Weinie
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,504
- Points
- 1,140
The article did state that the kids were orphans, which presumes their parents are dead. I am not sure that forcibly removing kids from their parents has much resonance in Canada right now.
Bringing 'Em Back or Not? (I.D.'ed Cdn ISIS fighters, families, kids?)
- Thread starter The Bread Guy
- Start date
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 15,353
- Points
- 1,260
"Asked what steps were being taken to protect public safety, Public Safety Minister Bill Blair’s office declined to answer."
Cause he has no clue. Like many of his peers.
Cause he has no clue. Like many of his peers.
I am all for bringing children back, if they are Canadian citizens.
The parents and such, held on suspicion of being ISIS? Or who left Canada to support the ISIS cause? Screw em.
Seperating kids from parents is never a great option unless dire circumstances require it. And this would, I imagine, qualify as dire circumstances. But this isn’t separating a child from an abusive parent in a domestic setting, this is an entirely different kettle of fish.
As for Canadians who left Canada to support ISIS in one form or another? Again, screw em. They made a very deliberate choice, and they have to live with the consequences of that choice just like the rest of us.
If I left Canada to support a fanatical terror group that was beheading people, taking women as sex slaves, and murdering people by the hundreds…and I ended up in a detention camp of some kind because of it. I wouldn’t expect anybody to lift a damn finger to help me.
0.02
The parents and such, held on suspicion of being ISIS? Or who left Canada to support the ISIS cause? Screw em.
Seperating kids from parents is never a great option unless dire circumstances require it. And this would, I imagine, qualify as dire circumstances. But this isn’t separating a child from an abusive parent in a domestic setting, this is an entirely different kettle of fish.
As for Canadians who left Canada to support ISIS in one form or another? Again, screw em. They made a very deliberate choice, and they have to live with the consequences of that choice just like the rest of us.
If I left Canada to support a fanatical terror group that was beheading people, taking women as sex slaves, and murdering people by the hundreds…and I ended up in a detention camp of some kind because of it. I wouldn’t expect anybody to lift a damn finger to help me.
0.02
Not accurate at all. It just isn’t for public consumption.
As for how many? Well, as the articles state, there are a certain number known to be in the camps. Some will be adults who can be charged, some will not. The ‘brides of ISIS’ will be judicially challenging. There are potential charges there for some, likely not for others. We can guess for ourselves how punitive the courts will likely be to a young woman who at the age of 19 got seduced to go to Syria and have some ISIS babies.
Generally it was the men who did real ISIS stuff. Most of them lost fights with the US Air Force, but a few are still around.
I was surprised to see this go public, but some recently unsealed court records lift the curtain just a bit on one particular individual:
Unsealed documents show RCMP intends to charge captured ISIS fighter
- Reaction score
- 27,197
- Points
- 1,090
If you're Canadian, I want you back for punishment here, not oblige some other nations to have to address our problems.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,894
- Points
- 1,160
Good question.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,670
- Points
- 1,160
Doesn't it depend on where they did the crime?
If a Canadian goes to the US and does a crime we expect the US system to deal with it. If they go to Australia and do it there, the same.
If they go to Iraq and commit crimes why shouldn't Iraq try, and if convicted, punish them?
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,894
- Points
- 1,160
Doesn't it depend on where they did the crime?
If a Canadian goes to the US and does a crime we expect the US system to deal with it. If they go to Australia and do it there, the same.
If they go to Iraq and commit crimes why shouldn't Iraq try, and if convicted, punish them?
... or make them President, as that type of behaviour tends to be a pre-requisite for senior leadership in some parts of the developing world.
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,138
- Points
- 1,140
I guess that would depend on our extradition treaty, if any, with that nation. There are all kinds of byzantine rules around extradition.Doesn't it depend on where they did the crime?
If a Canadian goes to the US and does a crime we expect the US system to deal with it. If they go to Australia and do it there, the same.
If they go to Iraq and commit crimes why shouldn't Iraq try, and if convicted, punish them?
What if said nation doesn't want/is unable to prosecute them?
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,138
- Points
- 1,140
We got off cheap. The government settled out-of-court because they rightly feared thay would lose at trial. He would've received five times more with a win in court.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,670
- Points
- 1,160
But the purpose of extradition is to bring a person who is in a foreign country but who committed a crime in Canada back to Canada for trial.
