View as Webpage

International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group

September 25, 2021

More than 110 Canadian Jurists Demand Justice for Hassan Diab

Yesterday, we released an open letter to Justice Minister David Lametti from more than 110 Canadian lawyers and legal professionals.

Their demand? Immediate action by Minister Lametti and his colleagues to protect Hassan Diab's rights:

1. That Minister Lametti give immediate assurances that Canada will not accept nor accede to a second request for Hassan Diab’s extradition;

2. That Minister of Foreign Affairs Marc Garneau urge France to put an immediate end to this continuing miscarriage of justice;

3. That Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suspend the extradition treaty with France.

Among the signatories: Alex Neve (human rights activist and former Secretary General of Amnesty international, Canada), Gary Botting (one of Canada’s leading authorities on extradition law), Rob Currie (specialist in the area of international and transnational criminal law), Don Bayne (Hassan Diab’s Canadian lawyer, has conducted trial and appellate advocacy at all levels of courts in Canada and at public inquiries around the world), Dennis Edney (defense lawyer for former Guantanamo Bay detainee Omar Khadr), Paul Champ (widely recognized as a leading authority on human rights and employment law issues), John Packer (Director of the Human Rights Research & Education Centre, University of Ottawa), Pearl Eliadis (human rights lawyer, expert in national institutions, human rights and democratic development), Barbara Jackman (lawyer specializing in immigration, refugee and national security law, human rights activist and recipient of the Order of Canada), and Allan Rock (president emeritus and professor of law at the University of Ottawa, former Minister of Justice & Attorney General (1993-97). Read more - Lire plus + Feel free to share on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram

Version française: Plus de 110 juristes canadien.nes exigent la justice pour Hassan Diab + Partagez sur Facebook, Twitter et Instagram

The Canadian Press: Dozens of lawyers call for suspension of extradition with France over Diab case

The Lawyer's Daily: More than 100 Canadian jurists demand Ottawa block any new bid by France to extradite Diab

Countering Islamophobia in Canada: After 20 Years of the "War on Terror"

Centre for Free Expression 23/09/2021 - Azeezah Kanji is a legal academic, writer, and Director of Programming at Noor Cultural Centre in Toronto. Her work focuses on racism, law, and social justice. Azeezah received her JD from University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law, and LLM specializing in Islamic Law from the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.  Join Azeezah in conversation with Tim McSorley, National Coordinator of the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group. Watch - Visionnez

Feel free to share on Facebook and Twitter

Open letter: Defer consultations on the Internet until after the election

Academic experts and civil society are calling on government to defer several open consultations on the future of the Internet until after a new government is formed.

OpenMedia 14/09/2021 - Dear Ms. Charette, Ms. Drouin & Mr. Sutherland, We the undersigned academics and organizations are writing to raise concerns with several of the Government’s ongoing consultations, specifically the consultation on “The Government’s proposed approach to address harmful content online” launched on July 29, 2021, and the consultation on “Fair revenue sharing between digital platforms and news media” launched on August 3, 2021. We represent a broad cross-section of civil society and public interest stakeholders and experts, and are committed to engaging with the Canadian government on these important issues. However, we note that this consultation takes place during an election period, at a time when the government is in caretaker mode. 

Guidance on the activities of government after the dissolution of Parliament specifically states that government business in matters of policy should be limited to areas that are routine, non-controversial, urgent, reversible without undue cost or disruption, or agreed to by opposition parties. The reference to emergencies such as natural disasters gives further context to the meaning of urgency in this guidance. The guidance further specifies that consultations must be deferred to the extent possible during the writ period. We note that the consultations referenced are on novel and highly controversial policy issues that could have profound implications for Canadians. According to media reporting, there is a significant diversity of opinion among stakeholders on these matters, and the political parties themselves have different policy prescriptions. Accordingly, these consultations are on matters that are neither routine, nor non-controversial, nor which have been agreed to by opposition parties, and we are of the view that to conduct them during an election is inappropriate and contrary to guidance. 

