Allegra Escorts Collective

Victims of terrorism suing the perpetrators.

dcbogey

New member
Sep 29, 2004
3,170
0
0
Could anyone explain to me how this would actually work? Would the victims really think they would be able to collect from a state that sponsors terrorism?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ble-to-sue-in-canadian-courts/article1161915/

Harper: Terror victims will be able to sue in Canadian courts

PM says they will be able to seek compensation from individuals, organizations and foreign states that support terrorism.

Anthony Reinhart
TORONTO — Globe and Mail Update, Sunday, May. 31, 2009 02:17PM EDT
Terrorism victims will soon be able to use Canadian courts to sue the perpetrators, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced today in Toronto.

Speaking at a Canadian Jewish Congress 90th anniversary luncheon, Mr. Harper said legislation will be introduced this week by Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan "to enable victims of terrorism to seek justice" and compensation from individuals, organizations and foreign states that support terrorism.
 

emerging44

Member
Sep 19, 2006
237
0
16
dcbogey said:
Could anyone explain to me how this would actually work? Would the victims really think they would be able to collect from a state that sponsors terrorism?
The simple answer is that it won't work and Harper knows that. For example, India supports the Tamil seperatists in Sri Lanka. Canada and India are friendly nations. Victims of a Tamil act go to court and sue for restitution. Is Canada going to allow the Indian Ambassador's car to be seized or an Air India 747 and upset their relationship? I don't think so.

Also, the Khadr family decide to sue the US for the actions that wounded their son. If they can get a judge to accept that the US acted as a terrorist, then a lawsuit can proceed.

This is just Harper trying to demonstrate that he is a law and order type of guy. It is also just an attempt to distract us from the economic situation.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
dcbogey said:
Could anyone explain to me how this would actually work? Would the victims really think they would be able to collect from a state that sponsors terrorism?
If the enabling legislation permits the courts to order the seizure of any assets those persons or States have in Canada.
 

Anynym

Just a bit to the right
Dec 28, 2005
2,961
6
38
emerging44 said:
The simple answer is that it won't work and Harper knows that. For example, India supports the Tamil seperatists in Sri Lanka. Canada and India are friendly nations. Victims of a Tamil act go to court and sue for restitution. Is Canada going to allow the Indian Ambassador's car to be seized or an Air India 747 and upset their relationship? I don't think so.
Correct. Because there's a huge difference between, say, supporting Tamil separatists, and being a State Sponsor of terrorism.

The classic example for the latter would be Libya in the '70s, with Libyan government agents planting bombs on commercial aircraft.
 

slowpoke

New member
Oct 22, 2004
2,899
0
0
Toronto
I think this is an ill advised piece of legislation that could cause more problems than it is likely to solve. Ottawa first has to designate specific countries as terrorist supporters before the injured party can sue that country. So Ottawa could possibly be sued by an accused country for an unjustified designation and local groups might also sue Ottawa for refusing to designate countries that had clearly supported acts of terrorism. I don't know what happens when the injured party chooses to sue a sub-national group like al-Qaeda or the IRA. There's not much point in suing a clandestine operation with hidden assets. This bill is probably an attempt to make Harper look a bit less parochial on the world stage. Obama has been getting too much international cred lately and Harper wants in on it.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nly-apply-to-listed-countries/article1166264/
Terror-victim law would only apply to listed countries

Victims would be allowed to sue countries Canada designated as terrorist supporters

GLORIA GALLOWAY

OTTAWA — From Wednesday's Globe and Mail, Wednesday, Jun. 03, 2009 04:07AM EDT

A proposed law would allow Canadian victims of terror to sue foreign countries that played a hand in the attacks, but only if those countries are on a list of known terrorist abettors compiled by the federal government.

Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan would not say which states would be designated as sponsors of terrorism. That will have to wait until the legislation is proclaimed into law, he explained. Nor is it clear how successful any suit against a foreign nation would be.

In 1996, the United States amended its Congress Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to allow American victims of terrorism to sue designated foreign states. By 2008, the U.S. courts had awarded more than $19-billion against those states and their officials, but only about 2 per cent had been collected.

"Obviously you hope for a higher recovery than that," said Mr. Van Loan, "but that's just a reality in any kind of lawsuit."

Members of the Canadian Coalition Against Terror (CCAT), a victims' group that has pressed for the right to bring foreign entities before Canadian civil courts, say they are concerned the scope of the legislation may be too narrow.

"It's a process which actually puts the government in a position where it has to point a finger at other governments," said Danny Eisen, a CCAT founder who was otherwise complimentary of the initiative. "We would rather allow the courts to do the job in this."

Maureen Basnicki, whose husband, Ken, was killed in the 9/11 attacks, is another founder of CCAT and has been a driving force behind the legislation. She praised the initiative saying the civil suits will complement the criminal justice system in cutting off financing for terrorism.

But neither Ms. Basnicki nor Mr. Eisen, who lost a cousin in the 9/11 attacks, were willing to name specific Canadian victims of terror who would use the new law to go after a foreign government.

Although the law is retroactive to 1985 - presumably to allow victims of the Air India bombing to take part - it was unclear what foreign government could be sued in that case.

A lawyer for CCAT said the law would make it easier for Air India victims to pursue individuals and groups in Canada that are alleged to have participated in a terrorist attack.

But René Provost, an international law expert at McGill University in Montreal, said existing laws allow victims to sue any people or organizations within Canada that have caused them harm through terrorist activities.

"It's a political ploy because you could [already] do that today and yesterday and five years ago," said Dr. Provost, who sees several other problems with the new legislation.

The first is that terrorism is difficult to define, he said. While there may be no argument about the 9/11 attacks, there are those who would say the U.S. bombing of villages in Afghanistan or the Israeli attacks in southern Lebanon constitute terrorism, Dr. Provost said.

A second problem would be to attribute an act of terror to a foreign government, he said. And a third potential problem is that "it invites retaliation by the other governments."

That concern is shared by New Democratic Party MP Joe Comartin who has supported the introduction of legislation that would allow terror victims to sue foreign governments.

By drawing up a list of countries that Canada considers supporters of terror, he said, "we ultimately could be a target for legislation in other countries."
 

BottomsUp

New member
Aug 30, 2004
1,816
0
0
So someone initiates a lawsuit, and 10 years later and multi millions spent on legal fees....Dumb idea.
 

train

New member
Jul 29, 2002
6,992
0
0
Above 7
dcbogey said:
Huh? Care to clarify that insightful remark?
I doubt there was a whole lot of insight behind those remarks.

And slowpoke I'm proud that you expressed an opinion on this without waiting for the official "party" position.

I have to agree with you though.
 
Toronto Escorts