News Sections
Judge orders release of Khadr interrogation video
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(28)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Thu. Jun. 26 2008 8:47 AM ET
Videotaped footage of interviews by Canadian officials with Omar Khadr must be released to his defence team, a Federal Court of Canada judge has ruled.
The interviews were conducted over four days in February 2003 at Guantanamo Bay.
Khadr's lawyers claim the videotapes will assist them because "unclassified summaries and open source information" indicate their client is seen crying and asking Canadian officials for help on the tape.
He also apparently tells them that he had been tortured and shows them the scars left by his injuries.
"I will refrain from commenting on what the tapes reveal. However, I am satisfied that any content that may tend to support the applicant's allegations is relevant and should be disclosed to the applicant and his counsel for the purpose of his defence to the criminal charges," Judge Richard Mosley said in his ruling released late Wednesday.
Khadr was also interviewed by Canadian officials in September 2003 and March 2004. However, Mosley said he only has evidence that Canadian officials have recordings of the February 2003 interviews.
Last month, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Khadr has a constitutional right to material related to interviews conducted by Canadian officials at Guantanamo Bay.
But the ruling allows the government to object to releasing some documents for national security reasons.
It was up to Mosely to determine what materials Ottawa must release.
Khadr was captured in 2002 following a firefight with U.S. Special Forces. He was taken to Afghanistan by his father, who had ties to al Qaeda and was killed in Pakistan in 2003. The Pentagon maintains Khadr threw a grenade during the fight, killing a U.S. soldier.
Human rights laws broken
Mosely also ruled that the U.S. military's treatment of Khadr, a Canadian citizen, violated international laws against torture.
The judge said the way the military prepared Khadr for interrogation sessions with visiting Canadian officials broke human rights laws, including the Geneva Conventions.
Khadr's treatment is described in a U.S. military document outlining "steps taken by the Guantanamo authorities to prepare the applicant for the Canadian visit" in March 2004.
Mosley, who did not reveal the technique used on Khadr, said the document should be made public because it is relevant to Khadr's allegations that he was mistreated while in U.S. custody.
Mosley also said Wednesday that Canada was not an innocent player in Khadr's mistreatment.
The federal judge said Canada "became implicated" when the Canadian interrogator met Khadr despite having knowledge of the efforts to prime the prisoner.
Dennis Edney, one of Khadr's lawyers, said the court's decision was a "resounding stain" on the federal government.
"This is a credible decision, it's the first court to have seen evidence to suggest that a detainee such as Omar Khadr was tortured by the Americans and it also for the first time directly implicates Canada in torture as well,'' he said in an interview from Vancouver.
"I'm happy when I see that governments are being made to be accountable for their abuses.''
Edney said once he receives the documents he will then decide if they'll be released to the media.
"This decision clearly indicates that Canada was well aware of the treatment Omar Khadr received and denied that by saying that they had always been told by the Americans that he would be treated well. They knew the exact opposite,'' Edney said.
Mosley's ruling also states that "U.S. authorities were interested in having Canada consider whether Khadr could be prosecuted here (in Canada) and provided details about the evidence against him to Canadian officials for that purpose."
Nathan Whitling, a lawyer for Khadr, told The Globe and Mail that the ruling shows that U.S. authorities were trying to return Khadr to Canada to be tried but Canada "refused to allow his return to his country of citizenship."
With files from The Canadian Press
User Tools
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(28)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.


Comments are now closed for this story
slgk
said
Mike Webster
said
Doug
said
Yuri
said
K. McEwan
said
Wow
said
Mike - A 15 year old is a child - by law. Arguing that he shouldn't be considered one anymore because he has been incarcerated past the age of majority is absurd. Read. Think. Learn.
C.Rouget
said
DWB
said
A vast number of Canadians know what our media elites won't admit. There is a growing part of our population that has, not just a religious allegiance to Islam, but also a political one that takes priority when they conflict with indigenous Canadian values.
Eleanor
said
We do not have to stoop to the level of these
terrorists!
Shan-David
said
Steve
said
Obviously some people can't get past their emotions and would prefer to have a show trial. Stalin, Hitler, and Saddam would applaud you.
Doug
said
Earl Robert
said
re: K. McEwin, your comment "the whole US miliary is fighting an illegal war in Iraq", when you keep repeating those lies your hoping that people will start to believe you. You are the one that makes ludicrous statements.
E. Maclachlan
said
Mike Webster
said
james
said
Like the CF in Somalia? Like the Americans in Vietnam and Abu Gharib prison in Iraq? Like the "collateral" damage of 640,000 Iraqi women, children, and elderly in Iraq? (John Hopkins University study)
"He isn't a child.."
