Saturday, October 09, 2021

Does Canada consider WikiLeaks a terrorist group, Chelsea Manning's lawyer asks at immigration hearing

The two-day IRB hearing that ended Friday did not settle the matter of whether Manning will be allowed into Canada

CANADIAN BORDER SERVICES ARE PATERNALISTIC CENSORORUS PURVEYORS OF PURITAN PRUDITY 
THEY HAVE CENSORED LGBTQ LIT AS PORN OVER MANY YEARS. THEY ARE CANADA'S SELF APPOINTED CENSORS


Author of the article: Adrian Humphreys
Publishing date: Oct 08, 2021 
Canada Border Services Agency is seeking to have U.S. whistleblower Chelsea Manning declared inadmissible to the country, which would prevent her from visiting and speaking at events in Canada. PHOTO BY SCREEN CAPTURE

A four-year fight by U.S. whistleblower Chelsea Manning for permission to come to Canada will continue until at least next year, after her immigration hearing ended Friday not with a decision, but a lengthy timetable for more legal arguments.


Manning, 33, was deemed inadmissible to Canada because of criminal convictions in the United States after she leaked a massive trove of U.S. military and diplomatic secrets to WikiLeaks in 2010.

That designation by Canada Border Services Agency blocks her from visiting Canada, and Manning is fighting the decision at the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB).

Manning’s lawyers, Joshua Blum and Lex Gill, argued the charges she was convicted of in the United States are not equivalent to the criminal offences in Canada that the government used as the basis for banning Manning from the country.

Canadian law declares it an offence to share damaging government secrets to a foreign entity or to a terrorist group, unlike U.S. laws that do not care who receives the information for a finding of guilt.

At the hearing Friday, Gill asked the government’s lawyers whether Ottawa considers WikiLeaks to itself be a terrorist group or a foreign entity, or whether they claim that such a group could learn the secrets indirectly by reading accounts of WikiLeaks’ releases.

The federal government lawyers, Josée Barrette and Anthony Lashley, said to wait for their written submissions to find out.

Manning was convicted under the U.S. Espionage Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and sentenced to 35 years in prison, the longest sentence ever issued in the United States for whistleblowing.

In 2017, after seven years in prison, Manning’s sentence was commuted by U.S. President Barack Obama. Shortly after, Manning tried to visit friends in Montreal but was stopped at the border.

The two-day IRB hearing that ended Friday did not settle the matter.

Instead, the IRB gave lawyers timetables for submitting additional written arguments — on top of the hundreds of pages of exhibits submitted by the government and more than 1,000 pages from Manning.

Manning also argues there was no evidence the leaked material caused actual harm to the United States, and that she leaked it as a public service and in the public interest.

Earlier at the hearing, Manning described her extraordinary experience as one of the best-known whistleblowers of the digital age, and the repercussions she faced, both legally and mentally.

While a military analyst with the U.S. Army deployed to Iraq, Manning leaked hundreds of thousands of documents, including an explosive video of two U.S. helicopters opening fire and killing 11 people on the ground, including two children and two journalists.

She said she did it to alert the public to what was really going on in the war on terror and how it differed from official versions.

On Friday, the IRB heard additional testimony from Heidi Matthews, an assistant professor of law at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto, on the importance of Manning’s whistleblowing. Matthews provided oral evidence and a written report.

“From torture to murder, from disproportionate civilian casualties to abusive detention and interrogation practices, the information Ms. Manning disclosed details evidence of violations of international human rights law, international humanitarian law and domestic military and civilian law that put truth to the lie about the humanitarian commitments of counterinsurgency doctrine,” Matthews said in her report.

The material Manning gave to WikiLeaks included about 75,000 Afghanistan war-related significant activity reports, 400,000 Iraq war-related significant activity reports, 800 Guantanamo Bay detainee assessment briefs, and 250,000 U.S. Department of State diplomatic cables.

IRB adjudicator Marisa Musto gave the government 30 days to provide its written submissions, followed by 30 days for Manning’s lawyers to respond to it. The government then has until Dec. 20 to reply to Manning’s submission.

Musto said her decision would be issued in writing, and because of the large volume of materials and complexity of the issues, would not be doing so until early 2022.

If Musto accepts the government decision that Manning is inadmissible to Canada, and that she’s not covered by whistleblower protections, the IRB will then have to consider Manning’s constitutional challenge of the laws used to restrict her from entering Canada.

• Email: ahumphreys@postmedia.com | Twitter: AD_Humphreys

No comments:

Post a Comment