The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION

Supreme Court to hear case of Libyan dissident who was denied refugee status

  • Print

OTTAWA - Last month, the Conservative government staged an unprecedented military display on Parliament Hill to celebrate how Canadian fighter jets and a warship helped overthrow Libya's tyrant dictator Moammar Gadhafi.

Nearly three years earlier, Libyan-born Mushen Ahemed Ramadan Agraira had appealed to the government to be allowed to settle in Canada, not hiding the fact that he once belonged to a group dedicated to Gadhafi's overthrow.

Then-public safety minister Peter Van Loan's conclusion: Agraira was a terrorist, who should be denied entry.

Now, that decision will be dissected by the Supreme Court of Canada, which will decide if Agraira is entitled to a judicial review of his case.

The high court granted Agraira's request for leave to appeal on Thursday, but as is usual gave no reasons.

"The case has interesting factual aspects to it, and it has interesting legal aspects to it," said Agraira's lawyer, Lorne Waldman. "What was it that caught the court's attention? I wouldn't speculate; I'm just very pleased we got leave."

What appears certain is that Van Loan's decision in a Jan. 27, 2009 letter will now be closely examined in a new political context: Canada went to war over Libya this year, joining a United Nations-sanctioned, NATO-led aerial bombardment and naval blockade that gave a rag-tag group of rebels the support they needed to overthrow, capture and kill Gadhafi.

Agraira came to Canada on a false Italian passport in 1997 that he bought in Germany a year earlier.

He claimed refugee status because he was a member of the Libyan National Salvation Front — a group that opposed Gadhafi and has reportedly enjoyed the backing of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, among others.

Canada rejected his claim in 1998 because his application was not deemed credible, and against the country's national security interest.

He married a Canadian woman in 1999, who sponsored him for permanent residency.

In 2002, the Immigration Department rejected his request, saying it had new information he was engaging in terrorism. Agraira wasn't told what that new information was.

In January 2009, some 34 months after Agraira appealed to Van Loan for ministerial relief in his immigration case, he was told it would not be in the "national interest" to admit him to Canada. Among Van Loan's conclusions:

- "The applicant offered contradictory and inconsistent accounts of his involvement with the Libyan National Salvation Front (LNSF).

- "There is evidence that the LNSF is a group that has engaged in terrorism and has used terrorist violence in attempts to overthrow a government.

- "There is evidence that LNSF has been aligned at various times with Libyan Islamic opposition groups that have links to al-Qaida.

- "It is not in the national interest to admit individuals who have had sustained contact with known terrorist and/or terrorist connected organizations."

Agraira's lawyers sought a formal judicial review of his case at the Federal Court — and won.

In a judgment on New Year's Eve, 2009, Justice Richard Mosley denounced Van Loan's reasoning.

Mosley questioned Van Loan's assertion that Agraira was a member of a terrorist group, saying the evidence in the case was "minimal at best" of any al-Qaida links. He noted that the LNSF was not on Canada's list of banned terrorist entities.

Moreover, Mosley ruled that the group was apparently receiving funding from Western governments to overthrow Gadhafi.

Mosley found that Van Loan had not balanced the factors in prior Federal Court decisions on determining what is in Canada's national interest.

Mosley granted the application for judicial review, but the government took the case to the Federal Court of Appeal and won.

Justice Denis Pelletier sided with Van Loan, saying that Agraira offered "contradictory and inconsistent" accounts of his connection to the LNSF.

Pelletier pointed to Agraira's own statement in a June 2009 affidavit when he tried to renounce his earlier declaration that he was an LNSF member.

"I was ill-advised when I arrived in Canada and that stating this would help my refugee claim," he said.

On arrival in Canada in March 1997, Agraira described what he said were his LNSF activities.

"As part of an eleven member cell, he delivered envelopes to members of other cells, raised or attempted to raise funds and watched and reported on the movements of supporters of the Libyan regime," Pelletier wrote in the March 2011 ruling.

Agraira also presented a letter from the LNSF that said he was a member of the group.

"Notwithstanding this evidence, on October 24, 1998, his claim for Convention Refugee status was refused on the basis of his lack of credibility," wrote Pelletier.

Waldman said he looked forward to arguing the case before the country's highest court.

As of Thursday afternoon, he still had one piece of unfinished business — telling his client about his successful leave application earlier that morning.

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes

    No

  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

LATEST VIDEO

The Creation of Wicked

View more like this

Photo Store Gallery

  • A goose flys defensively to protect their young Wednesday near Kenaston Blvd and Waverley -See Bryksa 30 Day goose challenge- Day 16 - May 23, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)
  • Ruth Bonneville Winnipeg Free Press January 18, 2011 Local Standup -

View More Gallery Photos

Poll

What do you think of the new Blue Bombers uniforms?

View Results

View Related Story

Ads by Google