Further, we would also highlight that elections regulations mean that many civil society and public interest organizations are constrained in our ability to raise public awareness of the issues raised by these consultations, encourage public participation, or raise funds to support our own participation. It is our view that this creates an undue barrier to participation by civil society and public interest organizations, and the public themselves, and consequently it is inappropriate to continue these consultations during the writ period. Rather, the Government should defer these consultations until a new Government is in place. We would be grateful for your feedback and welcome the opportunity to discuss further. Sincerely,

Organizational Signers

1. Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA)
2. Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC)
3. Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
4. International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG)
5. Internet Society Canada Chapter (ISOC Canada)
6. OpenMedia

Academics Signers

1. Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa
2. Lex Gill, lawyer and associate at the Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto
3. Vivek Krishnamurthy, Director of the Canadian Internet policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) and Professor at the University of Ottawa
4. Emily Laidlaw, Canada Research Chair in Cybersecurity Law and Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, at the University of Calgary
5. Fenwick McKelvey, Associate Professor in Information and Communication Technology Policy, Faculty of Communication Studies at Concordia University
6. Christopher Parsons, Senior Research Associate at the Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto
7. Gregory Taylor, Associate Professor at the University of Calgary
8. Dwayne Winseck, Professor of Communication Studies at Carleton University Source

Does CRA’s Charities Directorate have an Islamophobia problem?

The Philanthropist Journal 21/09/2021 - “Muslim-led charities have for years expressed concerns about the selection, frequency, and reasoning behind audits of their organizations,” the report says. “The findings from Under Layered Suspicion suggest that there is a basis for these concerns.” [A] whole-of-government approach borne out of the 9/11 attacks, and subsequent terror-financing laws that treated Muslims and their institutions as potential national security threats susceptible to the influence of foreign interests, have led to unfair scrutiny of Muslim charities and a deep chill in Muslim civil society more broadly.

Emon’s findings have since been corroborated by new research on the CRA’s handling of Muslim-led charities. A report released in June by the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group found that 75% of charities that had their status revoked due to audits by the CRA’s Review and Analysis Division between 2008 and 2015 were Muslim, even though charities promoting the faith make up fewer than 1% of all charities in the country. Many of the revocations were based on suspicions of terrorism financing. Experts agree that the charities in question did commit violations of the Income Tax Act, but they say these issues are common in the charitable sector and do not usually result in punishments as severe as revocation. They also point to double standards that punish Muslim-led charities for activities that go unnoticed for other faiths. The report pointed out several instances of registered Christian charities inviting speakers who are known to have expressed homophobic or intolerant views without enduring any repercussions.

They say Muslim charities have long harboured deep anxiety over being targeted by auditors, often spending much higher amounts on compliance than comparable charities because they have little room for error and have to go out of their way to allay the suspicions of the national security establishment. This has led to a chilling effect among Muslim civil society, a decline in donors, and the pulling back from crucial aid and sorely needed humanitarian work in regions like Palestine, Somalia, or Syria, because of the challenges of meeting all stringent requirements.

“We’re serving people, both locally and globally, and we actually genuinely appreciate the idea that charities shouldn’t be given a free pass,” says Zaid Al-Rawni, the CEO of Islamic Relief Canada. “We’re taking public money, and I have no problem with being asked questions about the work we do.” 

“The problem is when the rules are specific for one group,” he adds. Al-Rawni says Muslim-led charities spend enormous amounts of money on compliance, far more than comparable charities, and the risk of falling afoul of stringent regulations drives away many potential donors, who worry that they in turn may fall under scrutiny or risk their reputation if an organization is accused of terrorism links. His organization has declined to carry out international projects that would have served desperate communities for the same reason. Read more - Lire plus

The secret ‘Muslim ban’ involving a Tax Court judge a national scandal

Monia Mazigh: 9/11 aftermath — A life destroyed by the 'War on Terror'

ICLMG 20/09/2021 - I remember my mother calling me from Ottawa in September 2002. I was in Tunis with my five-year-old daughter and my eight-month-old son. I was discouraged, confused and exhausted. My husband had disappeared a few days earlier. “Your wedding picture … ,” she said sheepishly. I didn’t understand. “It is on the front page of the Ottawa Citizen,” she continued. “I hid all the copies I have found at my ESL class … I didn’t want people to know about the case … My God, what are we going to do?” She was crying. I was silent listening to her sobbing. The emptiness of the long-distance call was agonizing for both of us. Shame. Yes, we felt shame. My mother was ashamed that my wedding picture — meant to capture a private, happy moment in our lives — was now being used as public, creepy evidence that my husband, Maher Arar, allegedly associated with al-Qaida, had disappeared. A bearded young man and his young smiling bride with her beige headscarf, now a Muslim couple separated by forced physical distance and skewed international laws. A life was destroyed. A new one arose. That is what the post-9/11 period meant for my family.

