Dear Mr. Easter:
The case of Mahar Arar demands your attention. Here is what we know about the facts: Mr. Arar is a dual Canadian-Syrian citizen. He was detained by U.S. authorities while changing planes in New York en route to his Ottawa home. He expressed his desire to proceed to Canada but U.S. authorities instead deported him to Syria via Jordan. Mr. Arar spent over 10 months in a Syrian jail. He was tortured.
Here is what we know about the law: Section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees to every citizen the right to enter, remain and leave Canada. Canada has a correlative duty to admit any Canadian citizen. These principles are mirrored at international law. This means that once the United States decided to remove him, Mr. Arar had a legal right to enter Canada, and Canada had a legal duty to admit him. Do any of the additional facts and allegations affect this basic claim?
Does it matter that Mr. Arar was a citizen of Canada by naturalization, and not by birth? No. His right as a citizen to enter and remain in Canada is equal to that of a Canadian citizen by birth.
Does it matter that Mr. Arar is also a citizen of Syria? No. Canada's duty to admit him Arar is not affected by the fact that he is a dual citizen. As it happens, Syria does not even permit Syrians to renounce their citizenship.
Was the U.S. free to choose the country of citizenship to which Mr. Arar would be sent? No. In the event of more than one country of citizenship, the citizen can exercise his or her right to enter against either country of citizenship. The choice belongs to the one who has the right. If the dual citizen does not wish to return to either, the sending country may face a dilemma, but no such dilemma was faced here. When choosing from among countries of citizenship, international human rights law, as well as U.S. law, dictates that a person must NOT be sent to a country that presents a substantial risk of torture. Syria is just such a country.
Does it matter if Mr. Arar was alleged to have been involved in wrongdoing? No. Even if Mr. Arar were suspected of terror-related wrongdoing, his right to enter Canada, and the duty of Canada to admit him upon expulsion from the United States, remain unchanged. Canada now has an extremely expansive anti-terrorist law with wide-ranging powers of surveillance and enforcement. If Mr. Arar was suspected of breaking any of Canada's laws, Canada could have deployed its justice system against him, in Canada.
Here is what we do not know: Why was Mr. Arar's right to enter Canada violated? Even if Canada did not actively collaborate with the U.S. in sending him to a country where he would likely be tortured, many questions remain. Did the United States deny Canada the opportunity to admit Mr. Arar, contrary to U.S. and international law? Did Canada refuse to admit Mr. Arar, contrary to Canadian and international law? If the former is true, what steps did Canada take once it realized that Mr. Arar was in Syria? After all, protecting citizens is the first responsibility of any state, and torture is among the most egregious violations of human rights. We cannot forget that at this moment, other Canadians are being detained and possibly tortured in Syria and Egypt.
There are many other questions - particularly about Canada's role in gathering and furnishing information to U.S. authorities. Only an independent inquiry, with the authority to subpoena witnesses and compel disclosure of evidence, can address these questions. The RCMP Complaints Commission lacks these powers, and therefore is not the appropriate venue to bring the relevant facts to light. All Canadians - especially Maher Arar - deserve answers.
Audrey Macklin, an associate professor with the University of Toronto's law faculty, and the undersigned call upon the government of Canada to hold a public inquiry into the treatment of Maher Arar:
University of Toronto, Faculty of Law:
Professor Kent Roach, Professor Tony Duggan, Professor Colleen Flood, Professor Jim Phillips, Professor Martha Shaffer, Professor Lorne Sossin, Professor Hamish Stewart, Professor David Dyzenhaus, Professor Denise Reaume, Professor Lisa Austin, Adjunct Professor Noah Novogrodsky
From University of Toronto, International Human Rights Program:
Penelope Simons (Research Fellow)
Other universities:
Francois Crepeau, Université de Montréal, Law
Janet Cleveland, PhD, Université de Montréal
Sharryn Aiken, Queen's University, Law
Catherine Montgomery, McGill University, Sociology
Peter Showler, University of Ottawa, Law
Patricia Foxen, Vanderbilt University, Anthropology, Nashville, Tenn.
Other:
Georgette Gagnon, international human-rights lawyer
Janet Dench, executive director, Canadian Council for Refugees
Fernand Gauthier, former member, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
