Canada awards $10.5 million CAD to Omar Khadr, due to Supreme Court Ruling.

Link

When word of the government's multimillion-dollar settlement with Omar Khadr was first reported Monday night, Jason Kenney, the former defence minister, was quick to condemn.

"This confessed terrorist should be in prison paying for his crimes, not profiting from them at the expense of Canadian taxpayers," Kenney tweeted.

That much is consistent with a Conservative government that resisted repatriating Khadr, opposed his release on bail and might still be fighting Khadr's lawsuit if it were still in office.

This case is probably the most divisive in Canada in recent years and how one looks at it depends on what specific part of the event they want to focus on. To some, Omar Khadr was a terrorist, to others he was a child soldier who was then wronged by his own government. He was charged with killing a US soldier during a firefight in Afghanistan in 2002.

My opinion essentially boils down to the fact that Omar Khadr was a child soldier who was brainwashed since birth by his crazy parents and made to fight in Afghanistan until he was 15. The reason why he was "awarded" this money is because the Canadian government under Chretien, Martin, and then Harper violated his civil rights under the Constitution and other international law treaties. They conspired and gave him up to the US government and shoved him into Guantanamo for 10 years and then the Canadian prison system for another 3 years afterward. He sued for $20 million but ended up with less than half. If it went to court there's a real chance that Mr. Khadr would have been awarded more money so the government cut its losses and settled.

The Supreme Court of Canada has made it clear that regardless of what Mr. Khadr did prior to his arrest, the way the government handled it was an utter disaster and violated the most basic rights that are given to Canadian citizens, regardless of who they are or what they did. There is no rule of law if we accept what the government did to him and others during the so called War on Terror. Not only was Mr. Khadr's confession given under duress, that Mr. Khadr was tortured for years in Guantanamo, but also the fact that Canadian international law considers individuals under the age of 18 in combat as legally child soldiers and thus view them as victims in need of rehabilitation, rather than active participants in combat.

The Khadr saga will continue since apparently the widow of the US soldier he killed won a court judgement in Utah for a sum of $134 million back in 2015 and will likely try again because of the money awarded to him.

Individuals like Mr. Kenney and MP Erin O'Toole are simply pandering to their base. They know full well that Mr. Khadr was wronged legally and perhaps even morally. And blaming the Trudeau government for this is frankly absurd since the case has been going on since 2002 and the majority of it was during the Harper years, the previous Prime Minister.

I don't really have an issue with him being awarded this settlement myself. I think it was wrong that they violated his rights like that and left him in Guantanamo. He was only 15 and just a mere child.

Canada a joke that just keeps giving..

But even if they are right that this guy who was a kid soldier had his rights violated he lost them when he picked up a gun , and he should not be able to benefit from his crimes and particular not in this way.

Let´s hope tho that the wife of the soldier he killed gets her due and the Canadian government sends the cash straight down to her.

Does Canada treat every sub 18 year old violent offender the same as this person?

It does not work this way at all in Canada (or any civilized first world nation for that matter) and the Supreme Court has made it quite clear.

Someone does not "lose" their rights, otherwise they aren't rights, they are privileges that can be taken away at the whim of the government. Is that the kind of world you want to live in? Even those who have committed the most heinous crimes are owed a fair and due process. The fact that you said he was a "kid soldier" legally means he's not to blame for his actions and even if he was that doesn't excuse what the government did. He sued and won the case that's why he got the money.

When someone decides to become a terrorist and yes even if they are dragged in as a kid, they most certainly lose all rights. They have decided to break with society and it´s rules.

But even tho let´s say we accept that they have rights, they most certainly should not benefit from it in any way shape or form, and Canada giving in like this is a disgrace to the men and women who fight against these nutjobs.

It is very clear in Canadian law that they do not "most certainly lose all rights". That is something you made up entirely in your head, so please cite it or provide evidence otherwise you are lying. Not even in the US do you forfeit your civil liberties granted to you under the Constitution in the event of a crime.