Nineteen years later, I still envision the moment of this phone call in my mind. Over and over.

The year when my husband was arrested by the FBI at John F. Kennedy Airport and subsequently “rendered” to Jordan, then to Syria, was a ghost year for me. Exactly like the “ghost plane” that transported him from New Jersey to Amman. It was a real plane, owned by a shadowy corporation whose registration didn’t exist, a stratagem to avoid accountability. A sneaky tool adopted in the “War of Terror” to transport prisoners to torture so nobody could see, nobody could hear, nobody would be held accountable. Maher was imprisoned and tortured in Syria for almost a year before finally being released. A commission of inquiry in Canada cleared him of any links to terrorism and the government apologized.

But that year was a ghost year for me. I lived through it without realizing the daunting task in front of me. A single mother of two children living on social welfare. The wife of a now-suspected terrorist who split her time between writing letters to politicians, giving interviews to journalists and meeting human rights activists to tell them about my husband’s case. Once an aspiring academic, I realized that my career would never be back on track; my reputation would never be the same as before. That “before” that I cherished in my worst moments when I watched my children growing up under the cloud of shame and fear. That same “before” that made me believe the illusion that Canada was a country of rights and would protect all its citizens.

Instead, the illusion of rights was swapped for the illusion of security. Security became a commodity sold by governments to their populations. And the populations bought into that narrative. For decades, many believed in it. They gave mandate after mandate to policymakers who issued law after law to “protect us” from “them” — the terrorists. Unbeknownst to some, this illusion of security was built by confiscating and violating the rights of the “others.” You give security to some by grabbing it from others. We were the “others.” Four governments conspired to “erase” my husband’s rights: Canada, the U.S., Jordan and Syria. These governments had never previously totally agreed on common values, but they arrested, rendered in the middle of the night, tortured, blindfolded and imprisoned in dungeons without charges. Cooperation in the age of the “War on Terror.”

That same sort of cooperation in the “War on Terror” killed — both directly and indirectly — close to two million people, the majority in Muslim countries, and created 38 million refugees and displaced persons worldwide. At home, it started with Bill C-36, the first anti-terrorism legislation in Canada, passed by the Jean Chrétien government in 2001, and ended with Bill C-51, the anti-terrorism act 2.0 version passed by Stephen Harper in 2015. Each time a bill like this is made into law, a right is taken from some groups to satisfy the rest. At the beginning, the evil had one image: Muslim terrorists. But over the years, it has become anyone who challenges prevailing norms. Environmental groups? Charitable organizations? Indigenous groups? Gradually, they became the “other.” A perfect recipe for a polarized world. A scary world.

With the fall of Kabul into the hands of the Taliban and thousands of questions in the minds of many about the future of the civilians, very few words have been said about the human consequences of the “War on Terror.” Was it really worth it? Did it make our world a better place? Perhaps after 20 years of craziness and devastation, it is time to properly examine this orgy of destruction and abuse. It is time to look at our common humanity and know each other not through bombs, drones or infrared goggles, not through the “clash of civilizations” but rather through common dreams for a better world for our children. Perhaps, a world where wedding pictures stay safe inside family albums and continue to remind us of happy moments in our lives. Read more - Lire plus

The Canadian Press 15/09/2021 - Supporters of a Canadian man imprisoned in China for a decade and a half want the next federal government to use the 2022 Beijing Olympics as a bargaining chip to bring him home. And the advocates for Huseyin Celil say they want the deal to be a package that also wins the freedom of two other high-profile Canadian prisoners -- Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. Kovrig and Spavor recently surpassed a grim 1,000-day milestone in Chinese prisons in what is seen by Canada and its Western allies as retaliation for the RCMP's arrest of Chinese high-tech scion Meng Wanzhou on an American extradition warrant in December 2018.

But Celil's advocates don't want Canadians to forget him either -- or the fact that unlike Kovrig and Spavor, he has yet to be allowed a single visit by Canadian diplomats since his 2006 arrest -- and are calling on whomever wins Monday's federal election to appoint a special envoy to win his freedom. Canadian consular visits have been banned because China doesn't recognize Celil's dual Canadian citizenship, obtained in 2005, one year before he was arrested in Uzbekistan by the Chinese after his long-standing advocacy for the human rights of his Muslim ethnic Uyghur minority. "I'm hoping with the 2022 Olympic Games to be held in China that it's another moment where there's another opportunity to secure the release and return of Celil, whether it's part of a package that's done with the two Michaels or a stand-alone," Celil's lawyer, Chris MacLeod, said in an interview Tuesday. "Obviously, I want all three."

