jdobbin Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 There are likely to be many issues discussed as trade, Afghanistan and the environment. One issue may crop up on the first days: Khadr. Way back, I suggested that Canada ought to have some sort of contingency if Khadr was suddenly dropped off on our border. If the Cuba prison is closed, this may be what happens to Khadr. Harper seems not to have taken this into account. No Canadian citizen can be refused at the border. Khadr could be back in Canada in 2009. http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/569285 Canadian government lawyers have repeatedly raised concerns about the U.S. prosecution of Omar Khadr because he was only 15 when captured, while publicly, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has supported the war crimes trial of the Toronto-born detainee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 (edited) Harper might have him thrown back in the clink either way on some convenient charge. Edited January 14, 2009 by Charles Anthony deleted re-copied Opening Post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progressive Tory Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Harper might have him thrown back in the clink either way on some convenient charge. Maybe he'll have him arrested as a 'Separatist'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Maybe he'll have him arrested as a 'Separatist'. treason, would be the charge more likely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Harper might have him thrown back in the clink either way on some convenient charge. He will? No one can seem to think of one that would apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 treason, would be the charge more likely Treason against which country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Treason against which country? I'll leave that for Harper to figure out. Maybe they'll charge him with some random terrorism thing. Hell I'm no lawyer, I'll leave that to the crown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I'll leave that for Harper to figure out. Maybe they'll charge him with some random terrorism thing. Hell I'm no lawyer, I'll leave that to the crown. I wonder if Harper has even given it a thought. If he did not commit a crime in Canada or against Canadians, he might not be charged with anything. And if he was, what about time served already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Who's to say if the prison is closed they'd all be set free? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Who's to say if the prison is closed they'd all be set free? Since Bush has been trying to get countries for many of the prisoners who they no longer want to keep, you have to wonder if they will want to keep Khadr even if he is prosecuted. He may get time served and end up being sent to Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I wonder if Harper has even given it a thought. If he did not commit a crime in Canada or against Canadians, he might not be charged with anything. And if he was, what about time served already? It is a NATO war though and an act against an ally is an act against us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I wonder if Harper has even given it a thought. If he did not commit a crime in Canada or against Canadians, he might not be charged with anything. And if he was, what about time served already? Like I said terrorism is a very vague term, and a good crown attorney could spin some charge on it. Like I said that'll be up to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Since Bush has been trying to get countries for many of the prisoners who they no longer want to keep, you have to wonder if they will want to keep Khadr even if he is prosecuted. He may get time served and end up being sent to Canada. I can smell your trap from here dobbin. You are waiting for someone to say "just arrest him for anything and throw him in jail" so you can start going on about equal rights for all Canadians and all that business, lol. I'm on to you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Like I said terrorism is a very vague term, and a good crown attorney could spin some charge on it. Like I said that'll be up to them. It isn't a vague term. It is defined in law. I have never heard of any legal analyst who was able to say what charges could be laid in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 I can smell your trap from here dobbin. You are waiting for someone to say "just arrest him for anything and throw him in jail" so you can start going on about equal rights for all Canadians and all that business, lol. I'm on to you I'm not waiting on anything except to hear what charges might be laid. Canadian citizens can't be held on a security certificate without habeas corpus. Evidence must be presented. That is what all Canadians are guaranteed under law. Now, I am not saying he won't be taken into custody. I am asking what charge. You obviously don't care what charge but the Supreme Court would. Even the U.S. is having trouble figuring out what charges to place and whether Khadr's youth would apply if he was convicted. he could be released very shortly and Canada doesn't seem to have a plan for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 It isn't a vague term. It is defined in law. I have never heard of any legal analyst who was able to say what charges could be laid in this case. i'm speculating Harper will have to do something or he'll have egg on his face concerning Khadr. Like I said, that will be up to the legal department. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 i'm speculating Harper will have to do something or he'll have egg on his face concerning Khadr. Like I said, that will be up to the legal department. Prediction: if he ends up at the border, he will be taken in for a briefing and released. