Murderers - Welcome to Canada

[Keepitsimple]

Can anybody make sense of this? "Speechless" is the only thing that came to mind.

Link: http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2007...pf-3698485.html

March 5, 2007

Fugitive killer won't be deported

By TOM GODFREY, SUN MEDIA

A Bangladeshi fugitive convicted of killing his country's prime minister in a bloody coup won't be deported from Canada because he faces a death sentence in his native land, an immigration board has ruled.

Noor Chowdhury, 57, filed a refugee claim to stay in Canada in 1997 but was deemed inadmissible due to convictions in absentia for murder and conspiracy to commit murder, according to an Immigration and Refugee Board.

Identified in the board's decision as "C," the former lieutenant-colonel in the Bangladeshi military and 18 others were convicted of taking part in an August 1975 coup in which PM Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and 15 members of his family were murdered.

'NOT FORESEEABLE'

"C participated in a coup ... walking into the victim's home and killing him," the board said in a secret ruling made available last week.

The board noted he faces certain death if he's deported to Bangladesh.

"Removal to Bangladesh was not foreseeable as long as the death sentence remained in effect," the board said.

In 1999, a court sentenced 15 people to death for their roles in the massacre.

Chowdhury and two others allegedly involved in the coup fled to Canada after years on the run. The two have since obtained citizenship -- one lives in Ottawa, the other in Montreal.

[Wilber]

I can't.

[guyser]

Canada does not extradite nor deport anyone facing the death penalty. Thats the rules we operate under.

I guess there should be exceptions , but are we sure the trial was vaild?

[Topaz]

Canada does not extradite nor deport anyone facing the death penalty. Thats the rules we operate under.

I guess there should be exceptions , but are we sure the trial was vaild?

Just one question, does that mean if OBL was here, he be free to stay???

[guyser]

Just one question, does that mean if OBL was here, he be free to stay???

Nope, he would have been outed before applying and thus he would not be accepted.

[blueblood]

Guyser is going to tear me in half for this one but here I go...

Kim Walker got sent to jail for killing somebody (In my opinion he had just cause, it's not right in a lot of ways its a belief that's all) Now this other guy killed somebody, and he gets to immigrate to Canada and run around Scott free, this guy just got away with murder. If I can accept that Kim Walker commited a crime and got punished for it, this other guy should be punished as well. We have no business becoming a safe haven for criminals, we also have no right to interfere with the justice system of another country. It's too bad Bangledesh has the death penalty, maybe he should have thought about that when he committed treason. Quite the double standard here.

[Wilber]

Quite the double standard here.

It's what we do best.

[Argus]

Canada does not extradite nor deport anyone facing the death penalty. Thats the rules we operate under.

They're not MY rules. They're not the rules the Canadian people want. They're not even the rules the Canadian government wants. They're the rules made by unelected judges following the perculiar political ideology of the elitist, ivory tower liberal.

And the problem then becomes the same as we have with the terrorist sympathizers and the security certificates. If we can't send these murdering scum home, what then? Do we have to let them out on the street? If so, I vote that the government buy homes on the streets where the families of the Supreme Court justices live, and send all murderers and rapists and terrorist wannabees to live there.

[guyser]

Guyser is going to tear me in half for this one but here I go...

Kim Walker got sent to jail for killing somebody (In my opinion he had just cause, it's not right in a lot of ways its a belief that's all) Now this other guy killed somebody, and he gets to immigrate to Canada and run around Scott free, this guy just got away with murder. If I can accept that Kim Walker commited a crime and got punished for it, this other guy should be punished as well. We have no business becoming a safe haven for criminals, we also have no right to interfere with the justice system of another country. It's too bad Bangledesh has the death penalty, maybe he should have thought about that when he committed treason. Quite the double standard here.

Nah...not going to tear you in half....more like pieces

The diff is that Kim Walker killed a man in Canada. This other man "C" did not do so in our country. He got in because he was tried and convicted at the time.

Both are guilty as hell. No doubt about it.

Hopefully we are NOT a safe haven for killers, but it can and will happen sometimes.(it shouldnt tho) I dont think we are interfering with another countries justice system as he has been convicted. What we are doing is saying we will not give him to you to kill. We may be , well we are, interfering with the admin of that justice system but that is common place all over the world.

Lets look at this . Extradition is pursued thru Treaties with other countries because we are all soveriegn nations. He ("C") did not commit a crime on our soil so we have no reason to detain him. When the extradtion request came thru, there was likely a note saying he would be hung or shot, the basic death penalty.

We do not send people to their death, no matter how much I wish in some cases they would

And little did we know, political crimes are usually exempt from these treaties

I am only assuming here, but if Bangladesh decided to commute his sentence CDA would likely round up this guy and send him back, but the foreign affairs office would need assurances that he would not be killed.

