Quote:
Originally Posted by Zulu29
I guess I'm looking at it through a different lens. Clearly he was abused, tortured, tormented in Gitmo. I would gather that's undisputed. Were charges considered? That's something I'd like to know but it hasn't been stated. I really feel that saying charges were considered but not recommended would dump cod water on the fire. My 2 cents
|
Treason: There were calls last week to retroactively charge Khadr, now 30, with treason or other crimes punishable in Canada.
In 2008, Ottawa law students, under the supervision of Professor Craig Forcese, wrote a 153-page report given to a Senate Committee on Human Rights outlining the law. They later testified before a House of Commons committee.
The report concluded: “There is good reason to believe that Omar could be prosecuted under Canadian law. Repatriation, therefore, is not tantamount to impunity.”
Had Canada demanded Khadr’s repatriation after his capture, rather than deferring to the U.S., there was a greater possibility he could have been successfully prosecuted here.
Now that is likely impossible due to protections against double jeopardy and the fact that Canada’s courts have denounced the illegality of Guantanamo.
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2...rlying-it.html
So how I read that is that the senate was advised in 2008 that yes, had Khadr been repatriated there was a case for treason. But because he was left in Guantanamo, he was already being punished for a similar type of charge, so double jeopardy would apply. In essence, for those calling for a treason charge, he was already punished for it with his stay in Guantanamo. Had Harper(or Martin, or Chretien) fought to get Khadr back to Canada earlier, he could perhaps have be charged with treason here.