Isn't the situation we are discussing here about Canadians who left Canada to commit offences in foreign countries and who have been caught in a foreign country?
We do have arrangements with some countries who have tried our citizens for crimes in their country to serve out their punishments in Canadian jails. That's what we did with Khadr but when he got here he was almost immediately granted bail. That should make other countries somewhat cautious about letting prisoners with time to serve to come back to Canada.
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,138
- Points
- 1,140
A Canadian who commits a crime in Iraq and is subsequently repatriated/returns to Canada may be provisionally arrested and detained pending extradition on the strength of an INTERPOL RED NOTICE issued by Iraq. That's what i was getting at.
- Reaction score
- 4,175
- Points
- 1,260
Depends on the situation. If Canadian law says you can't leave Canada to do bad things, and you're nabbed elsewhere, did the offence of "leaving Canada" happen here, or there? My non-legal-beagle mind says leaving happened here, but I stand to be corrected/educated.
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,138
- Points
- 1,140
Section 6.1 of the Charter states that "Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada." Unless you're stupid enough to openly state "I'm going to wage jihad!" you are free to leave. In those cases which came to light, the traveller's passport was suspended/cancelled/seized which only thwarts travel by legitimate means. Some, I'm sure, have claimed they were visiting grandma in Israel and then joined ISIS instead. What happens when they re-enter Canada by right after being a member of a terrorist army is the issue.
- Reaction score
- 4,175
- Points
- 1,260
True enough - and then it often comes down to "what's the easiest to nail them with based on the evidence that'll make it in court?"
Treason and other Offences against the Queen’s Authority and Person
Marginal note:High treason- 46 (1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,
- (a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;
- (b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or
- (c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.
- Marginal note:Treason
(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,- (a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
- (b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
- (c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
- (d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
- (e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.
- Marginal note:Canadian citizen
(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) or (2), a Canadian citizen or a person who owes allegiance to Her Majesty in right of Canada,- (a) commits high treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (1); or
- (b) commits treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (2).
- Marginal note:Overt act
(4) Where it is treason to conspire with any person, the act of conspiring is an overt act of treason.
- R.S., c. C-34, s. 46
- 1974-75-76, c. 105, s. 2
unishment for high treason- 47 (1) Every one who commits high treason is guilty of an indictable offence and shall be sentenced to imprisonment for life.
Now from my understanding, we must be at war with an actual country for this to be applicable. Im surprised that this hasn't been changed. On the other hand, if Canada was to retroactively recognize ISIS as a country, it might work.
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,138
- Points
- 1,140
ISIS, despite their internal belief that they were a "state" were, in fact, a non-state actor. I doubt there is a legal basis to charge someone with treason for joining ISIS. However, there are lots of other criminal offences which they could be charged with, if the evidence is available to prove them.
- Reaction score
- 1,682
- Points
- 1,090
From my perspective, the law states we have to let Canadians re-enter the country. It doesn't impose a responsibility to return those who have committed offences abroad. You leave the country, and get yourself into trouble, that's on you... and I'm not including the "two Michaels" scenario in that.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,670
- Points
- 1,160
It's actually a lot broader than that.
The law pre 2001 was that generally you could not be charged and tried in Canada for an offence committed outside Canada. There were exceptions for war crimes (as defined in the Law of Armed Conflict) and certain other minor and specific exemptions.
Then things changed big time. S. 6(2) still states the general law:
But s 7 now adds a plethora of offences for which you can be tried in Canada for things done elsewhere and Part II.1 adds an abundance of circumstances that come under the general rubric of "Terrorism".
So Canada has given itself much power to bring jurisdiction over these crimes "home". Very few of these laws have been tested in court to see if they stand constitutional muster. Quite frankly, I hope they do because if someone commits these acts in a foreign country or beyond Canada's territorial jurisdiction, and somehow safely makes it back inside our borders, I would not want to see them escape some form of punishment if extradition becomes impossible for some reason or other.
That said, there's a difference between trying someone for their crimes here because they escaped justice in the country where they committed the crime and specifically bringing people home from the foreign country for trial here when the foreign country already has them and could try them there. Such trials here become very complex and costly and can all too easily end up with a guilty person escaping actual justice.
Similar threads
