We were disgusted and angered to see yet another attack on the reputation of Adil Charkaoui published in several media outlets last week.

Since his victory in the Supreme Court in February 2007, and since the Supreme Court agreed to hear a second challenge, this time aimed at the investigative practices of CSIS in security certificate cases, a steady stream of ‘revelations’ about Charkaoui has appeared in the media. Though not one of these has been backed up by proof, they have all tended to discredit Charkaoui, an eloquent and powerful defender of the rights of immigrants and of elementary justice in Canada.

Our organizations, along with hundreds of others, have joined Charkaoui in vigorously challenging the security certificate process, under which he was arrested in May 2003. Recent articles appearing in the Globe and Mail (“Terror suspect considering lawsuit”, 5 April 2008) and the Journal de Montreal (“Révélations choc”, 4 April 2008), like similar stories appearing in the National Post and La Presse over the past several months, illustrate the trouble with immigration ‘security’ proceedings like the security certificate.

Last week’s story was based on a web posting, written under an assumed name, which appeared on an internet “message board” over six months ago. According to the Globe, the posting alleges that Charkaoui has expressed certain outrageous beliefs and is furthermore a proponent of ‘jihad’. Offered without any context, the assertions are, quite simply, meaningless. Moreover, no evidence is offered, beyond the simple assertion of the author of the web-post, that any such comments were ever made by Charkaoui.

How is it possible that serious media outlets, including the heavyweight Globe and Mail, would chose to elevate this piece of internet gossip about an individual’s beliefs to the status of news-worthy information, failing to question the source, motivation or accuracy of the post? How have other news outlets been led to publish similarly questionable material and become vehicles for what has been described as a smear campaign against Charkaoui?

We think the answer to this puzzle lies, in part, in a dangerous way of thinking underlying the security certificate process itself.

No precise charges have to be laid to issue a security certificate; it is sufficient for the notoriously bumbling CSIS to state that they think the person “constituted, constitutes or will constitute a danger to the security of Canada”, where key words are not even defined. In such a situation, the standard of proof and standards of acceptable evidence necessarily remain very low. Crystal balls aside, it is not possible to prove such an allegation. Accordingly, CSIS need only show “reasonable grounds to believe” its general suspicions; and, to make their case, they are permitted to rely on opinion, hearsay and other information that would not normally be admissable in court.

On the basis – or even on the mere assertion - that it is reasonable to believe that they may have a certain profile, people can be subject to indefinite detention, placed under intrusive control orders, and threatened with deportation from homes and family, even when there is an acknowledged risk of torture. In this way, Hassan Almrei has been in prison for six and a half years, with no end in sight; the entire Jaballah, Mahjoub and Harkat families have their lives ruled by stifling house arrest conditions; and Charkaoui is threatened with deportation despite having lived here for thirteen years, with his parents, sister, wife and three children, and despite Immigration Canada’s assessment that he is at risk of “cruel and unusual punishment, torture or death” if deported.

Once this framework is accepted, the fact that Charkaoui, for example, is alleged on an internet site to have certain ideas and to have made certain comments, becomes a matter of importance. Fear and - dare we say it? - racism awakened by over-employed and little understood words like "jihad" overwhelm the need for real proof, or real charges that could be brought to trial.

As in court, so in the media: media reports have all too often adopted the same low standards, figuratively introducing the security certificate process into the ‘court’ of public opinion by labelling detainees “terror suspects”, and by inviting readers to take the most frivilous of hearsay seriously. Last week’s articles are a case in point.

Canada has seen internment camps, McCarthyism, and the imposition of the War Measures Act on Quebec. We are among those who believe that our safety depends on a clear rejection of the security certificate process, of indefinite detention, invasive house arrest, and deportation to torture. That is why we will stand by Charkaoui in the face of such unsubstantiated attacks, and continue to support him in his quest for justice.

Mohamed Boudjenane, Executive Director, Canadian Arab Federation
Deborah Bourque, National President, Canadian Union of Postal Workers
Hind Charkaoui, Coalition Justice for Adil Charkaoui
Dolores Chew, CEGEP Professor
Francine Dumas, Rassemblement Outaouais contre la guerre
Mary Foster, Coalition Justice for Adil Charkaoui
Minerva Gutierrez, Québec solidaire
Mac Scott, Carranza Barristers and Solicitors & No One Is Illegal Toronto
Harsha Walia, No One Is Illegal Vancouver
Présence musulmane Montréal

.... and others.

Note: The Globe and Mail refused to publish this letter.