the hard task at hand of righting these wrongs?

I know in my case I sure don't want to defend it.

I would much rather change it.

We can pretend we have the moral high ground through might makes right, but that's all it is, is pretending.

Thanks.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigyin
Just like the OBL fairy tale where USA drops into another country unannounced, shoots dead an unarmed man who is 'suspected' of a crime or crimes, steal the body and throw it in the ocean.

Then head home for a party.

Theres justice for ya, who needs courts and judges and all that claptrap. Just shoot em on sight who cares anyway.


Which sadly without the body we have no idea if it even occured, which in a lot of ways is even worse that fictions of violating other nation's soveriegnty, gunning people down in cold blood, outside of the law, is no longer a mafia tale or novel, but how the US Government does business.

We are trampling on our most fundamental right and protection since the Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus, the requirement of the government to produce a body of evidence, to prove in a regulated environment where the people are the jurrors as to whether the charges are arbitrary and trumped up, or have weight and merrit to them, where the accused has a chance to produce a body of evidence of their own to prove their presumed innocense.

These are sad and dangerous times we live in, and if the government will do it to foreigners, it won't be long until they are doing it to citizens too.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by snowspirit
 


Here is the amazing thing the US paid Pakistan 500,000 to illegally abduct and torture him, and the Canadian Government then has to pay him 10,000,000 for failing to protect his rights as a Canadian Citizen from being abused by the United States and Pakistan.

So here we are in cash strapped in debt societies in essence thowing away 10,500,000 on a vague suspicion of something and want to do end runs around the law.

No wonder our nations are bankrupt.

Great post, thanks for the additional information.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Unlike their American counterparts, who lately have gone out of their way to trample human rights, Canadian judges actually value human rights and, as seen by this ruling, act accordingly. On the other hand, the American Government uses the human rights issue to achieve an agenda. The American Government will either uphold (wink, wink), ignore or trample human rights, depending on which scenario ends up benefiting them the most. The end result is the loss of a just society.

The ultimate fault lies with the American people for not holding their elected officials' feet up to the fire on these vital issues. But then again, Americans have priorities, with other rights taking precedence...


edit on 7-5-2011 by SphinxMontreal because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-5-2011 by SphinxMontreal because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



Here is the amazing thing the US paid Pakistan 500,000 to illegally abduct and torture him, and the Canadian Government then has to pay him 10,000,000 for failing to protect his rights as a Canadian Citizen from being abused by the United States and Pakistan.


I agree totally and the funny part is, who thought it was a good idea to pay 500,000 dollars for a guy that was more than likely selling ammunition so that he could have some money? The article says that his dad wanted him to do this so possibly they were thinking, hey let's see if those fighters over there want to buy some of this garbage we found in our fields. Maybe we can buy a new goat or something nice.


edit on 7-5-2011 by jackflap because: punctuation



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jackflap
 


Here is the funny thing, a few years back a 21 year old kid here in Miami, that's right a 21 year old kid, got a 3 million dollar contract from the Pentagon to furnish it with .362 ammuntion rounds.

The only stipulation being that they could not be Russian or Chinese made.

So the kid goes to Chezk Republic and does what, buys a million Russian .362 rounds, proceeds to then counterfit the crates and file off the markings from the bullets!

By the way he was paid up front.

Now he ended up being jailed for all that, two years, in a Federal country club, after a fair trial.

See a difference?



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Absolutely incredible double standard. When I read the snippet below I suddenly thought that they could very well have found this crap and decided to sell it. It's not unheard of for the fighters in that area to hide ammunition and weapons in privately owned fields without the owner even knowing it. So here this kid does what his dad says and tries to sell the weaponry and ends up with a couple of jumper cables on his tongue and ankle.


The CIA paid Pakistani authorities a US$500,000 bounty to detain Abdullah Khadr in October 2004. The U.S. alleges Abdullah Khadr bought AK-47 and mortar rounds, rocket-propelled grenades and containers of mine components for al-Qaida for use against coalition forces in Afghanistan. He allegedly bought the weapons at the request of his father, authorities said.


Link

Do notice that the words used in the article state bought. Not brought. Which could be some intentional word play.



edit on 7-5-2011 by jackflap because: punctuation and content



new topics

top topics



 
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join