EDIT to add.: I believe , and perhaps jbg has some info, that the US has changed some of "out of country" laws to include pedophilia. I recall that some US tourists were arrested on US soil after being involved with some kids in Bangkok. This does go against what I wrote above as the crime did not occcur on American soil. Perhaps jbg knows and will be along any minute.................paging jbg.....to reception please

[guyser]

They're not MY rules. They're not the rules the Canadian people want. They're not even the rules the Canadian government wants. They're the rules made by unelected judges following the perculiar political ideology of the elitist, ivory tower liberal.

You are wrong, they are your rules. They were not made from unelected judges (read=Liberal) In fact you could not be more wrong, and if my writing style were like yours here is where I would insert a bon mot to try and humiliate the poster. But I wont. Hows them apples?

Death penalty was abolished in 1961. Death penalty was removed from the Military court years later ( I think in the 1970's) It was put to a free vote in 1976.... 'scuse me did someone mention Liberal judges?...and was defeated.

Japan, Germany, France, China and Austria do not extradite period.Most European nations, and Mexico as well as Canada do not extradite if the death penalty is called for.

In the case of Charles Ng I agreed we should not send him back to the US.....unless the US was willing to not execute him. (They got him, they didnt execute him)

Aside from all that, I did indicate that perhaps we should review this with an eye towards exceptions.But knowing how well we can convict the innocent in this country, it would have to be extraordinary circumstances. And frankly, if it were Texas asking, they would get a polite thanks for coming but please save your breath.

[blueblood]

So what gives this murderer the right not to face justice? It's not our business to detain/try him, it's bangledesh's. If I was in the bangledesh gov't i'd be hopping mad. By not extraditing this person is a flat out obstruction of justice even if it is barbaric. He did the crime in Bangledesh, he should pay for it there. Why not let all the murderer's in Canada out then. This is hypocricy in it's finest.

[guyser]

They're the rules made by unelected judges following the perculiar political ideology of the elitist, ivory tower liberal.

Just one more thing for all of us to ponder.

Who was PM in 1961 ? Diefenbaker

What Party was in power in 1961? The Progressive Conservatives.

So what does this mean?..."rules made by unelected judges following the perculiar political ideology of the elitist, ivory tower liberal."

[guyser]

So what gives this murderer the right not to face justice? It's not our business to detain/try him, it's bangledesh's. If I was in the bangledesh gov't i'd be hopping mad. By not extraditing this person is a flat out obstruction of justice even if it is barbaric. He did the crime in Bangledesh, he should pay for it there. Why not let all the murderer's in Canada out then. This is hypocricy in it's finest.

I dont see the hypocracy. We have signed a treaty with other nations and it states we will not send anyone back if they are facing the death penalty. We do not execute anyone in this country, so we will not facilitate another country in executing someone. I would cal that sticking to our guns (bad pun-unintentioned) If nothing else, we are not being hypocrites.Now if we can extradite someone before being convicted and sentenced to death, well then fine with me and our govt.

Plenty of first world countries do not even entertain extradtion in any form.

We do not let all the murderers out because we have convicted them and incarcerated them for crimes on our soil.

[blueblood]

So what gives this murderer the right not to face justice? It's not our business to detain/try him, it's bangledesh's. If I was in the bangledesh gov't i'd be hopping mad. By not extraditing this person is a flat out obstruction of justice even if it is barbaric. He did the crime in Bangledesh, he should pay for it there. Why not let all the murderer's in Canada out then. This is hypocricy in it's finest.

I dont see the hypocracy. We have signed a treaty with other nations and it states we will not send anyone back if they are facing the death penalty. Now if we can extradite someone before being convicted and sentenced to death, well then fine with me and our govt.

Plenty of first world countries do not even entertain extradtion in any form.

We do not let all the murderers out because we have convicted them and incarcerated them for crimes on our soil.

Look at this more simply. We have a murderer running around on our streets scott free. He has escaped justice, should he be running around free while other murderers are locked up. This is a loophole that is being exploited and needs to be closed. we don't have to drop him off at the airport, we can just boot him out of a plane with a parachute. The point is we cannot have murderers running around our streets in Canada.

[guyser]

Look at this more simply. We have a murderer running around on our streets scott free. we don't have to drop him off at the airport, we can just boot him out of a plane with a parachute. The point is we cannot have murderers running around our streets in Canada.

Show me where he was convicted in a Canadian court? So under CDN law he is not a murderer.

We cant boot him out of a plane because he is now a citizen of this country. Since it seems his was a political murder, he poses little threat to any of us. ( I may live to eat those words though)

If you think I want him here, you are wrong. I don't . But I also have some notions that his conviction was if not massaged , it was politically motivated. Their courts are not our courts. Who knows if the burden of proof is the same as ours.

Be that as it may, we have signed a treaty that spells this out for any country to read. And we have certainly been ignored when requesting help for a parent who had a child taken by the other spouse illegally. There are cases where the CDN living parent can prove where the child is and still no wheels turn.

[blueblood]

Look at this more simply. We have a murderer running around on our streets scott free. we don't have to drop him off at the airport, we can just boot him out of a plane with a parachute. The point is we cannot have murderers running around our streets in Canada.

