The Galloping Beaver
Alison, how could this part of the judgement exclude any of the docs that the Americans claim have gone missing?
In its ruling, the Supreme Court specifically instructed the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of Canada, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to "produce to a judge … unredacted copies of all documents, records and other materials in their possession which might be relevant to the charges against Mr. Khadr."
I'm not claiming to know, and I sincerely want to know, as you know. But I don't see how that doc could be left out, especially since the gist of it has been published, in the NYTimes, I believe.
Well, y'know: fingers crossed.
I think that my original comment vanished? Help? Well, I'll try again.
Alison, I'm grounding my faith in this paragraph (from the Grope and Flail):
In its ruling, the Supreme Court specifically instructed the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of Canada, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to "produce to a judge … unredacted copies of all documents, records and other materials in their possession which might be relevant to the charges against Mr. Khadr."
We've been hearing for some time that CSIS shot selves in foots by joining in the interrogations and sharing information -- that's how Khadr's lawyers managed to get this case to the SCC in the first place.
IANAL, and I could be wrong (I so often am), but I don't see how this judgement excludes any of the docs that any Canadian agency acquired through those processes -- I don't. I thought that was the whole trick, eckshully.
Of course the Merkins claim they have lost their copies. Gawd, they lose stuff all the time, all the White House email, eg -- careless, eh? But if we've got copies ... Heh heh heh.
And we do.
Skdadl, IANAL either but this bit from SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: Canada (Justice) v. Khadr, 2008 SCC 28 worries me :
"K is entitled to disclosure from the appellants of the records of the interviews, and of information given to U.S. authorities as a direct consequence of conducting the interviews."
Note: Nothing about records given to Canada from U.S. authorities, which would include the so-called "lost" original report which could exonnerate Khadr.
And this bit which immediately preceeds your G&M quote :
"In the present circumstances, this duty requires Canada to disclose to K records of the interviews conducted by Canadian officials with him, and information given to U.S. authorities as a direct consequence of conducting the interviews, subject to claims for privilege and public interest immunity."
Again, info given to US, nothing about info from the US.
I'll be happy to be wrong here, Skdadl.
Maybe the Supremes are feeling like they need to make themselves feel good about somthing so they pick on CSIS for interrogating a murderous teenager. The kid is a trainwreck ... let him be tried and punished for his crimes.
Commenting by HaloScan
