[R-G] Parliament races to pass new anti-terror bil

[Anthony Fenton]

Parliament races to pass new anti-terror bill
Richard Foot ,  Canwest News Service
Published: Monday, February 04, 2008

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html? 
id=22596346-1df1-4dbe-9901-ae4874ae9d02&k=83131


The House of Commons is racing against time to pass a controversial  
new anti-terror bill before a similar existing law - struck down by  
the Supreme Court - expires later this month.

That would normally be a difficult task in a minority Parliament,  
however the opposition Liberals have agreed to push new security  
certificate legislation through the House this week, in spite of  
Liberal concerns about the bill's impact on civil liberties.

"This isn't a bill we would have introduced ourselves," says Ujjal  
Dosanjh, the Liberal national security critic. "But this is the bill  
we were presented by the government.

"We believe the issue is timely passage (of the legislation) and as a  
responsible party we want to make sure that's done."

Bill C-3 is the Conservative government's response to the Supreme  
Court's landmark 2007 decision striking down provisions of the  
security certificate system - an extraordinary immigration measure  
that lets authorities detain and deport non-citizens considered  
national security threats.

The court said security certificates were an acceptable tool in an  
age of terror, but said the law violated the Constitution because it  
allows the government to detain and deport people, including  
permanent residents of Canada, without any way of defending  
themselves in closed judicial hearings.

The court gave Ottawa one year, until February 23, to bring the law  
in line with the Charter of Rights.

Eight months later the Conservatives responded with Bill C-3, which  
creates special advocates - government-appointed lawyers who can act  
in the interests of detainees by seeing and challenging the evidence  
against them.

Special advocates, however, would still be restricted from discussing  
the government's secret evidence with the detainees themselves,  
without explicit permission from a judge. They can also not compel  
the government to disclose all its evidence, as is the rule in  
criminal prosecutions.

Critics of the bill, including the Canadian Bar Association and  
prominent constitutional lawyers, say such restrictions will make it  
difficult for special advocates to defend accused people.

They say the use of special advocates will not pass constitutional  
muster and will simply end up once again before the Supreme Court.

The Bloc Quebecois and the NDP have said they will oppose the bill in  
the House, where on Monday night MPs voted 191-54 in favour of  
approving a handful of opposition-sponsored amendments to the  
legislation.

One of those amendments says security certificates cannot be based on  
information that may have been obtained through torture.

Such new clauses have not been sufficient to win the support of the  
NDP, whose members say the looming expiry of the old law is not a  
good enough reason to approve a new one.

"It's puzzling the Liberals supporting it," said Penny Priddy, the  
NDP's national security critic. "If someone gives you flawed  
legislation, why would you pass it just because of a tight timeline."

Tory MP Dave MacKenzie, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of  
Public Safety, told the Commons in November that, "If we do not pass  
this by February, 2008, all current security certificates would be  
quashed."

Six men accused of terrorist links are currently in jail or living  
under strict bail conditions, facing deportation from Canada under  
the security certificate regime.

Quashing their certificates, said MacKenzie, "would pose a serious  
threat to the safety of the Canadian public and the security of Canada."

So far only two Liberals, Ontario MPs Colleen Beaumier and Andrew  
Telegdi, have publicly opposed C-3. The support of their remaining  
colleagues is enough to ensure the bill's passage through the House  
in a final vote that's expected either Tuesday or Wednesday.

Dosanjh said in spite of its flaws, Bill C-3 is an acceptable  
solution to the constitutional problems pinpointed by the Supreme Court.

"We believe we've improved the bill (through amendments)," he said.  
"If the court takes a look at it and has comments to make it will,  
but I see no reason why it would be struck down again."


© Canwest News Service 2008