Canadian federal court upholds MQM’s ‘terrorist character’ WASHINGTON: A Canadian federal court has upheld the decision of an immigration board that said there was “reasonable grounds” to believe that the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) had “engaged in acts of terrorism”. The judgment, which was delivered on July 19, 2007, in Ottawa, but whose full text has only now become available, relates to one Mohammed Kashif Omer, who was a member of the MQM and who after arriving in Canada, claimed asylum. The Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board concluded on September 14, 2006, that the applicant was ineligible and ordered his deportation. Omer went in appeal against the Board’s decision to the Federal Court in Ottawa, presided over by a single judge who said, “Having reviewed the board’s reasons in light of the evidence presented, I find that the conclusion of the board to the effect that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the MQM is an organisation that engages, has engaged or will engage in terrorism, is reasonable.” According to the court’s record, Omer had argued that the intimidation that targeted political opponents was not violence to intimidate a population or to compel a government or organisation, as per the definition of terrorism (in an earlier Canadian case). The court said, “The applicant further submits that terrorism does not include settlements of accounts within an organisation, or between organisations, however despicable and politically incorrect this may be. Furthermore, the “civilians” or the “persons not taking an active part in the hostilities in a situation of harmed conflicts”, in the definition of terrorism ... are meant to refer to random targets, not an identifiable opposition. The applicant also maintained that there is no reasonable ground for finding that the MQM is a terrorist organisation, as there was no objective basis for the belief which was based on compelling and credible information ... The applicant argues that Pakistan is one of the most corrupt countries in the world, one where disinformation is rampant, and that since the authorities often lie to achieve their purpose, they cannot be trusted as a source for this information.” The Federal Court judge in rejecting the appeal said, “Having reviewed the board’s reasons in light of the evidence presented, I find that the conclusion of the board to the effect that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the MQM is an organisation that engages, has engaged or will engage in terrorism, is reasonable. While the board did not provide a detailed analysis of the documents on which it relied, as was done with the Amnesty International report in Khan, above, it identified a series of acts attributed to the MQM which it considered to be evidence of terrorist activities, and noted precisely where in the documentation submitted this evidence could be found. The board not only relied on a number of different documents, but also explained why it found the information to be credible. As in Khan, above, while the evidence relied on by the board might be less than proof on a balance of probabilities, it is more than a ‘flimsy suspicion’ and does appear to be based on compelling and credible information. As such, the decision of the board is reasonable and the court will not interfere with it.” Omer’s present whereabouts are not known.
Posted on: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:50:15 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015