Charkaoui v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Charkaoui v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing: June 13–14, 2006 Judgment: February 23, 2007
Full case name	Adil Charkaoui v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness; Hassan Almrei v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness; Mohamed Harkat v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and Attorney General of Canada
Citations	2007 SCC 9
Docket No.	30929 [1]
Prior history	Charkaoui History: reversing [2005] 2 F.C.R. 299, 247 D.L.R. (4th) 405, 328 N.R. 201, 126 C.R.R. (2d) 298, 42 Imm. L.R. (3d) 165, [2004] F.C.J. No. 2060 (QL), 2004 FCA 421 (F.C.A.D.); affirming [2004] 3 F.C.R. 32, 253 F.T.R. 22, 38 Imm. L.R. (3d) 56, [2003] F.C.J. No. 1816 (QL), 2003 FC 1419 (F.C.T.D.). Almrei history: reversing [2005] 3 F.C.R. 42, 251 D.L.R. (4th) 13, 330 N.R. 73, 45 Imm. L.R. (3d) 163, [2005] F.C.J. No. 213 (QL), 2005 FCA 54 (F.C.A.D.); affirming [2004] 4 F.C.R. 327, 249 F.T.R. 53, 38 Imm. L.R. (3d) 117, [2004] F.C.J. No. 509 (QL), 2004 FC 420 (F.C.T.D.). Harkat history: also reversing (2005), 340 N.R. 286, [2005] F.C.J. No. 1467 (QL), 2005 FCA 285 (F.C.A.D.); affirming (2005), 261 F.T.R. 52, 45 Imm. L.R. (3d) 65, [2005] F.C.J. No. 481 (QL), 2005 FC 393 (F.C.T.D.).
Ruling	Appeals allowed
Holding
Sections 33, 77 and 85 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) unreasonably violates sections 7, 9 and 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Court membership
Reasons given
Unanimous reasons by	McLachlin C.J.
Laws applied
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 7, 9, 10; Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, ss. 33, 77 to 85

Charkaoui v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 SCC 9, is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the constitutionality of procedures for determining the reasonableness of a security certificate and for reviewing detention under a certificate. The Court held that the security certificate process, which prohibited the named individual from examining evidence used to issue the certificate, violated the right to liberty and habeas corpus under section 7, 9 and 10 of the Canadian Charter. The Court however rejected the appellant arguments that the extension of detentions violated the right against indefinite detention, that the differential treatment violated equality rights, and that the detention violated the rule of law. As remedy, the Court declared the "judicial confirmation of certificates and review of detention" to be of no force and effect, striking down articles 33 and 77 to 85 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, but suspended the ruling for one year.