Category: Security Certificates

The Court held that Special Advocates could make submissions in the public hearings as this was required by the Open Court Principle/

The Court explains its decision with some redactions as to why some of the information the government sought to repress in the report of the Arar Commission was released. The case provides a good example of balancing under section 38

The Court discusses the prohibition on communication imposed on special advocates during the security certificate process.

Charkaoui is an important summary of the law on questions related to national security. It explains the meaning of the concept of national security; the burden of proof on the minister and the standard of proof; and discusses in detail the role of the special advocate.

The Court held that the transcript of the previous proceedings was not reliable and hence could not be used as evidence unless Mr. Jaballah testified and then only to impugn his credibility.

The Court held that the burden of proving harm on grounds of national security rests on the Minister and the standard of proof is to a balance of probabilities.

The Court ordered the disclosure of the source file due to the lack of candour on the part of the Minister.

The Court ordered disclosure of neutralized information to the named person.

The Court rejected an application by Harkat for disclosure holding that he had all possible disclosure.

The Court upheld the reasonable grounds threshold as constitutional within the context of security certificates.