Canada isn't the only nation to lose civil cases like this. The UK, Australia, and the US are other nations that have given compensation or formal apologies for their civil rights violations during the War on Terror. It is obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about here (yet again) and instead are relying on "feelings" and emotions.

Should that logic be extended to these cowpokes?

I think you are confused here, i was stating a opinion. Since arguing over a case that has been closed would be strange, even how much i disagree with the verdict. I think i made that pretty clear countless times.

As to UK they actually closed their cases before they came to court, but please do provide a link to a high justice's ruling. Not to mention the cases are not the same.

And lastly here you have a guy who have been confirmed a terrorist, have even killed a american soldier and who knows what else.

I'm not sure what Canadian law dictates, and tbh I have not followed this case all that closely, but when a civilized country breaks the rules we have to pay the price. Rules and consequences are what make us different and better than the terrorists; we forego those, and we sink to their level. This guy might be some poor brainwashed child soldier, or he might be an asshole terrorist, but that doesn't give us the right to mistreat him.

And that's my self-righteous rant for the day.

I know you are stating an opinion but your opinion is worthless if it's not backed up by facts and evidence. Otherwise you just are talking nonsense with nothing grounded in reality.

The entire point of this case is that Omar Khadr's confession and due process was taken away from him, so legally there was nothing "confirmed".

Good.

But no the point of this case is that Canada just spat in the face of every soldier and civilian who fought and lost their lives against terrorism , and it´s a disgrace that Canada's government did not prevent this.

But to be fair, it's not that surprising, Canada hailed Castro as one of the greatest and have close ties to Cuba.

Canada didn't break anything. He was detained at Gitmo.

But opposite to America, Canada have no laws preventing frivolous lawsuits against the state.

Did not prevent it how? They lost a legal case and it was a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court. In this case what soldiers and civilians think is irrelevant - here you go again resorting to feelings and emotional fallacies.

It's yet again clear you have no idea what you are talking about. I'd suggest actually reading about this case instead of posting knee-jerk reactions you pulled out the air.

How? well the same way any legislative power would do. Change the law or make a law that clearly states that someone like this can not benefit from his crimes no matter what.

And i did read the case , it´s not that complicated a case, it´s just Canada's government that is messed up.

So you want some kind of law to prevent the government from giving pay outs to citizens in cases the government lost? That must be the most absurd thing I've read from you.

How did he benefit? He spent 10 years in Guantanamo and 3 years in Canadian prison and this money is compensation, it's not a "benefit". It is money that compensates him from the years he spent wrongfully imprisoned.

No, I really don't think you did. Why lie on the internet? Here: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7842/index.do

There has to be a lot more Guantanamo Bay prisoners who just don't have the lawyer money to defend their case. Doubt Canada will ever lose another $10mil in court to a prisoner again. It feels like; well we paid one of them so we don't have to worry about the rest of them.

You got that wrong. Once a case has been won it usually entice more to come, and some lawyers do No win no Fee basis , particular in cases like this.

But it all depends on how many canadians was at gitmo, which i think was relative few.

Why is that absurd. There are such laws in the Us not to mention many other western democracies have similar laws.

How? he just got 10 mill - the legal fees but he is coming out a lot better considering that the guy is guilty and he have killed a american soldier and probably don´t feel any remorse. Not to mention that the war crime case is still pending, which hopefully will find him guilty and sentence him to the life in prison he deserve plus major reparations to the widow.

Are you drunk? I never said i read the actual court transcripts, and why would i when all i need to know is in the news articles.

@Jacanuk: yeah real criminals are going to claim innocence. Hopefully it doesn't overshadow actual innocent prisoners.

Though 10mil seems a bit excessive. Thought maybe around 30k a year for time spent imprisoned would be more reasonable.

We could pass a new law, but that would not affect this case or similar ones as in the eyes of the court the person did not commit any crimes. None of the benefits of crime laws passed in the US or elsewhere would solve this problem.

Having said that, I believe our PM just blundered again. As a matter of principle the gov't should have opted for a court ordered settlement to test the economic limits associated with our rights and to demonstrate that the gov't should have no part in assessing remediation of a situation that it created in the first place.

