Mahjoub Hearing, Tuesday, April 24, 2012

First of all, the public court hearings on the Stay of Proceedings  for Mahjoub ended today, so there is no court tomorrow – Wed. April 25. There are some further procedures but they are between the two lawyers and Justice Blanchard.

Again today there was a good turnout of traditional supporters of Mr. Mahjoub including some from Toronto Action for Social Change and No One Is Illegal. I thought it was somewhere in the high teens with different people coming and going all day . Some even came all the way from Durham, Kitchener-Waterloo and London. Adding to the court presence were journalists from CBCTV, City TV, French CBC and others including a private blogger who were there for the 1 pm media event outside the courtroom with some remaining for the afternoon session.

Arguing for Ministers Counsel was Don McIntosh and for public Counsel, Paul Slansky. Because there seem to be many fine points of law argued from cases cited and it is difficult to hear some speakers in the courtroom including Justice Blanchard I am not going to go into great detail. Mr. McIntosh spoke first and argued that there should be no Stay of Proceedings based on speculation about the commingled documents, which Mr. Slansky later  said was a misinterpretation of ‘speculation’ in the case law. Mr. McIntosh also argued that there is not overwhelming evidence of ‘the abuse of process’ that affects Mr. Mahjoub. Mr. McIntosh took Mr. Slansky’s arguments of yesterday for a Stay of Proceedings and attempted to refute each argument. He concluded that there is insufficient prejudice to Mr. Mahjoub to warrant a Stay. He cited some cases that represented greater crimes for which evidence was collected unlawfully and yet there was no Stay granted. He repeated the SIR’s (Security Intelligence Review) allegations against Mr. Mahjoub (all of which have been debunked as unprovable by past witnesses and for which there is obviously not enough evidence to stand up in a regular court of law) as requiring the continuation of the ‘Reasonableness of the Security Certificates hearings’ which began in 2008.

Mr. Slansky’s  response was that ‘Prejudice is the only factual issue here with no evidentiary burden on Mr. Mahjoub but on the Department of Justice’. He continued that the remedy for Mr. Mahjoub must address the prejudice. We don’t know the extent of the prejudice because the Justice Department apparently failed to even have a ‘sign-in’ sheet to a secured room so that they could know who had seen the documents. And someone photocopied documents and then failed to admit that until later when such copyying was forbidden by Prothontary Aalto.

Justice Blanchard questioned the adequacy of the summaries prepared by P. Aalto’s delegates and apparently wants to see the assessment of prejudice chart that Mr. Slansky referred to yesterday and perhaps wants to see the boxes of documents for himself. This is not clear to me.

There was some discussion over a letter by Mr. McIntosh that Mr. Slansky said Mr. McIntosh had reversed himself on. Both sides were asked to make a written submission to the court by next Tuesday with some kind of responses on Wednesday but this is not for the public. So the Stay hearing is not actually finished as of today and we don’t know when there will be a decision.

At 1 pm a media event (the media people mentioned earlier) took place outside 180 Queen St. with Mr. Slansky and Mr. Mahjoub speaking and answering questions of the media. I will not attempt to quote Mr. Mahjoub but one thing Mr. Slansky said was that a failure of the court to grant a Stay of Proceedings would be a ‘travesty of justice’. 

Mahjoub Hearing, Monday, April 23, 2012

Stay of Proceedings asked for

I thought court went well today with somewhere between 11 and 17 supporters - many No One Is Illegal young people and some of the long time supporters of Mr. Mahjoub plus some new ones. A group of about 10 of us had lunch together at one of the Indian restaurants across the street. Thanks to all who came today.

Also there was a huge (10 or more) RCMP presence in the building downstairs and upstairs in the court area. In fact they had the large glass door to the Starbucks coffee shop closed off this morning. It was either the CP article in the Star or the presence of NOII. Congratulations all around for having such an effect.

Paul Slansky presented the case for Mr. Mahjoub all day primarily regarding the ‘commingling of documents’ that occurred last July – by staff of the Justice Department. Mr. Slansky pointed out that the Reasonableness hearing has been delayed for seven months while Prothonotary (principal clerk of a court) Aalto and his team of ‘delegates’ have tried to separate the documents, which in itself is an abuse of process that should bring about a Stay of Proceedings. Mr. Slansky presented a number of case law precedents for crimes much greater than a deportation case (Mahjoub’s), all of which resulted in Stay of Proceedings. One point is that even though a few of the Justice principals in this affair, including the lawyers on the case, have sworn affidavits that they ‘hardly looked at’ the multiple boxes of defence documents, there is still no way of knowing who may have examined them since the documents were allowed to sit in an unlockable room for perhaps 1.5 months, with no sign-up sheet or guarding for who may have entered the room where some documents were seen scattered about on a table.