With the Winter Games set to open in February, there are growing calls to boycott the Chinese games or cancel plans to broadcast them amid a chorus of criticism over Beijing's treatment of the Uyghurs, as well as its clampdowns on Hong Kong, Tibet and Taiwan. Celil's family has been caught up in that geopolitical swirl as they saw their periodic visits to him in prison cut off about five years ago. That's when Beijing began its crackdown on Muslim Uyghurs in China's Xinjiang province, rounding them up into prison camps, citing the need to fight terrorism. China's treatment of the Uyghurs has sparked worldwide condemnation and allegations of genocide, accusations China vehemently denies. The upshot for Celil's family and supporters is that they are no longer sure if he is even alive because all contact with his family in China has been cut off, said MacLeod.

"I don't have any communication with the family since the concentration camps opened in China," said Celil's wife, Kamila, in an interview from southern Ontario where she lives with her 16-year-old son -- a child her husband has never met. Kamila Celil said the current Liberal government hasn't done enough to push for her husband's release, and she would like to see more done. MacLeod agrees, saying the current government deserves a "terrible grade" for its advocacy on behalf of Celil. He said ministers in the former Conservative government of Stephen Harper were able to commute Celil's original death sentence to life in prison. Alex Neve, the former Canadian secretary-general of Amnesty International, said successive Canadian politicians have failed Celil and his family. "Over the span of 15 years of unjust imprisonment and grave human rights violations, two prime ministers and 10 ministers of foreign affairs have had the opportunity and responsibility to secure Huseyin Celil's release from detention in China and return to his family in Canada," Neve said in a statement to The Canadian Press.

"There have been many reassuring words, but little in the way of sustained, high-level government efforts to bring him home. The next government must turn that around. Pursuing freedom for Huseyin through every possible avenue must become an absolute top priority." Prior to last week's televised federal leaders' debate, Neve joined a coalition of several dozen human rights advocates, lawyers and many others in sending an open letter to the five major party leaders to revive their interest in Celil's case. While they said they supported the Canadian government's efforts on behalf of Kovrig and Spavor, they were "gravely concerned about Canada's foreign policy and its choice to prioritize some Canadians over others," they said in their letter. "Canada has been actively building a coalition in support of the two Michaels but has left Huseyin Celil behind. We are very disturbed to see him being treated as a second-class citizen and deprived of his rights." Read more - Lire plus

Canada’s ‘two Michaels’ on a plane back from China: Trudeau

TAKE ACTION: China: Free Huseyin Celil

Canadaland 20/09/2021 Recent weeks have seen increasing reports of police violence and misconduct at Fairy Creek. According to reporters, activists, and legal observers on the ground at the anti-logging demonstrations in southern Vancouver Island, the RCMP has been deploying force in their arrests of peaceful demonstrators. One video taken on August 21 showed an RCMP officer ripping the Covid face masks off of two women, seconds before police unleashed pepper spray onto a crowd at close range. “I screamed at him, asking what the heck he was doing and why’d you rip our masks off?” one of the women, Sharon Davies, tells Canadaland. On this week’s episode of CANADALAND, we speak to people who describe violence they’ve experienced or witnessed at Fairy Creek, as well as to experts who explain the limits of the public’s ability to hold the RCMP to account.

Kristy Grear, a producer and videographer with an independent film studio, says she felt compelled to break out of her documentarian role to help demonstrators shield their faces when police brought out their canisters of pepper spray. She says the RCMP threw her into some bushes and that, when she got up, she saw some particularly disturbing things. “I watched them pick up a girl by her hair and make her open her mouth and deploy the pepper spray into her mouth,” Grear says. “I saw one officer spread the legs of a young woman and spray the pepper spray up her pants and into her genital area. I watched people be [dragged] out and choked and beaten and stepped on and kicked and punched.” There have been allegations that Indigenous people and people of colour appear to have been specifically targeted for harassment and arrest. Others have described the police engaging in night raids, in which loud sounds and lights are used to keep people awake. [...] At over 900 arrests, the Fairy Creek blockades have now surpassed the 1993 Clayoquot Sound conflict as the largest act of civil disobedience in Canadian history.