They should have left it as a mea culpa and taken their lumps instead of trying to limit fallout by negotiating a better deal. There's no such thing as a better deal in these situations as any deal is going to upset people. This is borne out by the fact that 71% of Canadians oppose this deal according to polling results announced today. That will perhaps make you feel better.

Yes, you could pass a new law and you should , and while it would not affect this case , since retroactive lawmaking is well, not something that happens. It will be there for future cases and it will make sure they won't happen.

Trudeau always blunders so it´s not surprise that he blundered again. And while i disagree that the government should pay one cent to him, they should now withhold the money until the case in the us have been settled and make sure the widow gets hers.

The US military tribunal that convicted him was a kangaroo court, with a complete charade of a trial. Child soldiers cannot be convicted for war crimes under international human-rights laws. And it failed to prove that he even killed anyone, but forced him into a plea bargain, just so he can return home to Canada. Not to mention that the invading US army were the aggressors in the first place. It's no surprise the Canadian supreme court rejected the US kagaroo tribunal's verdict and set Khadr free.

The Trudeau government only settled for $10 million just so it doesn't have to pay out the full $20 million if it goes to court, which would've most likely ruled in Khadr's favour. The matter should've been settled in court, rather than settled out of court.

In news related to this thread a conservative MP from Calgary appeared on Fox News to talk about the khadr story on Monday.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/rempel-fox-news-1.4211294

Trudeau says Omar Khadr case could have cost $40-million

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says he understands why Canadians are angry about the $10-million payout to Omar Khadr, but insists a court case would have ended up costing taxpayers tens of millions of dollars more.

The Liberal government has faced a public backlash against the apology and payment to Mr. Khadr, with a public opinion survey showing 71 per cent of Canadians opposed the deal.

“I share those concerns about the money. In fact, that’s why we settled,” Mr. Trudeau told reporters at a news conference announcing the appointment of Julie Payette as the country’s next governor-general. “If we had continued to fight this, not only would we have inevitably lost, but estimates range from $30- to $40-million dollars that it would have ended up costing the government.”

Mr. Khadr pleaded guilty in 2012 to throwing a grenade that killed U.S. Army Sergeant Christopher Speer in Afghanistan in a deal that allowed him to be moved to a Canadian prison. He later recanted.

The Prime Minister’s comments came just hours after an Ontario Superior Court judge turned down a request from Sgt. Speer’s widow and a soldier injured in the same incident to freeze Mr. Khadr’s assets.

Lawyers for Mr. Khadr had launched a $20-million civil lawsuit against Ottawa over the role of Canadian officials in U.S. interrogations of the former child soldier at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. While there, he faced abuse, including sleep deprivation. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 2010 that Mr. Khadr’s Charter rights were violated.

I'm Canadian, Albertan actually. The province crying the loudest about him being "rewarded for being a terrorist".

And I'm ashamed of my fellow Albertans for even entertaining the notion that it's ok to deny someone their due process. Whether he's an innocent victim, or a vile terrorist, it's irrelevant.

Khadr killed a soldier in a firefight in a warzone. There's nothing wrong in that. He was doing what soldiers do in a war, kill and die. If you can't accept that, don't become a soldier.

Well, if you claim he is a enemy combatant you are also going against the canadian supreme court and pretty much saying Canada are at war with the US.

Well said.

This isn't the first time when volunteers from other countries went to fight in a war for other people. Hundreds, maybe thousands of people, went to Ukraine to fight against Russian aggression, no one (well maybe Russia) is calling them terrorist or saying that Russia was in war with the countries where these people came from. All wars have these people. If they keep shooting and killing soldiers I've no problem. That's what war is about.

Sure war is war. But this guy is treated like a victim not a soldier in a war. In a war the US as a party of that war has the right to take war prisoners and also treat them accordingly.

@Jacanuk: but thats the whole point, they didn't treat him accordingly, they deprived him of his human rights.

Even the most evil criminals have human rights.

But again is this a criminal or a soldier in a war. Is Canada at war with America?