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Harper might have him thrown back in the clink either way on some convenient charge. "Loitering." Who's to say if the prison is closed they'd all be set free? That's a very good question. The US has so far seemed determined to prosecute Khadr, and I can't see why Gitmo being closed would change that. I don't think it is likely that the new administration would see fit to interfere with cases already before the courts (and while the trial has been started and stopped a number of times, Khadr's case IS before the courts.) While I could envision Obama bringing Hope And Change to prisoners who've been held at Gitmo without charges, or who have been tentatively charged but have yet to face trial, it seems to me that intervening in a trial in progress would be a rather extraordinary step, and one Obama or his people will be unwilling to take particularly when a defendant as unsympathetic as Khadr is charged with slaying a medic. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 "Loitering." Cute. I would have said a security certificate but the Supreme Court says that can't be used for a Canadian citizen. Charges have to be made. Evidence presented. That's a very good question. The US has so far seemed determined to prosecute Khadr, and I can't see why Gitmo being closed would change that. I don't think it is likely that the new administration would see fit to interfere with cases already before the courts (and while the trial has been started and stopped a number of times, Khadr's case IS before the courts.) Oh, I'm sure that prosecution will proceed. The problem faced is that in sentencing, the age issue still comes up and Khadr might get time served and be deported. This is the latest that American news sources are reporting on this case. The reporters at the Whitehouse have said that Bush is trying to get countries to take back some of the prisoners at the base because they are no longer thought to be a threat. The U.S. doesn't want them and no country wants them. Bush mentioned this in his closely speech the other day. There are still major problems with Khadr's case. Evidence is still sketchy and there is no eyewitness to his his attack. While I could envision Obama bringing Hope And Change to prisoners who've been held at Gitmo without charges, or who have been tentatively charged but have yet to face trial, it seems to me that intervening in a trial in progress would be a rather extraordinary step, and one Obama or his people will be unwilling to take particularly when a defendant as unsympathetic as Khadr is charged with slaying a medic. McCain also wanted to close the base so there is not much difference between Obama and McCain on this one. The case against Khadr could very well collapse again shortly. In any event, it doesn't mean that the base can't be wound up and prisoners brought to the U.S. where U.S. justice system prevails. If that happens, once again Khadr could be released and deported. Harper doesn't seem to have a plan for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Harper doesn't seem to have a plan for it. Fight fair dobbin. The Americans don't know what they're going to do for certain either. Harper cannot be expected to comment in order to substantiate rumor, surely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 "Loitering." I was thinking more "littering". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Fight fair dobbin. The Americans don't know what they're going to do for certain either. Harper cannot be expected to comment in order to substantiate rumor, surely. I think the Americans should set him loose back in Afghanistan....with a 20 minute head start! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Fight fair dobbin. The Americans don't know what they're going to do for certain either. Harper cannot be expected to comment in order to substantiate rumor, surely. Think it is pretty clear that under McCain or Obama, the prison in Cuba is going to close. Once Khadr is in the U.S., he comes under U.S. judicial jurisdiction. I think we can say with a certain confidence that the age issue will come up. Then, we have to see if the case collapses again. I have said that Khadr will likely end up back in Canada. I think it is likely going to be sooner rather than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Harper doesn't seem to have a plan for it. It's not that difficult to cover all contingencies. That's been done here and in other Khadr threads. Mind you dobbin, Harper isn't as smart as we are so I hope he and his advisors are paying attention to our learned comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 I was thinking more "littering". The U.S. can't even keep the charges going half the time. This was just announced in the last hours: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/13/khadr.html Legal proceedings against Canadian Omar Khadr have been thrown into fresh uncertainty after the head of the U.S. military commission process at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, secretly withdrew, then re-issued charges against all defendants, Khadr's military defence lawyer said Tuesday.The procedure — referred to as "withdrawal and re-referral" — has the legal effect of nullifying all prior proceedings in Khadr's case, Lt.-Cmdr. William Kuebler said in a statement. "As of today, there is no trial date in the military commission case of Omar Khadr," Kuebler said. He said documents recently disclosed by the U.S. Defence Department show that Susan Crawford, the Pentagon's top official for the military commissions, withdrew all charges on Dec. 17 and refiled them last Friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.