Other arguments made were: based on ‘privilege’ and ‘prejudice’ – that because Mr. Mahjoub’s ‘privileged materials’ which were to be used by his lawyers have been examined and even photocopied against directions from Prothonotary Aalto, Mr. Mahjoub’s case has been (fatally) ‘prejudiced’. Examination and separation of the boxes of commingled documents has resulted in a rating code from 1 to 5, with a low number indicating no compromise and a 4 or 5 indicating severe compromise with even one document in the category 5 being sufficient for a Stay, in Mr. Slansky’s view. Anywhere from 1/7 to ½ of the documents  in each box belong to Mr. Mahjoub’s team. In fact Mr. Slansky concluded that enough of Mr. Mahjoub’s documents have been seen to ‘produce a full picture of litigation plans and violations of solicitor-client privilege’. Mr. Slansky pointed out that the trial judge – justice Blanchard – is tied to the process that he initiated – choosing Mr. Aalto to find ‘delegates’ who would then separate documents and make summaries for  Judge Blanchard. Otherwise why have this process at all if the court has no confidence in its own process. Justice Balanchard seemed to be complaining about the process which included summaries and redacted summaries for some eyes. Another argument by Mr. Slansky is that the burden of proof is not borne by Public Counsel (Mr. Mahjoub’s lawyers) – they do not have to prove that the documents were seized and examined - but by the ‘Respondents’ (Justice Ministers lawyers) who must prove that Mr. Mahjoub’s case has not been prejudiced. Mr. Slansky pointed out repeatedly that the Respondents have not done anything to assure that Mr. Mahjoub has not been prejudiced. Mr. Slansky concluded this argument by saying that ‘the extent of Prejudice is high’.

Another argument used was that ‘a Stay of Proceedings would keep Justice in good repute’, meaning that a continuation of proceedings would be seen by the community as a disrepect for the law, and this is as powerful an argument for a Stay as is the injustice to Mr. Mahjoub. He argued that ‘truth seeking’ is undermined by having one side be much stronger than the other - a very unlevel playing field. Mr. Mahjoub’s case is seriously weakened by having its plans etc. exposed to the opposition. Again there is the danger that an unfair administration of justice will put justice into disrepute by the continuation of hearings.

Mr. Slansky said that continuation of this case under these circumstances would be a ‘travesty of justice’. He said that the respondents would seek an alternative remedy in their presentation tomorrow (Tuesday) which seemed to consist in removing current Justice lawyers from the case (they were not present in court today) which is completey incomplete and unsatisfactory to public Counsel.

At different points throughout the day, Justice Blanchard tried to ‘water down’ Mr. Slansky’s arguments by saying that public Counsel had not brought forward any significant documents and that he was more concerned with the ‘adverse effects’ of a particular document on the case rather than the documents taken as a whole. As indicated earlier he wasn’t pleased with having to accept ‘summaries’ of documents’, but Mr. Slansky reminded the Justice that this was the process he (Justice) had put in motion and that he was bound to it. Whether he will in fact be bound to it is an open question.

I don't know how the judge can resist Mr. Slansky’s arguments that there can be no fair trial for Mr. Mahjoub if the proceedings are not stayed and that Justice will be put into disrepute if the proceedings continue.

We applauded Mr. Slansky at the end of the day immediately after the judge walked through his door. 

Court resumes Tuesday morning at 9:30 am at 180 Queen St. W., 6^th floor. Please come and 'pack the court'

Stop the Secrecy! Pack the Courts!

Mohammad Mahjoub, a Torontonian, detained without charge for over 11 years, is going to court to have all charges against him quashed on April 23 - 25, and the proceedings are open to the public. Sign up for a morning or afternoon shift by clicking here: http://www.doodle.com/244bzmq2x9m6asdt (Federal Court, 180 Queen Street, 6th floor, Toronto)

In the summer of 2011, government officials entered Mr. Mahjoub's lawyers' room in the Federal Court, seized boxes of documents, viewed and read the materials and then mixed them up (commingled) with their own government documents. This represents a serious breach of attorney-client privilege, an essential part of a fair trial.

This latest, entirely illegal and unprecedented access to confidential defense documents by government officials representing the Department of Justice, proves yet again that no legal, fair or just processes are being followed in Security Certificate detentions and hearings.

Earlier, CSIS officials admitted in court that, from about 1996 to 2006, CSIS and/or Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) listened to, recorded, analysed and used Mr. Mahjoub's conversations with his lawyers (as well as his family members and friends) against him. In December 2010, the court found that, despite an order to cease doing so, CSIS continued the practice of listening to his conversations with his lawyers for two more years.

Stop the Secrecy! Pack the Courts! End the Security Certificates!
Mon – Wed, April 23 - 25, 9:30am - 5:00pm.
Federal Court, 180 Queen Street, 6th floor, Toronto

Mohammad Zeki Mahjoub was arrested under a "security certificate" in June 2000, over 11 years ago. Under this “security certificate” Mohammad Mahjoub has spent the last 11 years without any charges being laid against him or having access to the "evidence" against him. For over 11 years, Mr. Mahjoub has remained either in jail or on draconian bail conditions without going through a trial or being found guilty. For 11 years, Mr. Mahjoub has lived with the threat of deportation to death or violence looming over his head without access to justice. Security Certificates can only be used against non-citizens, who are given lesser rights to justice, simply on the basis of citizenship.

Currently, three men are being held under security certificates: Mohammad Mahjoub (since 2000), Mahmoud Jaballah (since 2001), and Mohamed Harkat (since 2003). In 2009, security certificates against Adil Charkaoui and against Hassan Almrei were thrown out; both are now suing the government.

SECURITY CERTIFICATES:
* Only apply to immigrants, not citizens
* No charges are laid; only general allegations of potential danger, often based on profile and association
* Federal Court has ruled that presumption of innocence does not apply
* Evidence is not disclosed to the person arrested nor to his lawyer
* Evidence thought to have been obtained under torture is supposed to be excluded; in practice, CSIS admitted in 2008 that all current cases would fall apart without recourse to evidence likely resulting from torture
* Standard of proof is "reasonable grounds to believe" - far lower than in criminal courts
* Any information is accepted as evidence; including hearsay, newspaper clippings, unsourced intelligence, etc.
* Until 2008, CSIS systematically destroyed evidence (all current cases predate 2008)
* In practice, people arrested under security certificates are subject to indefinite detention
* If upheld, a security certificate results in deportation, even if there is an acknowledged risk of death or torture

Please Like: www.facebook.com/SupportMahjoub
For more information: http://www.peoplescommission.org/en/mahjoub/

To contact the Justice for Mahjoub Network: justiceformahjoub@gmail.com

Our Demands: 1) Immediately free Mahjoub, Harkat and Jaballah; 2. Apology, reparations and citizenship for all five security certificate detainees; and 3. Accountability for all officials responsible for their arbitrary, indefinite detention.

Mohammad Mahjoub's First Speech

Friday evening , March 16, Mohammad Mahjoub spoke to an audience for the first time in 12 years at the No One Is Illegal film night Whose Borders? at the Palmerston Library, 560 Palmerston, near Bloor and Bathurst. He spoke at the end of two films, the first, "Kanawayandan D'aaki - Protecting Our Land" (Praxis Pictures, 12 mins) a short one about the KI's with beautiful photos from their traditional lands (KI is a campaign of NOII) and the longer film "Enemy Alien" (dir. Konrad Aderer, 81 mins) http://cinespect.com/?p=1979- about a Palestinian-American activist Farouk Abdel-Muhti http://rwor.org/a/1257/farouk.htm who was incarcerated after 911 along with thousands of other Muslim and south Asian people. It is the story of his 2 years in many prisons including long terms in solitary confinement, as friends tried to get him out - with protests and legal measures. He had health problems that were not allowed to be dealt with and he died 3 months after his release. One lawyer said that the two year incarceration was a deliberate death sentence. Film-maker Konrad Aderer is the grandson of Japanese-Americans who were interned during WW2 just for being of Japanese ancestry and Konrad's persistence at making this film came largely from his sense of injustice at how immigrant peoples have been badly treated in the U.S. There were a lot of parallels to Mahjoub's case.

Mohammad spoke powerfully and passionately for about ten minutes. He talked about the similarity of the injustice of his case to that of Farouk Abdel-Muhti, and encouraged the audience of about fifty people to fight for justice for those who don't have it and to expect strong resistance from governments for doing so.

