Agreement reached on release of detainee documents.

I am surprised that all the parties were able to work this out. However no doubt none wanted to provoke a constitutional crisis or even an election so it should not be too surprising. The Conservatives were holding out for veto power but did not get that. However, they must be satisfied with the checks that are provided against release of sensitive documents. This is from the CBC.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he's satisfied with the agreement on the release of Afghan detainee documents.

In St-Félicien, Que., for a funding announcement, Harper called the deal "reasonable.

"I believe it meets both our objectives: obviously to abide by the Speaker's ruling but also — and this is extremely important — for the government to protect our legal obligation to keep confidential certain documents," he said.

"I do hope that it will work and that everyone will be satisfied with the arrangement."

The Conservative government and the opposition parties reached a compromise earlier Friday. A committee of MPs, who would be required to take an oath of confidentiality, will be able to review uncensored documents to determine their relevance.

Documents deemed relevant would then be passed on to a panel of experts who would determine how to release the information to all MPs and the public "without compromising national security."

The documents are at the centre of accusations that prisoners were tortured by Afghan authorities after being handed over by Canadian troops. The government maintained that releasing the documents posed a threat to national security and the security of Canadian troops in Afghanistan.

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announces the agreement on Afghan detaineee documents in the House of Commons on Friday. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson tabled the deal in the Commons on Friday afternoon.

"In your ruling on April 27, you were confident that members of Parliament of all parties could come to an agreement," Nicholson told Speaker Peter Milliken. "I just want you to know that confidence was not misplaced.

"It's an agreement that complies with Canadian laws, it does not compromise national security and it does not jeopardize the lives of Canadian men and women who serve in uniform."

Liberal House leader Ralph Goodale told the Commons that "the participants in the talks over the last 2½ weeks have all tried, I believe, to get it right."

The agreement came hours before the extended deadline agreed to by the Speaker. He had ruled that MPs had the right to see the documents, and he gave all parties two weeks to reach a compromise that would protect national security.

The all-party committee asked for an extension until Friday at 1:30 p.m. ET.

Had an agreement not been reached, the government could have faced a contempt of Parliament motion, which could have triggered an election.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/05/14/detainee-deal.html#ixzz0nvwo7Hay

Cracks in Opposition approach to Afghan detainee issue.

The difference hinges on whether Frank Iacobucci should be used to help resolve the problem. Iacobucci has already been hired by the Conservatives to advise them on what could be released uncensored. Why Ignatieff would also accept him is a bit hard to comprehend since Iacobucci in accepting the Conservative job which in effect implies that his vetting the documents is appropriate compared to MP's doing so. Neither the NDP nor the Bloc Quebecois go along with relying on Iacobucci. Perhaps next week the parties will come to a resolution. It is quite doubtful that Ignatieff would ever contemplate anything that could result in an election!

Cracks appear in opposition's approach to Afghan detainee issue
By Steven Chase
Globe and Mail
Parties divided on whether they should call on retired judge to resolve the problem of accessing uncensored documents

As the search continues for a parliamentary compromise on Afghan detainee records, the real question appears to be whether opposition parties can remain united.

There were glimmers of progress Thursday in high-stakes negotiations between the Harper government and the opposition majority over how to grant MPs access to uncensored versions of detainee documents without breaching national security.

Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats emerged lauding what they called a willingness to work on a solution after this week's historic ruling by Speaker Peter Milliken reaffirmed Parliament as the supreme authority in the land with a virtually unfettered right to demand documents. Talks continue next week.

But opposition parties are divided on whether they should call on retired Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci to resolve the problem. He's already been hired to advise the Conservative government privately on whether any of the information blacked out by censors can be made public.

A big problem, should MPs tackle the documents directly, is how all four parties bridge inevitable disagreements about whether particular portions of redacted records can be released.

Legal scholars say it would help legitimize the process if an independent party with no political stake in the outcome was brought in to help scrutinize records.

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said this week he would consider relying on Mr. Iacobucci if the former judge's mandate could be changed to make him report to Parliament instead of the Tories. Some Liberals are leery of committing senior MPs to reading mountains of documents - a process that because of the need to swear an oath of secrecy would neuter their ability to speak publicly on the treatment of detainees after Canadian soldiers hand them over to Afghan officials.

Thursday, however, the NDP and Bloc Québécois flatly dismissed the notion of turning to Mr. Iacobucci.

Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe said the former justice is effectively tainted because he consented to being part of a process the Harper government previously argued was superior to letting MPs scrutinize uncensored documents.

"He accepted to be hired by the government knowing perfectly that was a question here in the House saying that the members have the right to know," Mr. Duceppe said.

NDP defence critic Jack Harris said his party wants MPs to serve as the filter for what should be released or withheld.

"We want Parliamentary oversight, not a proxy."

Opposition parties, who comprise a majority in the Commons, passed a rare "order-to-produce" motion in Parliament for the documents last December, but the minority Conservatives responded by releasing heavily censored versions of records.

The Liberals, NDP and Bloc Québécois pressed the matter because they want more details on detainee handovers in the face of allegations that prisoners captured by Canadian soldiers were transferred to torture at Afghan hands - and because they want to ensure censors are not hiding records of misdeeds.

In a widely accepted verdict, Speaker Milliken ruled this week that the government does not have a unilateral right to censor documents and gave the Commons two weeks to work out a compromise that would allow MPs to see unredacted copies.

If a solution cannot be found, the government could be voted in contempt by the opposition majority - a situation that would be all but certain to trigger a snap election and undermine the reputation of Canada's Parliamentary system.

The NDP appears to favour a two-stage process where a select group of Parliamentarians screen the tens of thousands of pages of documents, deciding what censored passages can be released. Under this scenario any new freshly released information would be funneled to the Special Commons committee on Afghanistan.

Canada has most prisoner transfers in Afghanistan

As usual the Harper government is secretive about everything refusing to release figures about how many detainees are transferred even though other countries do so. As is done ad nauseam security reasons are given. Apparently other countries do not share these concerns. Not only that but the Human Rights organisation has trouble gaining access to these detainees. This is from the CBC.

Canada tops allies in Afghan prisoner transfers


Canada outstripped its NATO allies almost two-to-one in the number of prisoners it turned over to Afghan authorities in the first nine months of last year, figures prepared for the Afghan government show.

The statistics were compiled by the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and made available to The Canadian Press. The federal government does not disclose them.

Furthermore, the commission complained in its latest annual report that it is still frustrated in attempts to check on prisoners handed over to the country's notorious intelligence service, the National Directorate of Security.

The commission, which relies heavily on Canadian government funding and mentorship, said between January and the end of September 2009, it was notified that 267 suspected insurgents had been transferred to NDS by Canada, Britain, the Netherlands and Denmark. The United States has its own system for dealing with captured Taliban.

Among NATO allies, the Canadian army was way out in front with 163 prisoners. Britain followed with 93 confirmed transfers; the Netherlands 10 and Denmark 1.

Unlike those countries, who make these numbers publicly available, Ottawa refuses to release its figures, citing operational security and the safety of troops as the reason. Before the U.S. surge, the explanation was that giving away the number of captured with so small a Canadian force on the ground would help the Taliban track where their people might be.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/18/canada-afghanistan-prisoners.html#ixzz0la5jLYwL