Home Page News Opinion Foreign Policy Politics Policy Legislation Lobbying Hill Life & People Hill Climbers Heard On The Hill Calendar Archives Classifieds
Advertising Subscribe Reuse & Permissions
Hill Times Events Hill Times Books Hill Times Careers The Wire Report The Lobby Monitor Parliament Now
Global

Omar Khadr and values in a time of ‘war’

By Gar Pardy      

With the Conservatives looking to resume hammering the government on its $10.5-million payment to Omar Khadr when Parliament returns Sept. 18, there’s room for more context in this debate.

Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, pictured earlier this year, took the lead this summer defending the government's $10.5-million payment to Omar Khadr after they reached a settlement over Mr. Khadr's lawsuit that alleged the government had violated his rights while he was in prison in Guantanamo Bay.
The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

Societal values, especially “Canadian” ones, have had recent public airings. In the 2015 election and the subsequent leadership campaign for the Conservative Party there were a variety of comments offered on the values that should be associated with Canadian society. Those debates offered little since they were largely abstractions, far removed from the preoccupations of most Canadians.

But the public debate over the government’s decision to agree to compensation and a public apology for Omar Khadr has, in both direct and indirect ways, ignited issues that are fundamental to our societal values. These values—which rise above the partisan comments of the past two years (which had more to do with national characteristics than values)—provide the cement essential for any free, open, and democratic society.

Central to those values is the rule of law. And key to the rule of law is its commonality to all.

The importance of the rule of law

In our phantasmagorical world, it is adherence to the rule of law that remains the essential point on which governments can be judged and freedoms measured.

Unfortunately, during times of war, governments adjust values on the temporal altar of necessity.

In the nearly first two decades of the 21st century, Canada along with many other democratic societies where the rule of law is paramount, have been in a state of war and have been prepared to make less common the application of the rule of law.

The plasticity of the concept of war has made matters worse. Our public discourse is crowded with talk of wars on terror, drugs, people smuggling, diamonds, and more. These concepts have usurped the historical concept of war that before now was restricted to dangers to national survival. Today, war is used indiscriminately, often to convince people of the dangers of the dust balls lurking under their beds.

Sadly, many Western governments in the aftermath of 9/11 sought to redraw the balance in law between the state and its people.

The United States, supported by a phalanx of countries that should have known better, led the world in such actions. The new standards still roil the values that most countries used to consider fundamental.

Context on the Khadr case

It is this rebalancing that is central to the treatment of Omar Khadr by both the governments of the United States and Canada since 2002. This includes: the creation of a prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, outside the rule of law as understood within the territorial limits of the United States; the denial of long-established international norms in the classification and treatment of captured persons; the denial of the recently established norm in international law concerning the treatment of child soldiers; the indiscriminate use of torture to intimidate and extract information; the limitation of medical treatment for wounded combatants; and an unwillingness to allow independent legal counsel in the jury-rigged adjudication system as represented by the American military commissions at Guantanamo.

All of these factors presented Khadr with an enormous dilemma. If he fought the Americans within the system available at Guantanamo, as he wanted to do, he faced the almost certainty of spending up to 40 or so years in an American prison. Equally, he could expect no assistance from the government of Canada, especially in the aftermath of a 2010 Supreme Court decision that imposed no obligation to provide help.

His Canadian lawyer strongly argued he should plead guilty with the condition that he be transferred to a Canadian prison. This Khadr did and in 2012 was transferred to a Canadian prison. This triggered the substantive involvement of the rule of law as understood and practised in Canada and his release on bail.

In the meantime, Khadr sought compensation from the Canadian government largely based on another aspect of the 2010 Supreme Court decision. This firmly stated Khadr’s rights under the Charter were abused by Canadian officials who sought information from him while he was still a prisoner at Guantanamo.

Most legal experts familiar with the matter agree Khadr had an ironclad case for compensation. After many months of negotiations, Khadr’s lawyer and government lawyers reached an agreement for compensation and an apology. It was then sanctioned by the court.

The family of an American soldier killed during the firefight that led to Khadr’s capture in 2002 had initiated action in American courts seeking compensation from Khadr. The court, using evidence largely generated by the torture-based process at Guantanamo, agreed that compensation was appropriate.

In judicial terms, this was the sound of one hand clapping. Khadr was not represented in the proceedings and no one questioned the quality or legitimacy of the evidence used.

There is no value in the decision of this American court and no Canadian court should give it recognition.

Canadians have expressed strong views both for and against the government’s decision to agree to compensation for Khadr. But in its faithfulness to the fundamental value of the rule of law, it is a decision that all Canadians will come to appreciate in these dark days when governments often are too ready to limit its universality.

Gar Pardy as director general of consular affairs at Foreign Affairs dealt with many aspects of Khadr family troubles including the arrest of Omar’s father Ahmed Khadr by Pakistani authorities in 1996 and Omar Khadr’s capture in Afghanistan in 2002 and transfer to Guantanamo. He retired in 2003 but has since written extensively on the matter.

The Hill Times

More in News

What happens if an MP’s found guilty of sexual harassment? No one’s saying

News|By Abbas Rana
All the federal political parties say they take sexual harassment “seriously,” but none will say what disciplinary action they would take against an MP found guilty of it. “We take sexual harassment allegations very seriously,…

Feds’ sweeping, new environmental assessment bill keeps power in ministers’ hands, say observers

The government’s new Impact Assessment Act includes hundreds of pages detailing changes to the environmental assessment process in Canada, but keeps ultimate power over approving natural resource projects in the hands of the federal environment…

NDP reviewing past, present harassment processes amid Stoffer, Weir allegations

The NDP isn’t currently investigating the specific harassment allegations against former NDP MP Peter Stoffer, but it says it's looking into how such complaints were, are now and will be handled, something strategist Robin Sears…

Patrick Brown gaining support since re-emerging to challenge sexual harassment allegations, says adviser, though Conservative MPs largely quiet

Patrick Brown, who in a dramatic move re-entered the Ontario leadership late Friday afternoon, is receiving strong support from all corners of the political world since publicly re-emerging to challenge the sexual harassment allegations that…

Some Liberal MPs frustrated with leadership for not sharing anti-abortion political strategy on Canada Summer Jobs program

Some Liberal MPs say they're frustrated the party leadership did not share the political strategy with the caucus on why the government was so adamant on keeping the new controversial reproductive rights clause in the…

NDP elects former Hill staffer Vick as new party president

NDP members elected a new party president on the last day of the party’s 2018 policy convention, with former Hill staffer Mathieu Vick being elevated to the role after garnering roughly 83 per cent of…

NDP delegates protest ‘watered down’ Palestine policy

In the waning hours of the NDP policy convention’s second day dozens of delegates stood in silence with hands raised holding posters proclaiming “Free Palestine” as they protested what some called a “watered down” resolution…

Galvanizing members, regaining momentum key for NDP at convention to be in fighting shape for 2019: strategists

With more than 1,800 New Democrats gathered in Ottawa to debate and help shape future party policies, NDP strategist and former national director Karl Bélanger says a top priority this weekend is to “galvanize” members…

NDP ‘shaken’ by harassment allegations, promises to root out problems in own ranks

The NDP's approach to anti-harassment was the first policy to earn mention at its convention in Ottawa on Friday—despite not being slated on the floor—with outgoing president Marit Stiles apologizing to party members who had…

WANT MORE EXCLUSIVE HILL TIMES CONTENT?

We’re offering 15% off a year-long subscription to the hill times online content.