Mohammad also told some of us afterward that this was the first time in 12 years he had ever been out of prison or his apartment at 10 pm. I needed to be there to accompany him home because his curfew is still 8 pm, but won't be after March 20 when the new conditions begin - with no curfew!

Noah Bingham, one of the film-makers of the planned documentary "Secret Trial Five" http://secrettrial5.com/ was there and did some filming of Mohammad's speech.

Mohammad's new conditions begin on March 20 and his birthday is March 21.

MAHJOUB HEARINGS POSTPONED

The hearings in the Mahjoub so called "security certificate" case that were scheduled for 20-21 February 2012 have been postponed.

Stay tuned for announcement of new date next week. In the meantime: please ask your organizations to sign our statement in support of Mahjoub:

www.peoplescommission.org/en/mahjoub/feb2012.php;

join the Support Mahjoub facebook group http://www.facebook.com/SupportMahjoub &

http://www.facebook.com/events/242809372471603/

and check out other things you can do at: www.peoplescommission.org/en/mahjoub.

Pack the Court! End "Secret Trials"! Support Mohammad Mahjoub!

http://www.facebook.com/events/242809372471603/ (please share!)

Monday, Tuesday, Feb. 20 - 21, 2012, 9:30am - 4:30pm, Mohammad Mahjoub Court Hearing, Federal Court, 180 Queen Street, 6th floor, Toronto (near Osgoode station)

http://www.peoplescommission.org/en/mahjoub/

On Feb 20, 2012, lawyers for Mohammad Mahjoub - a Torontonian who has been in jail or on house arrest for more than 11 and a half years without charges or trial, on secret evidence obtained under torture - will appear in Court to ask that all proceedings against him be tossed out. In the summer, government officials entered Mr. Mahjoub's lawyers' room in the Federal Court, seized boxes of documents, viewed and read the materials and then mixed them up (commingled) with their own government documents. This represents a serious breach of solicitor-client privilege, an essential part of a fair trial.

*Please attend the court house in support anytime between 9:30am and 4:30pm on Feb 20-21*

WHAT IS A SECURITY CERTIFICATE?
Mohammad Zeki Mahjoub was arrested under a "security certificate" in June 2000, over 11 years ago. Under this “security certificate” Mohammad Mahjoub has spent the last 11 years without any charges being laid against him or having access to the "evidence" against him. For over 11 years, Mr. Mahjoub has remained either in jail or on draconian bail conditions without going through a trial or being found guilty. For 11 years, Mr. Mahjoub has lived with the threat of deportation to death or violence looming over his head without access to justice. Security Certificates can only be used against non-citizens, who are given lesser rights to justice, simply on the basis of citizenship.

CONTINUED ILLEGAL ACTIONS BY THE CANADIAN GOVT.
This latest, entirely illegal, and unprecedented access to confidential defense documents by government officials, representing the Department of Justice, proves yet again that no legal, fair or just processes are being followed in Security Certificate detentions and hearings.

Earlier, CSIS officials admitted in court that, from about 1996 to 2006, CSIS and/or Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) listened to, recorded, analysed and used Mr. Mahjoub's conversations with his lawyers (as well as his family members and friends) against him. In December 2010, the court found that, despite an order to cease doing so, CSIS continued the practice of listening to his conversations with his lawyers for two more years.

*Please also read and sign the statement in support of Mr. Mahjoub here
(organizations only!): http://www.peoplescommission.org/en/mahjoub/feb2012.php

*Please also view and sign this general statement on and against security certificates: www.harkatstatement.com *Sophie Harkat has just released an appeal to ask us and our friends to sign this important statement

BRIEF SUMMARY OF MR. MAHJOUB'S TRIBULATIONS IN CANADA

Mohammad Zeki Mahjoub came to Canada in 1995 from Egypt, where he had been detained without charge and tortured. He was accepted as a refugee in 1996, settled in Toronto, got married, and had two young sons. However, back in Egypt, a year and a half after his arrival in Canada, his three brothers were arrested and held without charge for eight years. They were all released in 2005, never having been charged or tried.

In June 2000, Mr. Mahjoub was arrested on a security certificate. He began a hungerstrike in 2002, after he was sexually assaulted by a guard. His complaints led nowhere. This was the first of several hunger-strikes. In 2005, after being imprisoned for five years without a trial, Mr. Mahjoub began a hunger strike to protest prison conditions, consuming water, juice and occasional broth, lasting 76 days and losing 110lb before he was hospitalized.

