And there was much rejoicing

Let’s have a big “Yeah baby!” for the Supreme Court, which today unanimously put the smack-down on a particularly egregious example of post-9/11 use of ridiculous police state legislation: the “security certificates”.

Top court rules against security certificates
The Supreme Court of Canada has struck down the security certificate system used by the federal government to detain and deport foreign-born terrorist suspects.

In a 9-0 judgment handed down Friday, the court found that the system, described by the government as a key tool for safeguarding national security, violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

…

For non-Canadians, or Canadians who haven’t been paying attention, here’s a summary of what the security certifcate legislation (that just got smacked down) was doing. This summary is from the Wikipedia article, which has more information on the debate, and links for followup.

In Canada, a security certificate refers to a document issued under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act allowing the government to remove any non-citizen who poses a security threat to Canada or Canadians. The certificate is prepared for and signed by the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration when a non-citizen, either a permanent resident or foreign national located in Canada, is deemed to be inadmissible on the grounds that the subject is a threat to national security or has violated human rights abroad, or is involved with organized crime or other serious offences. The signed certificate is then referred to a federal court judge who reviews the evidence. All or part of the evidence may be heard in secret, in the absence of the subject of the certificate, if the judge rules that airing it publicly may hurt national security or put the safety of any individual at risk. There is no provision for such evidence to be revealed to the subject being detained or to his or her lawyer though the judge may provide a summary of the evidence heard.

If the judge determines that the certificate is not reasonable, the certificate is quashed. If, however, the judge decides that it is reasonable, then the certificate becomes a removal order. The Federal Court’s decision cannot be appealed.

An individual may be held for several years, without any criminal charges being laid, before a hearing is complete, and can be deported without any criminal charge or conviction.

It doesn’t take a lot of familiarity with the “principles of fundamental justice” to understand that being held without knowing what you are accused of, and without the chance to see the evidence against violates those principles.

So, it’s nice to see the Supreme Court come right out and say that. Of course, they’re dillydallying with some kind of special prosecutor exception and have given the government a year to come up with something that better balances national security interests with the rights of the individual, so it’s not a complete statement about civil rights and due process being paramount, but I’ll take what I can get.