As stated in Series – 12 the legal actions surrounding the Abu Zubaydah incident truly proved to be a stomach-turning event for CSIS. Maneuverings through the political-justice system now enabled Charkoui to gain the Courts favorable decision that the CSIS should not be able to destroy notes and files creating their ‘summary files’, but agents should retain their notes and recordings.
This placed CSIS between ‘a rock and a hard place’ in their mandate to protect National Security. We shall show you why and their attempted solution as we carry on in Series – 13.
Note: The decision that the CSIS should not be able to destroy notes and recordings creating their ‘summary files’ placed them in a precarious Security position. It was held that agents should retain their notes and recordings for possible necessary use in court. But such action would leave both the CSIS agents identified and the information collection system naked. It would irreparably damage CSIS and place National Security in the hands of the Islamic terrorist. This is what was a stake when on June 26,2008 the Supreme Court of Canada reached this ruling.
CITATION: Charkaoui v. Canada Citizenship and Immigration, (2 S.C.R. 326, 2008 SCC 38 Date: 20080626 Docket: 31597)
“We have concluded that Mr. Charkaoui’s appeal succeeds. In our view, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (“CSIS”) is bound to disclose to the ministers responsible all information in its possession regarding the person named in a security certificate. The ministers must convey this information to the designated judge. The judge must then disclose the information to the person named in the security certificate, except to the extent that disclosure might, in the judge’s view, endanger Canada’s security. These obligations of disclosure cannot be properly discharged where CSIS has destroyed what it was bound to disclose.
As a matter of text and context, we have therefore concluded that CSIS is bound to retain the information it gathers within the limits established by the legislation governing its activities. In accordance with its prior practice, it did not do so here. For reasons to be later explained, we are nonetheless satisfied that a stay of proceedings would not be an appropriate remedy in this case.”
Note: In essence CSIS was being instructed to stop destroying its tapes and notes in terrorism investigations. The SCC judges of the time considered this to be a fundamental mistake of the CSIS in interpreting the statutes. It was no where stated that the CSIS was trying to circumvent the law to enable some illegal practice on its part.
“The only appropriate remedy is to confirm the duty to disclose Charkaoui’s entire file to the designated judge and, after the judge has filtered it, to Charkaoui and his counsel,” said the ruling.”
Armed with this Supreme Court ruling Charkaoui’s lawyers were soon asking the Federal Court to order immediate disclosure of all the CSIS evidence. Mary Foster, a member of Coalition Justice for Adil Charkaoui stated the Supreme Court has recognized his right to see all the evidence against him. This is not quite true. His right was to see evidence that was pertinent to National Security only after it had been filtered through judges of the Justice system, and only if it would not be endangering National Security.
The man never should have been released from custody subsequent to his arrest, but as spoken on February 17, 2005 he was released on bail of $50,000 Canadian and his surveillance conditions went into effect.
As we have seen a great deal transpired from being released under conditions of bail until Justice Daniele Tremblay-Lamer on 24 September 2009 announced she would lift all restrictions on Mr. Charkaoui by the end of the day.
On February 20, 2009 Charkaoui had > gained a bid to lessen his surveillance regime given Justice Daniele Tremblay-Lamer finds the threat posed by Charkaoui “neutralized, in large part as a result of the passage of time.” (Date: 2009-02-20 2009 FC 175 DES-4-08)
Time in no manner lessens the threat posed by the true Islamists.
Take note: Through the Lamer Lips is stated that Salem El Menyawi, a Montréal imam and professor of Islamic theology at Concordia University, “significantly assisted the Court in determining whether Mr. Charkaoui’s release will or will not pose a danger to national security or to the safety of any person.”
This man Salem El Menyawi is truly not capable of assisting anyone to an unbiased decision and needs to be removed from the Canadian Education system himself. Daniele Tremblay-Lamer exposed her own lunacy and flawed logic in relying upon such an evidential source for decision making. She bases her Charkaoui Threat Level upon her perceptions that Salem El Menyawi “knew Mr. Charkaoui during his detention. He continued his contacts with him after his release from detention; he sees him regularly almost every week and considers him a good friend. Mr. El Menyawi describes Mr. Charkaoui as a devout Muslim who adheres to the Sunni interpretation but who respects other religions and opinions that are contrary to his own.
From the conversations had with Mr. Charkaoui, he is convinced that if Mr. Charkaoui is released without conditions, he will be a model citizen. Mr. Charkaoui is very mindful of the fact that he has the support of his community and he would not want to behave in a way that would disappoint them.
Although Mr. El Menyawi is not an expert, I place significant weight on his testimony since he has had many opportunities to personally observe Mr. Charkaoui and to notice his maturity or lack thereof, his commitment to his family and to his community and to what extent the community exercises control over Mr. Charkaoui’s conduct.
