New information surfaces on Minister of Citizenship and Immigration's involvement in George Galloway banning

Excellent reports, kim -- very well done, all staff who worked on them.

I still have to read the second report -- I'm especially interested in Judge Mosley's reasons for refusing to accede to the government's request to have the docs back for redaction. Mosley is turning out to be such a good guy -- he's the judge who went through the docs the government had on Omar Khadr, eg, and decided (after the Supreme Court ruling) which could be released, among them the video of CSIS agents fumbling at GTMO and some important emails, and he's made other decisions that suggest he's pretty sceptical of the government's arguments about the need for secrecy. Given that he was the civil servant who drafted the anti-terrorism act in 2001, I was a little surprised at the spine he's shown as a judge, but I'm now a fan.

Hmmn. Well, I'm at the point now where I need to be pointed at the government docs that actually "outline the many reasons related to national security for which the documents need to be returned, and argue that large portions of the document require redaction." I think I've skimmed them all, and I see very little in the way of reasons -- ie, anything beyond the mere claim -- although Barbara Jackman's summaries are, as one would expect, very helpful. (The CBSA claim that other agencies need consulting is amusing.) But maybe I'm missing something. It would be helpful if the pdf/s in the main list could come with explanatory labels.

Anyway, I think that the very terseness of Judge Mosley's ruling is telling. He gave the government the back of his hand. That is precisely what we need in our judges, something approaching the scepticism of the UK High Court about claims of national security/damage to international relations/jurisdictional claims -- ie, judicial assertiveness that we haven't quite seen yet from our Supremes, although one has the feeling that they are inching towards it. In their Khadr decision, they did say that no such claim can justify a constitutional violation, although they backed into that and haven't done much about it since. I'm hoping that Mosley is getting ready to tell government lawyers that "national security" does not mean CYA, and if they try that again in his court, they should bring a toothbrush. (I don't actually know whether Canadian judges can do that; I believe that American judges can if they get annoyed enough.)

I note also from Jackman's summaries that there are many relevant docs still missing?

This case is so important for a whole host of reasons. The ban on Galloway should be lifted. The patent misbehaviour of Alykhan "Infandous" Velshi, if not also of the minister, needs some kind of censure probably beyond what the court can do. A lot of other civil servants (eg, at CBSA) need some re-edumacation in resisting the politicization of their work. And beyond all that, we have the problem of living in an era of "strong" executives, here, in the UK, in the U.S., and elsewhere, who are not being checked in their abuse of secrecy claims by their legislatures and against whom our last defence is either the courts or citizens rising in the streets.

And to the detective work: Just a guess, but it's always been my suspicion that the "journalist" who first alerted Velshi to Galloway's visit is Meir Weinstein of the JDL. Weinstein appeared on UK television at the time; I wouldn't be surprised if he was also the source of the leak to the Sun, and I wouldn't be surprised either to learn that he and Velshi (given Velshi's improper granting of an interview with the Sun) colluded on that leak. I raise these points only as speculation -- if they are legally problematic for babble, please feel free to edit.

At least the British press has picked up the the story (with a hat tip to the work of rabble reporters).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/21/george-galloway-canada-ban-h...

Too bad the oft repeated use of Immigration dept. and the Canadian Border Services Agency as the private police enforcers for the Ruling Party in Canada its only gets a ho-hum from Canada's own complicit media.

Democracy? Free exchange of ideas? Who cares, eh?