A 15 year old isn't a child? According to international law, which Canada has signed on to, he is.
As the saying goes "one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter".
Thank goodness for judges and human rights groups who see through this facade of "support the troops" as an answer for this and other atrocities.
It is despicable that we are allied with a nation that tortures ... particularly children. These videos appear to reveal the truth of the modern day Gulag in Cuba.
Mark in Campbellford
said
Cathie
said
When you leave Canada your rights stop at the border.
The long arm of any nation rarely extends that far.
The fed judge is order the Canadian govt to do something but it will not help his case. The US military judge can refuse to use the info. and this is military courts.
Come on Canada get some facts. Real facts. Go to the US military tribunal commission website. Press releases with actual transcripts are there for the world to see.
Canada has already admitted they do not want Khadr back.
Joe Almeida
said
Who made the determination that Khadr was a full-fledged terrorist? Did a court of law with admissible evidence? No. The US military has accused Khadr of that. The fact the Khadr was even involved in the fighting is in dispute. So where is the due process that exists for Khadr to determine the facts? That due process doesn't exist. The US has not made a proper determination and is afraid to bring Khadr on US soil because the government would be forced to declare who Khadr is in terms of legal standing. The US Supreme court ruled on that, and now a Federal Court has found the Canadian government complicit with actions againsts in own citizens that are not up to it's responsibilities. This has nothing to do with "bleeding heart judges" - it has everything to do with due process and the rule of law - and the US along with Canada have violated both. When that happens, neither accused terrorist, government, soldiers, or citizens can truly speak of honour or respect.
PG
said
Joe
said
Gary Patterson
said
Afghanistan and Iraq were both invaded by the United States illegally and anyone who opposed the invasion was classified as a terrorist.
In Kadhr's case he was the only survivor of an encampment that the Americans bombed. He suffered shrapnel injuries to his head and was unable to see. He was shot in the back by a special forces member not dressed in uniform.
I guess the fifteen year old should have done his duty and just stood up and be shot.
The Americans will surely invite all the right wing nuts and criminals into their military to fight their wars, as they already do.
Colin Chiswell
said
ARJAY
said
As far as the uniform is concerned, does his lack of uniform mean he's a terrorist, or does it also mean he might not have been involved at all? How do we separate innocent people from the terrorists without a trial? And if the States is torturing children and refusing to give them trials, is this what you think makes us superior to the terrorists?
Please explain your position in more detail Mike.
Robert in Toronto
said
The fact that the Canadian representative knew of this abuse, and consented to it, and did not object places us as accessories.
Canada has long been held up as an example of democracy in action - human rights, dignity, observance of the law. It's so interesting that everyone went to the assistance of the woman in Mexico accused (and convicted) of fraud, and brought her back to Canada immediately (a process that usually takes up to 6 months) while we deny that same support to this individual, who has been held for 4 or 5 years solely on an accusation.
Had the charge not been one of terrorism (and boy, can we make use of that term today to cover a multitude of sins), everyone would have been up in arms over the way this individual had been treated.
Play the tape on CTV news - in its entirety - lets everyone see what's on it and see if the American's hands are as clean and pure as they claim, or let's see if they wallow in the mud with the rest of the terrorist nations that they attack every chance they can get.
Kevin in Toronto
said
He is Canadian and he was underage at the time. We cannot decide to obey our own laws when it's convenient.
If he had been 18 at the time of the event, I'd say too bad.
ance
said
if the western democracies that are desperately trying to influence unstable areas of the world do not follow these rules then lets forget everything and come home...
MJES
said
Know that I am ashamed but with a resolve to stand and be counted. Our government has lost its way to be sure but for the most part our people have not. The world may not hear us, (average joe citizen) as we are drowned out by a manipulated mainstream press (for the most part) - And we, middle America, are too cut off from the voices of the world and the stories of the world.
It is important that you keep speaking loudly no matter your position and hopefully we can turn to the sound on a responsible internet, for mutual direct dialogs and cut out our one-sided media outlets such as Fox and CNN.
We are not lost but a bit locked away like children who have been grounded.
We have an important decision to make this year and to have Canada, Europe, Africa, Asia, South America &c… chime in with some insights and support may be more valuable than any summit or the ramblings on from our US G8 representatives. Grass roots communications are imperative, more direct, and perhaps if handled responsibly and respectfully more educational.
I am amazed at how cutoff we are…. like the concert singer I scream out to the crowd , I can’t hear you….