Show me where he was convicted in a Canadian court? So under CDN law he is not a murderer.

We cant boot him out of a plane because he is now a citizen of this country. Since it seems his was a political murder, he poses little threat to any of us. ( I may live to eat those words though)

If you think I want him here, you are wrong. I don't . But I also have some notions that his conviction was if not massaged , it was politically motivated. Their courts are not our courts. Who knows if the burden of proof is the same as ours.

Be that as it may, we have signed a treaty that spells this out for any country to read. And we have certainly been ignored when requesting help for a parent who had a child taken by the other spouse illegally. There are cases where the CDN living parent can prove where the child is and still no wheels turn.

Under Bangledesh law he is a murderer, let them deal with him. The point is he is a murderer. We have a responsibility as a world leader and an example of justice to make sure justice is served. it's just too bad that facing justice for murder in bangledesh is death. What about if a Canadian killed someone here and fled to a country that wouldn't extradite him? justice isn't served.

[guyser]

We have a responsibility as a world leader and an example of justice to make sure justice is served.

We do and we are. We are upholding justice by doing exactly what we said we would when we signed the Treaty and be faced with this scenario.

it's just too bad that facing justice for murder in bangledesh is death. What about if a Canadian killed someone here and fled to a country that wouldn't extradite him? justice isn't served.

It would suck if he went to a country that does not have an extradtion treaty with Canada. But it has and will happen again. Still sucks tho.

[blue_canadian]

Just one question, does that mean if OBL was here, he be free to stay???

The American government and the CIA thought BIN was a good guy

[Alexandra]

Canada does not extradite nor deport anyone facing the death penalty. Thats the rules we operate under.

They're not MY rules. They're not the rules the Canadian people want. They're not even the rules the Canadian government wants. They're the rules made by unelected judges following the perculiar political ideology of the elitist, ivory tower liberal.

And the problem then becomes the same as we have with the terrorist sympathizers and the security certificates. If we can't send these murdering scum home, what then? Do we have to let them out on the street? If so, I vote that the government buy homes on the streets where the families of the Supreme Court justices live, and send all murderers and rapists and terrorist wannabees to live there.

You're right Argus. The 'supreme authorities' decided to change the rules in 1999, see: http://www.canada.com/theprovince/story.ht...0f9d698&k=10407

"...The act was designed to "prevent fugitives from considering Canada as a safe haven."

But it has backfired.

Before 1999, countries making extradition requests had to meet stringent evidentiary requirements -- including sworn affidavits from persons affected or connected by the crime -- resulting in long delays.

The new act removed the requirements, allowing a mere summary of evidence. Judges were to accept it in good faith.

For a time it appeared to be working.

"There were hundreds of cases flowing through without much consideration at all," says Gary Botting, a legal scholar with the University of B.C.'s Faculty of Law.

But a quartet of Supreme Court of Canada rulings, known collectively as the Ortega ruling, quickly derailed the "rubber stamp" approach.

The Court said judges had a duty to protect the Charter rights of fugitives by questioning foreign evidence. It allows lawyers to put up all sorts of objections....."

and on and on and on it goes for the 'rights of the fugitives'!

[na85]

Just because they're fugitives doesn't mean they don't have rights.

[Alexandra]

Just because they're fugitives doesn't mean they don't have rights.

You are speaking of those reciprocal rights of Canadian 'fugitives' held by one of our extradition treaty partners, such as - Singapore?

Why should Canada honor the rights of a fugitive from Singapore or Malaysia, et al. when those same rights are not honored for a Canadian in many of our extradition partner countries?

`

[na85]

Actually I was referring to fugitives in general. Don't put words in my mouth.

Why should Canada honor the rights of a fugitive from Singapore or Malaysia, et al. when those same rights are not honored for a Canadian in many of our extradition partner countries?

Because it's the moral high road, it's the right thing to do.

[guyser]

and on and on and on it goes for the 'rights of the fugitives'!

You would rather our judges just bend over and release these people to their respective homelands? I wouldn't.

Lets see...Mexico , The Phillipines and Thailand. All well known to be as fair as we are here in Canada, or perhaps they aren't?

India, probably better.

But what is really lamentable is China whining in that piece. I can easily say China has no leg to stand on, none at all, and in fact it discredits the others. China is surely the bastion of human rights and fair courts.

[Wilber]

Actually I was referring to fugitives in general. Don't put words in my mouth.

Why should Canada honor the rights of a fugitive from Singapore or Malaysia, et al. when those same rights are not honored for a Canadian in many of our extradition partner countries?

Because it's the moral high road, it's the right thing to do.

So we let assassins run free in our country. Not just any assassin but the assassin of a head of state. I'm certainly not proud of that kind of high road and it seems like a stupid thing to do.

[na85]

Rather than worrying about kicking these assassins out, I'd worry about preventing them from getting in in the first place.