The RCMP recommends that anyone with issues about their behaviour submit a complaint. And demonstrators at Fairy Creek have been doing just that, with at least 91 having been filed to the RCMP’s watchdog body, the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission (CRCC). But lawyer Paul Champ says that the CRCC is quite limited in its ability to actually hold the force to account. “You make a complaint to this Civilian Review and Complaints Commission. They do an investigation and then they make a report with findings and recommendations,” he explains.“But the RCMP commissioner doesn’t have to accept any of those findings or recommendations. And if the RCMP commissioner doesn’t, then it just sits there.” Champ is now representing the BC Civil Liberties Association in a court application to get the force to move more swiftly, so that complainants needn’t spend years waiting for the RCMP commissioner to respond to the CRCC’s reports. The RCMP itself is responsible for the first phase of complaint reviews. And if they believe that a complaint against them falls outside their mandate to investigate it, they are able to dismiss it. Hundreds of complaints get dismissed each year. It is when someone disagrees with the RCMP’s assessment of their complaint that it is referred to the oversight body, the CRCC.

Per figures in the CRCC’s annual reports, complaints against the RCMP have been increasing over the past few years. In 2020, the public lodged 1,647 complaints against the Mounties — 22% more than in 2019. Champ describes the RCMP complaints process as “toothless,” compared to even those for most municipal and provincial forces in Canada, which he says “are usually far more effective” and “go far more quickly.” The CRCC also offers no opportunities to hold individual officers accountable for misconduct. “For example, [under] the Ontario Police Services Act, if you make a complaint, it can actually go to a full disciplinary hearing against individual officers. Individual officers can be disciplined and even fired,” Champ says. “There’s no mechanism like that at the federal level, none at all.” Historically, the fourth estate has also served as a check on police powers, shining a light on misconduct when official processes prove ineffective. But the RCMP has been blocking access to areas where arrests are being made, in exclusion zones far past the sightlines of reporters and photographers. [...]

Wally Oppal, a retired BC Supreme Court judge, says it will take tougher legislation to create a real civilian oversight body that can compel police to change their conduct, not one that is just advisory in nature. “I just think that’s absolutely wrong for a police force in the 21st century, still not being amenable to independent civilian authority to examine their conduct,” he says. “You know, if you don’t have independent oversight, essentially you have a police state,” Oppal says, “and you can’t do that in a democracy.” Read more & Listen - Lire plus et écouter

B.C. Civil Liberties Association heads to court over RCMP complaint delays

Police treatment of Indigenous protesters differs starkly from white protesters, experts say

National Post 13/09/2021 - Chelsea Manning, the former U.S. soldier whose leak of thousands of U.S. documents changed the public’s view of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, is challenging Canada’s secrecy laws — saying the way they are being used to keep her out of the country threatens the public’s right to know important information that embarrasses the government.

Manning, a 33-year-old American citizen, served notice of intent to raise a constitutional challenge of two laws that the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) is using to prevent her from visiting Canada. “It would appear to put nearly every political, national security, and foreign affairs reporter in Canada at some risk of a criminal charge and life imprisonment on a routine basis,” lawyers Joshua Blum and Lex Gill write in a notice of challenge filed on Manning’s behalf. Blum and Gill, representing Manning at a hearing of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) next month, say the government’s application of security and criminal code laws to her case mean the same laws could also be wielded to silence whistleblowers and journalists, undermining Canada’s constitutional rights and freedoms.

The connection between Manning and public interest journalism in Canada comes from the government saying the Security of Information Act — that criminalizes passing information that could harm Canada to foreign entities or terrorist groups — applies to Manning’s case, when what she was convicted of doing was passing public interest information to media organizations as a whistleblower, her lawyers say. The government’s position “threatens freedom of expression and freedom of the press in the starkest and most obvious terms,” write Blum and Gill. [...]

In 2018 she was allowed in to speak at a conference. A government assessment at the time said Manning’s crimes “were of a time and place, little real harm resulted.” After a weekend in Montreal that May, she returned to the U.S. without incident, documents say. If Manning thought this meant she was welcome in Canada, she was mistaken. It appears someone wasn’t pleased with her visit and CBSA declared her inadmissible to Canada. After a challenge in Federal Court, the government agreed to refer her case to the IRB for a hearing, filed documents say. “This proved to be false,” Manning’s lawyers write. An Access to Information request showed that CBSA “unlawfully held the file and never sent the matter to the tribunal for a hearing.” Under threat of another court challenge, Manning’s case was finally referred to the IRB.