Based on all the testimony and the evidence heard thus far, I find as a fact that the danger to national security and to the safety of any person is neutralized. I point out, as Justice Noël did previously in Charkaoui (Re), above, that in making this finding, I am not ruling on the reasonableness of the certificate since the evidence is not complete and this issue must be determined at a later time.
If the danger is neutralized, it remains to be determined what preventive conditions would be necessary and proportionate to ensure that the danger remains neutralized until the Court determines the reasonability of the certificate.
I place considerable weight on the passage of time. First, the allegations in the certificate date back nine years. The contacts that the applicant could have had with certain individuals before his arrest that may have been problematic at that time would have been interrupted for roughly nine years. The applicant’s trips ended in January 2001. He lives in the same building as his parents, with his wife and now, his three children.”
One: a. At the core of the issues of concern is the reasonableness of the security certificates which were acknowledged and defended as appropriate in a multiplicity of the Court dockets presented prior. b. Much new evidence has been legally entered in damning Adil Charkaoui for the Islamic terrorist he was clearly established as being. c. For whatever reason, Lame Brain Lamer chose to set aside legal evidence for the mere ‘opinion’ of a Muslim Buddy Boy and her own misconstrued personal ideologies.
Two: Note what I have highlighted in her further statement. “The Ministers pointed out that the applicant chose to not testify about the release conditions as he had done in the past before Justice Noël. The applicant submitted a detailed affidavit, which specifically explains the impact of the release conditions on his personal and professional life. I note that the Ministers chose to not cross-examine the applicant on his affidavit as they could have done under rule 83 of the Federal Courts Rules (1998), SOR/98-106.”
By this time of 31 July 2009, CSIS had reached the decision due to Court orders demanding more transparency surrounding their investigations re Charkaoui that they could not comply. Such vast disclosure would be jeopardizing its source and methods which CSIS considered the lifeblood of National Security.
They simply could not afford to expose the entirety of their investigative network and technique given the magnitude of the threat to National Security this action would entail. As such, the Crown acknowledged there was insufficient evidence to uphold the security certificate against Charkaoui given their withdrawal of much of the evidence. Essentially the Crown pulled all of the wiretaps it used against Charkaoui, and half of its human sources, leaving it with insufficient evidence to meet the security certificate’s test that there is a “reasonable suspicion” that Charkaoui is a threat to Canadian national-security.
Thus, the judgment proceeded accordingly in September 2009 with the actions of Lame Brain Lamer.
And six years after the federal government declared him a terrorist and severely restricted his freedom of movement, Adil Charkaoui was a free man only because the CSIS had to withdraw their evidence, not because he was not a terrorist.
Thus, on August 5, 2009 Justice Tremblay-Lamer issued a directive saying she would consider whether she should quash the certificate or order the Ministers to revoke it themselves on her return from holidays, in early September.
Her holidays obviously took precedence over the confinement of Charkaoui, an issue that was considered to be so profoundly affecting the National Security and Canadian Immigration.
Daniele Tremblay-Lamer on 24 September 2009 announced she would lift all restrictions on Mr. Charkaoui by the end of the day and our Islamic animal was free to walk the streets once again unhindered.
Daniele Tremblay-Lamer is obviously a self-centered legal idiot that missed the most blatant of facts, that the CSIS withdrawal was truly not an issue. All the ‘new evidence’ entered in through the legal docket proceedings that had occasioned was not withdrawn and could never be withdrawn from Court Evidence. This ‘new evidence’ should have been considered by her as now ‘established precedent’ showing all terrorist claims surrounding Charkaoui to be true. This docket evidence is shown in these writings and cannot be ignored.
At the time Mary Foster, a member of the Coalition Justice for Adil Charkaoui, said the ruling had given the Charkaoui family a great sense of relief. “They can have a much more normal life; it means they can go outside the home without always being together,” Foster said.
Well, Mouthy Mary, their sense of relief is justifiably at some point going to end, and it will not just be Adil behind bars next time, trying to escape the Canadian Justice system.
I do not know if the Crown understood all this at the time they were protecting the National Security interests through withdrawal to shelter our spy agency. But, CSIS can issue a sigh of relief knowing that Adil and Animals will be herded behind bars by the RCMP and out of the nation permanent at some time in the future.
We shall carry on with our Docket examinations and disclosures as to why and how this will come about in the next Series segment titled The Islamic Canadian Dollarmania.
As shown prior through our docket examinations all the evidence is on file establishing the case against Charkaoui as a Muslim terrorist.
Prepare to rid the nation of him now.
It is a righteous action with God that you do so.
Galatians 4:16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?