In April 2006, Mr. Mahjoub, along with three other security certificate detainees, was transferred to the "Kingston Immigration Holding Centre", a six-cell facility opened specifically to detain Muslims held on security certificates, which was soon dubbed "Guantanamo North". The facility, which now stands empty, cost tax-payers $3.2 million to build, and two million a year to operate with one inmate, according to CBC.

Mr. Mahjoub, with two of the other detainees at Guatanamo North, went on hungerstrike again in winter of 2006 for 93 days. He was finally ordered transferred to house arrest on February 15th 2007.

It took months for Mr Mahjoub to be transferred from prison after the federal court ruling, and when he was, it was under conditions that in practice turned his home into a prison and his family into his prison guards.

In February 2007, the Supreme Court struck down Security Certificates as unconstitutional but gave the government a year to respond. Significantly, the court refused to accept that the regime was unfair since it only applied to refugees and permanent residents, and therefore afforded them a far lower standard than that accorded to Canadian citizens facing similar allegations.

In February 2008, Security Certificate laws expired but the Canadian government passed a new Security Certificate law which remained essentially the same. New certificates were issued against Mr. Mahjoub, Mahmoud Jaballah, Hassan Almrei, Mohamed Harkat and Adil Charkaoui. All five men remained in prison or under house arrest and had to begin the process all over again.

On 18 March 2009, Mr. Mahjoub returned to prison at Guantanamo North in Kingston. He could no longer subject his family to the intolerable and humiliating invasions of their privacy that the conditions of his house arrest required. On 01 June 2009, Mr. Mahjoub began another hunger strike to protest conditions in prison. He remained on hunger strike for six months.

On 30 November 2009, Mohammad Mahjoub, then the sole prisoner at “Guantanamo North”, was again ordered transferred to house arrest in Toronto.

In summer 2010, in a significant court victory, the Federal Court ruled that part of the "case" against Mr. Mahjoub was probably gleaned from torture, and could not be accepted by the Court. The extent of that finding, however, is still subject to closed door proceedings that Mr. Mahjoub cannot attend.

From about 1996 to 2006, CSIS and/or CBSA listened to, recorded, analysed and used Mr. Mahjoub's conversations with his lawyers against him. In December 2010, the Federal Court found that, despite a court order prohibiting this practice, CSIS continued to violate solicitor client privilege in this way for two more years.

In October 2011, the court reviewed Mr. Mahjoub's bail conditions, as it is required to do every six months. On February 03, 2012, the Federal Court ruled that the government failed to show that it is reasonable to maintain intrusive conditions of control and surveillance on Mohammad Mahjoub.

For the first time since 2000, Mr Mahjoub will be able to go anywhere in Toronto without supervision or notifying the CBSA; in addition, his curfew will be lifted and a camera in front of his house removed; and he will be able to travel anywhere in Canada. Many intrusive conditions nevertheless remain, such as a prohibition on use of internet and cell phone, phone tapping, and supervision outside Toronto. These conditions were imposed with sole reference to the government's arguments; the court ruled that it could not take Mr. Mahjoub's responses to the allegations into account.

Until the question of the commingled documents is decided, ongoing hearings on the certificate itself - unconstitutionality, illegality, "reasonability" - have been suspended. Depending on the outcome of the February hearings, these could continue in March with key witnesses like Stockwell Day.

Mahjoub 'Detention Review' Decision Comes Down

First of all this is a brief report of the last day of the Mahjoub Detention Review hearing which took place on Tuesday, December 20. Both Monday Dec. 19 and Tuesday Dec. 20 were given over to ‘Final Submissions’ by both Ministers’ Counsel (M.C.) David Tyndale and Public Counsel (P.C.) Paul Slansky. I was not in attendance on Monday but several people did attend including Alison Jean from Kitchener-Waterloo and Frank Barningham from Durham. There were five people who were present for at least some of the day on Tuesday. Without going into detail, the submissions just maintained the positions held throughout by M.C. and P.C. M.C. said that Mr. Mahjoub must continue to be considered a threat and therefore there should be no change in his detention conditions. M.C. held that the considerable evidence brought by Criminologist Professor Stéphane Leman-Langlois that Mr. Mahjoub could no longer be considered a threat to anyone according to criminology theory and therefore his Charter rights were being violated by continued punitive bail conditions. P.C. also reviewed the findings of psychiatric witness Dr. Payne whose evidence suggested that continuing the isolating conditions on Mr. Mahjoub were just making him more and more unhealthy. Judge Blanchard at one point asked M.C. if they could imagine a way of doing surveillance monitoring of Mr. Mahjoub – ‘differently’. M. C. also brought up a minor issue with a used laptop that Mr. Mahjoub had purchased at Goodwill and then sent to CBSA to see if it could have any internet capacity disabled so he could use it to store his voluminous court filings. CBSA then sent a letter to the court accusing M. of purchasing the laptop without permission. P.C. pointed out the absurdity of M. ever being able to use the internet while having no internet connection and not being able to visit a library or internet café.