No longer claiming Manning’s crimes were equivalent to treason, CBSA instead tagged her for violations under the Criminal Code of unauthorized use of a computer and section 16(2) of the Security of Information Act. That section of the secrecy laws declares it an offence to intentionally and without lawful authority share information with a foreign entity or terrorist group that harms Canadian interests. Manning’s lawyers say neither of these laws are equivalent to what Manning was convicted of in the United States. Manning’s disclosures were not out of greed nor malevolence towards the West, her lawyers say. A charge of “aiding the enemy” against Manning was rejected by the U.S. military court.

The Canadian government’s argument appears to reject public interest disclosure as a mitigating factor and equates a leak to a news agency with passing military secrets to al-Qaeda or an enemy state. “This is the fundamental reason why constitutional and international human rights law uniformly guarantees that freedom of expression must protect listeners as well as speakers,” Manning’s lawyers argue. “In the instant case — and while a source or whistleblower’s constitutional right to impart information is doubtlessly also at play — it is the public’s right to know that is most fundamentally at issue.” Manning’s lawyers also argue the law is overly broad; as worded, it extends the same blanket protection over all information the government “is taking measures to safeguard.” “This could range from truly sensitive classified documents, all the way to run-of-the-mill data that happens to be password protected,” the lawyers say. “This indeterminacy is constitutionally impermissible, in part, because of the chilling effect its application could have on legitimate newsgathering.” Read more - Lire plus

Common Dreams 13/09/2021 - Up to half of the estimated $14 trillion that the Pentagon has spent in the two decades since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan has gone to private military contractors, with corporate behemoths such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, and General Dynamics hoovering up much of the money. That's according to a new paper (pdf) authored by William Hartung—director of the Arms and Security Program at the Center for International Policy—and released Monday by Brown University's Costs of War Project.

Published just days after the 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks and two weeks after the last U.S. military plane departed Afghanistan, the paper documents the extent to which the massive post-9/11 surge in Pentagon spending benefited weapon makers, logistics firms, private security contractors, and other corporate interests. "The magnitude of Pentagon spending in the wake of the 9/11 attacks was remarkable," Hartung observes. "The increase in U.S. military spending between Fiscal Year 2002 and Fiscal Year 2003 was more than the entire military budget of any other country, including major powers like China, Russia, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France." According to Hartung's analysis, from "one-third to one-half" of the Pentagon's $14 trillion in spending since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan on October 2001 went to defense contractors, which spend heavily on government lobbying. Read more - Lire plus

DemocracyNow! 15/09/2021 - We speak with reporter Matthieu Aikins about how his investigation for The New York Times found an August 29 U.S. drone strike, which the Pentagon claimed targeted a facilitator with the militant group ISIS-K, actually killed 10 Afghan civilians, including seven children and Zemari Ahmadi, an Afghan engineer who had worked since 2006 for an American aid group.

A review of video evidence by the Times shows Zemari loading canisters of water at the charity’s office, after the Pentagon claimed surveillance video showed Zemari loading what they thought were explosives into a car at an unknown compound earlier in the day. “We put together evidence that showed that what the military interpreted as a series of suspicious moves from the sky was, according to his co-workers and colleagues and video evidence, just an ordinary day for this aid worker,” says Aikins. Read more - Lire plus

The New York Times 20/09/2021 - The decision on a case at the Guantánamo war court did not resolve the broader issue of whether prosecutors can use evidence obtained through torture. A Pentagon appeals panel on Monday threw out a ruling by an Army judge who found that evidence obtained during the torture of a defendant could be considered in determining pretrial matters in a death-penalty case at Guantánamo Bay. “The issue of admissibility of such evidence is not ripe or ready for judicial review,” the Court of Military Commission Review ruled in a six-page decision that essentially left to another day the overarching issue of whether prosecutors can in some instances use evidence obtained through the torture of a prisoner.

Lawyers brought the appeal on behalf of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi man accused of plotting Al Qaeda’s bombing of the U.S. Navy destroyer Cole off Yemen in 2000, which killed 17 U.S. sailors. Mr. Nashiri was waterboarded by psychologists working for the C.I.A., and his trial has been mired in pretrial proceedings for a decade as the court that was set up after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, tries to deal with the legacy of the torture. The Pentagon appeals panel issued the decision on Monday, the eve of the first pretrial hearings in the case since January 2020 following a lengthy closure of the court caused by the coronavirus pandemic. A military commission at Guantánamo is essentially a commuter court, with nearly everybody who takes part in the proceedings, aside from the prisoner, arriving on a charter flight from the Washington, D.C., area.

