This is where mindless pacifism and legal idiocy lead.
The good news is that federal court Justice Anne Mactavish refused to order our soldiers to stop transferring enemy prisoners into the custody of the Afghan government.
The bad news is that she based her judgment not on the merits of the case ... [leaving] the door open for judicial intervention if circumstances require our soldiers to resume prisoner transfers at some future date.
Judge Mactavish -- and whoever else hears such cases going forward -- should realize that Kandahar is not Kitchener; and it is ridiculous to think that the residents of both places should be able to avail themselves of the same Charter rights and due process.
... the legal suit really seems more like a means of advancing the unstated third alternative: pulling out our troops altogether and washing our hands of the imperfect Afghan regime...
If Amnesty and the BCCLA get their way, then whole nations will be abandoned to their suffering for the sake of protecting Canadian moral purity in regard to a handful of suspects. Like so many pious defenders of human rights who have raised their voices since 9/11, these NGOs have lost the forest for the trees. It is a shame that Judge Mactavish found basis in her law books to provide them encouragement.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Charter rights for the Taliban? (Part II)
This excellent ‘Post’ editorial comments on the recent federal court ruling on the Amnesty and BCCLU attempt to have the Canadian Charter apply to Afghan detainees: