Mr. Warren Allmand, representing ICLMG at the follow-up meeting to Canada’s Second Universal Periodic Review with civil society and Aboriginal organizations, raised important issues which had been overlooked in the countries’ recommendations to Canada regarding national security, including the lack of redress in the cases of Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El-Maati and Muayyed Nureddin, the need to implement the recommendations from the Maher Arar/O’Connor Commission regarding the oversight of security agencies, the alarming behavior of the government regarding the use of information that may have been obtained through torture, the application of the US no fly list to Canadian flights, the existence of the UN1267 terrorist list, the presence of racial profiling and the lack of due process regarding those lists and the security certificate regime, and the recent and problematic re-introduction of the preventive detention and investigative hearing dispositions in the Criminal Code (Bill S-7), etc. The ICLMG is opposed to terrorism and supports actions against terrorism which are respectful of human rights and civil liberties. Measures that violate or undermine human rights standards here and abroad in the name of national security make Canadians unsafe, not safer.
Follow us @ICLMG
In the context of the present controversial debate and imminent vote on Bill S-7 (Combating Terrorism Act), the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group makes a last appeal to Members of Parliament to reject the proposed legislation. The ICLMG opposes the reintroduction of the two provisions of the 2001 Anti-Terrorism Act that were subject to a sunset clause: the “investigative hearings” and the “preventive arrest” provisions (section 10). These provisions expired in February 2007 when a majority of Parliament, including 90 Liberal MPs, voted against their prolongation. Six years later, nothing justifies their reintroduction. “In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing, we appeal to Members of Parliament to not give in to fear,” said Roch Tassé, National Coordinator for ICLMG. “The Anti-Terrorism Act was adopted in a rush after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. Let’s not repeat the same mistake. A more rational assessment of the proposed legislation, one that is not grounded in fear, makes it obvious that the controversial provisions are neither necessary nor effective to confront terrorism.”