At issue in the appeal had been a decision by prosecutors earlier this year to include in a classified filing something Mr. Nashiri told a C.I.A. interrogator during a particularly brutal interrogation in 2002. His lawyers were seeking information about a drone strike in Syria in 2015 that killed Mohsen al-Fadhli, another Qaeda figure, as they explored a theory that the United States had already killed plotters of the Cole attack who were more senior and more culpable. Prosecutors asked the judge to end that line of inquiry, pointing to a classified cable that said Mr. Nashiri had told C.I.A. agents as he was being interrogated at a secret prison in Afghanistan that Mr. Fadhli had not been involved.

Defense lawyers asked the trial judge to reject the filing, saying prosecutors in a military commission trial are forbidden to submit evidence derived from torture. Rather than reject the evidence, the judge, Col. Lanny J. Acosta Jr., ruled on May 18 that while juries could not see that type of evidence, prosecutors may invoke such information for very narrow use on matters that are a judge’s rather than a jury’s domain. The ruling stirred controversy. David Luban, a professor of law at Georgetown University, said he found it troubling because “torture evidence sneaks in through the back door.” Mr. Nashiri’s defense lawyers said they were disappointed that the panel had not gone further and forbidden the use of evidence derived through torture in pretrial litigation. They had sought a broader decision that found Colonel Acosta’s reasoning flawed, and an order to review filings made between the prosecution and the judge to determine if other such evidence had seeped into the case. Mr. Nashiri’s military lawyer, Capt. Brian L. Mizer of the Navy, said Monday that his team was considering an appeal to a civilian court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Read more - Lire plus

Secret Hearing Focuses on Hidden Microphones at Guantánamo Prison

20 Years After Start of 'War on Terror', Groups Demand Closure of Gitmo 'Once and For All'

Biden administration has made little progress towards goal of closing notorious Guantanamo Bay prison

New judge says 9/11 trial at Gitmo is 'at least one year away'

Iraqi detainee reported suffering paralysis at Guantánamo

Toronto: Benedict Cumberbatch Urges U.S. to Shut Down Guantanamo Bay

Bloomberg 21/09/2021 - Hong Kong has quietly broadened the language it uses to describe national security violations, a shift lawyers said could expand the reach of a government crackdown on dissent in the Asian financial hub. City authorities have begun using the phrase “contrary to the interests of national security” in recent weeks to define new red lines in the entertainment industry and the tax code. Previously, officials had warned more specifically against anything that might “endanger national security.” The latter term appears 31 times in the full text of the security law, while the “contrary to” phrasing is absent.

That subtle shift could increase compliance risks for companies operating in Hong Kong, especially in sectors like technology and media that frequently bump up against political issues. Under the broader term, more people, groups and firms could be accused of security violations for espousing values that run contrary to the government’s stated interests. The new term comes as authorities expand a crackdown on dissent to trade unions, charities, filmmakers and professional associations -- including for journalists -- that engage in what the government deems “political” activities. The city’s largest opposition newspaper, Apple Daily, and its biggest teacher’s union have ceased operation in recent months under government pressure due to their support for pro-democracy causes. Read more - Lire plus

H.K. Pro-Democracy Union Prepares To Disband on Security Fears

Hong Kong to create more national security offences

Hong Kong Tiananmen vigil organisers charged under national security law

Groups that endanger national security to lose charities status, tax exemptions, Hong Kong’s financial services chief warns

Snacks, books for prisoners spark Hong Kong security law arrests

ACTIONS

No More Attacks on Afghanistan

World Beyond War - In response to a bombing at the Kabul airport, the US president authorized 2 drone strikes on August 27 and 29 that killed several Afghan civilians, including a family of ten. Official counts indicate that at least 241,000 people have been killed in the Afghanistan and Pakistan war zones. We oppose any further attacks on Afghanistan, “over the horizon” or by troops on the ground.

How to Help Afghans in Afghanistan and Canada

Muslim Link - The people of Afghanistan are in dire need of humanitarian aid and Canada has committed to accepting 20,000 Afghan refugees.

How can you help? Click below for a list of ways you can support the people of Afghanistan at home and abroad.

Protect our rights from facial recognition!

ICLMG - Facial recognition surveillance is invasive and inaccurate. This unregulated tech poses a threat to the fundamental rights of people across Canada. Federal intelligence agencies refuse to disclose whether they use facial recognition technology. The RCMP has admitted (after lying about it) to using facial recognition for 18 years without regulation, let alone a public debate regarding whether it should have been allowed in the first place.

