| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Great White North | |
| Judge to rule on request to let British MP into Canada | |
| 2009-03-29 | |
| A Federal Court judge will rule Monday on an injunction asking that British MP George Galloway be allowed entry into Canada for a series of anti-war speeches. The federal government advised Galloway in a letter this month that he could not enter Canada because he violated provisions in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, specifically ones that relate to terrorism. The charge he engaged in terrorist activities is apparently based on the fact that Galloway delivered humanitarian goods to war-torn Gaza and gave $45,000 to the Hamas government. Lawyers representing groups trying to bring Galloway to Canada argued in Federal Court in Toronto Sunday that an injunction should be granted allowing Galloway to enter Canada for four days pending a judicial review. Justice Luc Martineau -- who presided over the court via video from Ottawa -- reserved his decision until Monday. Meanwhile, the organizers of Galloway's speaking tour said the speeches will go ahead, whether or not the parliamentarian is able to be physically present. The first of the four speeches titled "Resisting War from Gaza to Kandahar" is set for 7 p.m. in Toronto. They say if the judge rules in favour of Galloway by 2 p.m. he can make it across the border in time. If the ruling does not go in his favour Galloway will deliver his speeches via telecast. Monday morning, likely before the judge makes his ruling, a group from Montreal is to go to the U.S. border, where Galloway will stand within their sight but he will not attempt to cross the border.
Department of Justice lawyer Stephen Gold said the letter was a matter of courtesy to Galloway, so that the five-time MP didn't show up at a border crossing and run the risk of being detained. "It was a courtesy letter, an information letter, although it may have been unusual," said Gold, who at one point had to ask the judge to silence the sometimes raucous reactions from Galloway and free-speech supporters in the overcrowded courtroom. The letter did not constitute a final decision because Galloway had not yet gone to a point of entry and therefore not submitted to an examination by border officials, so there is nothing for the court to rule on, Gold said. Jackman said the letter was in effect a final decision because border officers take into account any information from the minister, and the letter would therefore greatly bias their decision. Gold said the decision to allow or disallow entry to a person at a point of entry lies with the border officers, and if the court decides to let Galloway in it would usurp the officer's authority. | |
| Posted by:tipper |