Thomas Walkom: On Benamar Benatta

I am happy that someone is still keeping this case alive. Benatta received shabby treatment from Canada and even worse from the US. At least he is back in Canada. I have heard of no action in the US to investigate his treatment. All the flutter of activity by Sen. Leahy and Specter about Arar seems to have died down now as well. Gonzales remains on the hotseat only because of his firings of attorneys.

Somebody should probe this man's case


Asks for asylum in Canada, sent to U.S., jailed for years

Apr 07, 2007 04:30 AM
Thomas Walkom

First, there was the Maher Arar case. A judge who looked into it concluded that the RCMP played a key role in the U.S. decision to send the Canadian computer engineer to Syria for torture.

Then, came the cases of three other Muslim Canadians who say that they too were tortured in Syria with the help of Canadian security services. The claims of Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin are being investigated by retired Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci.

Now, another allegation involving Canada's role in so-called extraordinary renditions has surfaced. This time, it is Canada that is said to have done the rendering. Refugee claimant Benamar Benatta – an Algerian air force officer who says he deserted while on assignment in the United States in order to flee his homeland's decade-long dirty war, and who later sought asylum in Canada – swears in an affidavit filed with the Iacobucci inquiry that on Sept. 12, 2001, Canadian officials transported him across the border against his will and without a legal deportation order.

There are some things about this affair that we know from official U.S. and Canadian records. We know that Benatta, who had arrived in Fort Erie on Sept. 5 and requested political asylum, was in detention awaiting a scheduled immigration review. We also know that the review never happened. Instead, on the day after 9/11, Canadian officials drove him across the border and handed him over to U.S. authorities. They, in turn, transferred him to a jail in Brooklyn, one later criticized by the U.S. justice department for its abuse of Muslim prisoners.

By November, FBI interrogators concluded Benatta was unconnected to terrorism. Still, he remained in jail in Brooklyn for another five months. He says guards would amuse themselves by slamming his head against the wall.

In April 2002, he was charged with minor immigration offences and brought before a judge. The case went on for a year and a half. In the end, federal judge Kenneth Schroeder accused the U.S. government of engaging in "sham" and "subterfuge." He concluded that Benatta had been detained under "extremely harsh conditions" and denied counsel. And he recommended that all charges be dropped. Eventually, reluctantly, the U.S. government agreed.

Even then, Benatta was kept in jail for another 2 1/2 years. In the U.S., his case became a minor cause célèbre, an example of post 9/11 excess. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights weighed in with a 2004 report on Benatta that accused Washington of flouting its international obligations.

Last July, he was brought – in irons – to the border and released back into Canada to pursue his asylum request. He is no longer in jail.

During all of this, no one said much about Canada's role. In his judgment, Schroeder noted only that "as a result of the horrific events of Sept. 11, 2001, the Canadian authorities alerted United States authorities of defendant's presence and profile ... and returned him to the United States."

Indeed, there seems to be a curious lack of official documentation. We know he entered Canada in 2001 using – as do many refugee claimants – false papers. We know that by that point he had been living illegally in the U.S. for four months. We know, from transcripts of his first appearance before an immigration adjudicator on Sept. 12, that he was being held in detention until his identity could be authenticated and that a review of his case was scheduled for the following week. We also know that his English was not very good but that he declined the offer of an interpreter.

A Canadian government memo filed with the Iacobucci inquiry says that Benatta voluntarily agreed to return to the U.S. But it also notes that Ottawa can find no paper work to support that claim.

In short, we do not know the circumstances of his removal from Canada. Clearly, someone in Canada contacted the Americans to say the Algerian was in custody. Did the U.S. then ask for him back? Did Canada volunteer him? That Benatta would agree to leave Canada in the midst of making a refugee claim and with a hearing scheduled seems implausible. Yet, if he did not agree, who authorized his removal? If this was vigilante deportation, has it become a common practice?

Iacobucci won't investigate Benatta's case. He said this week his mandate is limited. Fine. But someone should. Regardless of the merits of Benatta's refugee claim, the manner in which it and he were treated is manifestly disturbing.