Send a message to Prime Minister Trudeau and Public Safety Minister Bill Blair calling for a ban now.

+ Take action to ban biometric recognition technologies

Trudeau: Ensure justice for Abousfian Abdelrazik

In September 2003, Canadian citizen Abousfian Abdelrazik was arrested in Sudan, while he was back in the country visiting his ailing mother. Over the next three years he was imprisoned for nearly 20 months and was held under house arrest for 12 months. 

He was denied a lawyer, and was never charged or brought before a judge. During that time he was badly tortured in three different prisons. Not only did Canada fail to take steps to protect him, CSIS officials frequently obstructed efforts to secure his release.

Stop Mohamed Harkat's Deportation to Torture

No one should be deported to torture. Ever. For nearly 19 years, Mohamed Harkat has faced the ordeal of being place under a kafkaesque security certificate based on secret evidence and accusations he cannot challenge, and facing deportation to torture in Algeria.

Please join us and send the letter below to Prime Minister Trudeau and Minister of Public Safety Bill Blair, urging them to stop the deportation to torture of Mr. Harkat.



• Your letter will also go to your Member of Parliament, along with the ministers of Justice & of Immigration.
• And don't hesitate to also sign and share this petition!

China: Free Canadian Huseyin Celil

The Chinese authorities accused Huseyin of offences related to his activities in support of Uighur rights. They held Huseyin in a secret place. They gave him no access to a lawyer, to his family, or to Canadian officials. They threatened him and forced him to sign a confession. They refused to recognize Huseyin’s status as a Canadian citizen, and they did not allow Canadian officials to attend his trial. It was not conducted fairly, and resulted in a sentence of life in prison in China. His life sentence was reduced to 20 years in February 2016. Huseyin has spent much of his time in solitary confinement. He lacks healthy food and is in poor health. Kamila needs her husband, and the boys need their father back

+ Urge China to stop targeting Uyghurs in China and abroad

OTHER NEWS - AUTRES NOUVELLES

Migrants and Refugee Rights

Droits des migrant.es et des réfugié.es

Canada: Abuse, Discrimination in Immigration Detention, as Thousands Held

Biden administration to reopen migrant detention camp near Guantánamo Bay prison

Surveillance

New Zealand: rushing anti-terror law could lead to surveillance overreach, minor parties say

EFF and Allies Urge Council of Europe to Add Strong Human Rights Safeguards Before Final Adoption of Flawed Cross Border Surveillance Treaty

UN urges moratorium on use of AI that imperils human rights

EU commissioner calls for urgent action against Pegasus spyware

‘There is no private life’: Three Togolese journalists react to being selected for spyware surveillance

Weapons Trade

Commerce d'armes

Canada must stop arming Saudi Arabia, four former MPs say

Miscellaneous

Divers

US donates ‘anti-terrorism’ equipment to PNP

Ken Rubin: Opposition to combating centralized secretive prime ministerial decision-making is weak

Celebrating 10 years of RightsCon: 2021 Outcomes report

January - June 2021

What we've been up to so far in 2021:

• We called on the government to not expand anti-terror laws to fight racism
• We met with many MPs, agencies, policy staff from the Offices of the Minister of Public Safety and Minister of Justice, etc.
• We published a report exposing CRA's Prejudiced Audits against Muslim Charities
• We continue to call for Justice for Dr Hassan Diab and his family!
• We were featured in 85+ news media articles, op-eds and podcasts
• We co-organized and presented in various online events
• We published op-eds, articles & statements ...and much more! More details

During the second half of the year, we will organize activities around the 20th "anniversary" of the beginning of the so-called "War on Terror" and the rushed adoption of Canada's Anti-terrorism Act of 2001, as well as the problematic laws passed and human rights abuses inflicted since in the name of national security.

And we will continue fighting:

• against facial recognition technology, governments' attacks on encryption, and online mass surveillance
• for a review mechanism for the Canada Border Services Agency
• to abolish security certificates and end deportation to torture
• to repeal the Canadian No Fly List
• for justice for Hassan Diab & the reform of the Extradition Act Read more

Version française: Ce que nous avons fait à date en 2021. Aidez-nous à protéger les libertés civiles pour le reste de l'année!

Les opinions exprimées ne reflètent pas nécessairement les positions de la CSILC - The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the positions of ICLMG.