Hassan Almrei v. Minister of Citizenship & Immigration, et al.
(Federal) (Civil) (By Leave)
Constitutional law - Civil rights, Immigration Law, Procedural Law, Evidence, Statutes, Interpretation.
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Canadian Charter (civil) - Civil rights - Immigration law - Procedure - Evidence - Security certificate - Inadmissibility - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in holding that s.78 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, applies to an application for release under s.84(2) of the Act, enabling the court to hear secret evidence from the state in camera and ex parte - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in holding that the time spent in detention and the conditions under which it has been spent are almost entirely irrelevant to the question of whether removal from Canada will occur within a reasonable time - Whether s. 82(2) and 84(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, infringe ss. 7 and/or s. 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? - If so, whether the infringement can be justified under s. 1.
On October 19, 2001, the Appellant, who had claimed protection as a Convention refugee upon arriving in Canada in 1999, was detained pursuant to a security certificate signed by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and the Solicitor General for Canada (the "Ministers") under s. 40.1(1) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2 (the "former Act"). It indicated that the Ministers believed that the Appellant would engage in terrorism, or is a member of an organization that will engage in terrorism. Partially on the strength of secret evidence adduced in camera and ex parte, the certificate was found to be reasonable. A removal order was issued on February 11, 2002. Meanwhile, the Ministers sought a danger opinion concerning the Appellant. The first opinion was overturned on judicial review, but a second danger opinion concluded that the Appellant would not be at risk of torture if removed to Syria, and, in the alternative, that if he were at risk, it would be justified due to the risk he presents to Canadian security. The Appellant sought judicial review of that opinion.
More than 120 days after the removal order was issued, the Appellant applied for judicial release under s. 84(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the "IRPA"), which act had then come into force. The designated judge found that secret evidence could be received pursuant to s. 78 in the s. 84(2) review. The length and conditions of detention were of limited relevance under s. 84(2) since it was a forward-looking provision. The Appellant had not satisfied the first aspect of s. 84(2) test. Finally, the length and conditions of the Appellant's detention did not offend ss. 7 or 12 of the Charter. The review was dismissed, as was the Appellant's appeal.
- Date modified: