I'm a bit surprised this story doesn't seem to have gathered much attention outside of Canada since I think it offers an interesting rights vs security dilemma.
First, a bit of back-story about the family at the heart of this story: the Khadr family, a family of Egyptian-Canadian dual citizens. The family's patriarch, Ahmed Khadr, was a suspected terrorist that was killed in 2003 in a raid by the Pakistani army. Of the children, two are suspected terrorist: Omar Khadr, who has been held in Guantanamo since 2002 for the murder of a US soldier and plead guilty in 2010 (though it is widely suspect that after he returns to Canada to serve the rest of his sentence (which he has the right to do under his plea deal) he will appeal his plea deal on due process and/or coercion grounds, an appeal that most observers expect him to win). The family as a whole is known to have very close ties to Al Quaeda, though which (if any) members of the family are actual terrorist had been a matter of debate here in Canada.
But that's just for context. The other child of the family that is a suspected terrorist, Abdullah Khadr, was recently involved in an extradition suit. In 2004, the United States government paid the Pakistani government half a million dollars to kidnap Abdullah, who was held for a period of fourteen months during which he was interrogated by US and Canadian authorities, to whom he admitted to having provided material support to Al Quaeda. During his detention he was allegedly tortured by the Pakistani authorities. After his release by Pakistan he came back to Canada where he was immediately arrested at the request of the US government and faced extradition for charges related to selling arms to Al Quaeda and training with them.
The problem occurred when the Ontario court that heard his cased turned down the extradition request, saying that while there was more than enough evidence to extradite Khadr he could not be extradited to the United States because they violating the principle of fundamental justice by being involved in Khadr's "shocking" mistreatment during his 14-months detention in Pakistan. The judge also said that extraditing Khadr would "only serve to reward the Americans' gross misconduct" in the case.
The judgment was upheld on appeal and today the supreme court of Canada refused to hear the government's final appeal, essentially meaning that the supreme court does not think the government has a case.
So, now the question is: do you think that the court was right to refuse to extradite Khadr due to the fact that he was held without due process by a third party at the request of the United States, despite evidence that he provided material support to Al Quaeda? Why or why not?
Source: Abdullah Khadr won't be extradited - Canada - CBC News