I dont think the decision to appeal this decision should come as a surprise to anyone in the legal profession. Justice O'Reilley is a trial level federal court judge who created a new principle of fundamental justice (ie a duty to protect) and used a very interesting remedy (ie ordering the government to make demands of a foreign government). This is the kind of groundbreaking constitutional law on which a lower level court rarely has the final word on.
Whatever you think of the particular facts of the Khadr case the clarity an appeal would bring regarding the governments obligations to Canadians imprisoned abroad and the role of the courts in enforcing those obligation makes it worthwhile appeal.
3 comments:
I wonder what the Cons would say/do if they were in Opposition?
Exactly!
I dont think the decision to appeal this decision should come as a surprise to anyone in the legal profession. Justice O'Reilley is a trial level federal court judge who created a new principle of fundamental justice (ie a duty to protect) and used a very interesting remedy (ie ordering the government to make demands of a foreign government). This is the kind of groundbreaking constitutional law on which a lower level court rarely has the final word on.
Whatever you think of the particular facts of the Khadr case the clarity an appeal would bring regarding the governments obligations to Canadians imprisoned abroad and the role of the courts in enforcing those obligation makes it worthwhile appeal.
As they say, "tough cases make for bad law".
Good point KC. My sense is the government should have said "we'll do it but we want to appeal to clarify the law for the future"
Post a Comment