MEDIA ADVISORY
For immediate release
Feb. 28, 2007
(Toronto) - Law students and two law professors, Sujit Choudhry and Michael Code, of the U of T Faculty of Law saw their months of hard work pay off yesterday as the Supreme Court of Canada accepted their legal arguments in its groundbreaking decision in Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration). In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court found that the procedures laid out in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) are unconstitutional because they unfairly deny individuals who are suspected threats to national security under the IRPA the right to know the case against them. The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court in June 2006 and the decision was released on February 23, 2007. The Court has given Parliament 12 months to come up with new legislation.
Under the IRPA, the Minister of Justice has the power to issue a security certificate against permanent resident (landed immigrant) or foreign national who is suspected of being a threat to national security. Since the legislation was enacted after 9/11, five people have been declared possible threats to national security under the Act. All of them were detained. The Federal Court reviews the reasonableness of the certificate, but when issues of national security arise the proceedings are conducted behind closed doors without the individual named in the certificate present.
U of T law students volunteering under the school's International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC) worked closely with law Professor Sujit Choudhry and his co-counsel, Robert Centa of Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP and graduate of the U of T law school, and clinic Director Noah Novogrodsky. The clinic made joint submissions with Human Rights Watch as third party interveners in the case. A second U of T law professor, Michael Code, who was also assisted by several law students, presented argument in the case on behalf of the Criminal Lawyers Association.
"The SCC has unanimously confirmed the importance of procedural fairness and individual liberties even with respect to those suspected of terrorism," said Choudhry, who made oral submissions before the court. "Michael single-handedly persuaded the court that many other options are available that interfere less with a person's fundamental right to a fair hearing. But the fight is not over. We will stay closely involved in the case over the next 12 months to ensure that the government comes up with new legislation that does not offend the Constitution."
"This case demonstrates how the IHRC can draw on the special expertise of law professors and form partnerships with law firms and human rights organizations to advance important human rights issues for our country," said IHRC Acting Director Darryl Robinson. "We are proud of the student involvement in the case and particularly grateful for the enormous contributions of Robert Centa and law firm, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP, as well as Human Rights Watch. We look forward to future collaborations of this kind."
-30-
For more information, please contact:
Jane Kidner, Assistant Dean, External Relations, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto
(416) 978-6702 or j.kidner@utoronto.ca
