The quest for answers begins; Abousfian Abdelrazik is coming home, but there’s still no system in place to ensure his ordeal is not repeated yet again
Special to the Ottawa Citizen, June 26, 2009
It’s official. As long as the U.S. doesn’t interfere, Abousfian Abdelrazik will finally return home on Saturday, the fifth Canadian to come home with questions about Canadian complicity in his torture.
Has anything changed since the four with stories so similar to his – Maher Arar, Ahmad El Maati, Abdullah Almalki and Muayyed Nureddin – came home and demanded answers about Canada’s role in their torture?
For starters, we aren’t as easily convinced when fellow citizens are labeled as terror suspects. An overwhelming number of Canadians from all walks of life – apparently more skeptical of the security apparatus and the government than Abdelrazik – were willing to risk criminal charges by contributing to his airline ticket home.
That’s encouraging, and not surprising, given all we’ve learned from the Arar and Iacobucci Inquiries about the lack of evidence behind the allegations leveled against the others.
The media is more skeptical too. Even before Arar, El Maati and Almalki were released, the onus was on them to somehow disprove allegations being hurled at them in the media by nameless, faceless officials hoping to distract attention from their own shameful behaviour. Thanks to findings at the Arar Inquiry, and the benefit of hindsight, very few journalists are still willing to publish terrorism allegations from officials insisting on anonymity. That’s encouraging too.
We’ve also seen a shift in the courts, aptly demonstrated by the Federal Court ruling forcing Canada to bring Abdelrazik home.
But have the Canadian government and its agencies changed?
There, the news isn’t as good.
By waiting until a Federal Court forced it to bring Abdelrazik home, the government demonstrated it has learned precious little. And CSIS and the RCMP have yet to express any remorse for their now well-documented contribution the torture of El Maati, Almalki and Nureddin. So despite evidence that CSIS requested Abdelrazik’s detention, it’s unlikely he’ll be getting an apology any time soon.
So where can he turn for answers and accountability?
When Arar returned home almost six years ago, Shirley Heafey, then chair of the RCMP’s Public Complaints Commission, had publicly revealed that the force was refusing to cooperate with her investigations. Even if she had won new powers, her investigation would have been restricted to the RCMP, and Arar would have had to ask for separate investigations into the roles of CSIS, the CBSA, DFAIT and other agencies.
That’s why he called for a public inquiry – one that could subpoena witnesses and evidence from all the Canadian agencies implicated in his case.
Arar won that inquiry, and through it we all won many answers and important recommendations. Recognizing there was nowhere for El Maati, Almalki and Nureddin to turn for answers either, the Arar Inquiry made a recommendation leading to the creation of a second inquiry to examine their cases. And to address the long term, the Arar Inquiry called for the creation of a review mechanism with powers much like its own.
That recommendation, made more than two and a half years ago, has been fiercely resisted by CSIS and the RCMP, and dutifully ignored by the government.
Not that things have changed. Just weeks ago, the current chair of the RCMP Public Complaints Commission announced that he still lacks the power to investigate the force’s national security work. And SIRC has emphasized that its investigation into Abdelrazik’s case will be limited to CSIS involvement, not other agencies involved.
The government, apparently lacking the courage to stand up to CSIS and the RCMP, says that before it can implement that robust, independent and integrated review mechanism, we need to wait until the Air India Inquiry releases its report.
So Abdelrazik comes home to the same dilemma Arar faced six years ago. How will he, and we, get to the bottom of who did what in his case? Must he fight for an inquiry too? If he somehow manages to win one, will that be used as another excuse to stall implementation of a long term solution? And in the meantime, how are we to have any confidence in the agencies that are supposed to make us feel safer?
If the government won’t stand up to CSIS and the RCMP, we must. Canadians must insist on implementation of the long term, efficient and effective checks and balances so essential to delivering the accountability our democracy demands.
Tags: Abdelrazik, Almalki, Arar Inquiry, El Maati, Iacobucci, Maher Arar, Nureddin