The next hearings will have to do with the ‘Stay of Proceedings Motion’ which Judge Blanchard has allowed Mr. Mahjoub since the commingling of M.C. and P.C. documents last summer. These documents are slowly being separated – with great difficulty and delay under the supervision of Protonary Judge Aalto as a separate procedure since the fall of 2011. Right now the ‘Stay of Proceedings Motion’ hearings are scheduled to begin around February 20, 2012.

The press release below is by Mary Foster of the ‘People’s Commission Network’ of Montreal regarding the ‘Detention Review Decision’ - http://www.peoplescommission.org/en/mahjoub/

There is some cautious reason to rejoice!

Press Release:

Court: Government fails to show that it is reasonable to keep Mahjoub under conditions.

Detained without charge for almost 12 years, Toronto man gains significant freedoms.

Toronto, 3 February 2012 -- A Federal Court decision says the government failed to show that it is reasonable to maintain intrusive conditions of control and surveillance on Mohammad Mahjoub, arrested under a security certificate almost twelve years ago. The decision is the outcome of detention review hearings that took place in late 2011.

"People who care about justice and are not frightened by vague, unproven and unconvincing allegations must call for Mr. Mahjoub's immediate release from ALL conditions. The court is clear: the government has failed to show that he should be kept under his current conditions. The question is then why are any conditions maintained? His full liberty must be restored to him immediately," said Mary Foster, an activist with the People's Commission Network.

While the decision does not free Mr. Mahjoub entirely, he has nevertheless won considerable concessions. For the first time since 2000, he will be able to go anywhere in Toronto without supervision or notifying the CBSA; in addition, his curfew will be lifted and a camera in front of his house removed; and he will be able to travel anywhere in Canada.

"I am looking forward to enjoying more freedom," said Mr. Mahjoub, "Maybe for others it doesn't seem like much, but to someone who has been denied the right to walk about or travel freely for twelve years it is very precious. It gives me a foretaste of the day when this nightmare will be behind me entirely and my name will be cleared from false allegations and malicious labels."

Many intrusive conditions nevertheless remain, such as a prohibition on use of internet and cell phone, phone tapping, and supervision outside Toronto.

"It is very disturbing that the Court says the presumption of innocence does not apply in security certificate cases because there are no charges," added Foster. "That is a very dangerous logic. Where are we headed with this?"

A series of scandals rocked Mr. Mahjoub's case over the last year. In December 2011, media reports revealed the existence of a secret CSIS memo in which the spy agency admitted that "the bulk of information" in Mr. Mahjoub's security certificate file was tainted by torture. During the summer, Department of Justice staff seized confidential documents belonging to Mr. Mahjoub and his lawyers from the Federal Court, mingling it with their own. Mr. Mahjoub has applied for a permanent stay because of the serious and ongoing breach of client-solicitor privilege. Neither of these issues were considered in this week's decision.

Mr. Mahjoub is a torture survivor who was accepted as a refugee in Canada in 1996. The 51-year old father of two was arrested under an immigration "security certificate" on the request of CSIS in June 2000. After his release from prison, he was placed under intrusive house arrest conditions, pending the final outcome of his case.

Two other men remain under security certificates in Canada: Mohamed Harkat in Ottawa, an Algerian refugee who has been fighting a security certificate for nine years, and Mahmoud Jaballah in Toronto, a torture survivor from Egypt who was arrested in 1999, released, and then re-arrested on the same information in 2001. Certificates against Hassan Almrei and Adil Charkaoui were thrown out in 2009; both men are now suing the government for reparations.

-30-

For interviews:
514 222 0205

Source:
People's Commission Network
www.peoplescommission.org/en/mahjoub
https://twitter.com/#!/peepcomm