According to the Canadian supreme court , this is not a soldier but a mistreated canadian citizen deprived of the rights granted to any other normal citizen.

I am all with the notion that he is a soldier , but soldier don´t have the right to come back and sue the government afterwards if he is held by a enemy force as a POW.

Depending on which version of the story you believe, he was either a child soldier or an innocent bystander. But regardless of which story you believe, he cannot be considered a criminal under international law, where child soldiers must be rehabilitated rather than criminalized.

The Canadian supreme court ruled that the Harper government deprived him of his human rights as a Canadian citizen, and therefore that gives him the right to sue the Canadian government for human-rights violations. $10 million might seem excessive to you, but it's not as excessive as the $20 million that the Canadian supreme court would've awarded him had the case been taken to court, so the $10 million settlement actually saved Canadian tax-payers far more money than what they would've had to pay him otherwise.

A innocent bystander don´t kill a american solider by throwing in a grenade. And as a child soldier , well he is not a child anymore and was not a child when he got caught.

But you might say they saved the taxpayers a sum of money, but they also slapped the face of every soldier who ever served from their allies. Luckily tho as mentioned this guy still has to face the music in a american court and here im sure he will be found guilty and sentenced to at least life in prison.

He was a child when he got caught and the Supreme Court has had said so back in 2010. You are getting the most basic facts of this case wrong and it's frankly embarrassing to read. It always blows my mind why people feel the need to comment on issues and events they clearly and demonstrably know nothing about.

Also, the US court and the widow of the soldier won't ever see a dime from Khadr. The most amateur legal analysts will tell you that.

16 is old enough to drive, so relax mate, i read the case.

And it doesn't matter if they see a penny, all the canadian government needs to do is hold it back until the case in us is done. Then they wont have to pay a cent. Since the guy will be in jail

Clearly not, because if you did you'd know that in Canadian law a child soldier is under the age of 18. By legal definition, Omar Khadr was a child soldier. This is a proven, demonstrable, fact and it has been repeated in this thread ad nauseam yet you still seem to have trouble understanding.

Yet again you have demonstrated you don't understand the case, mate. Omar Khadr already spent time in American and Canadian prison as well as in Guantanamo. The case against him now is a civil case that uses flimsy evidence gained under torture as its basis... which is inadmissible in any Canadian court.

Again i do not care what under law is a child soldier, he was 16 , which in my opinion is not a child soldier.

But apparently one of the news articles had it wrong, it stated that the us war crime was still pending, but i can see that the supreme court denied the appeal, which is unfortunate.

But at least canda shows they can support terrorists.

If you don't care what the law is why are you discussing this?

Eh? are you trying to argue that you cannot have a opinion because the law says something else.

You do know that we are debating right? not talking about whether 2+2 equals 4.

There is no proof that he threw the grenade. The only "evidence" against him was a flimsy "confession" forced out of him under torture, which is illegal, so the Canadian supreme court rejected it. And yes, he was a child at the time. He was 15 years old when the incident took place.

If you're referring to the US court case about the widow's bid to freeze his assets or get some of that $10 million, then you should know that Canadian courts have already rejected it, so she won't be seeing a dime of that money. And if Trudeau didn't settle for $10 million, then the alternative would've been to spend $40 million, of which Khadr would've got $20 million.

No i was talking about the actual war crime trial, which some of the news sites reporting the story misreported as pending.

But it seems that case was declined in 2015 by the supreme court even tho most still report it as there being a pending appeal.

Well, i have no doubt he did kill the soldier , he plead guilty. So no reason to argue over that, you may disagree but he plead guilty.

No, I'm saying your opinion isn't backed up by any facts. Your own personal opinion of how you think the world should or shouldn't be is irrelevant and no one cares.

Ok, then that is settled. No one cares what you think and no one cares what i think.

Isn't the internet great.

Except he isn't arguing what he thinks, he's arguing what the law says. All your doing is talking about your own feelings.

I have no sympathy for a terrorist who spent time in Guantanamo Bay.

My sympathy is with the American family who lost a son, and the Canadian tax payers who have to pay a terrorist millions.

Almost got me, Steven