Federal Appeal


Causal link between national security and refusal to issue passport to applicant

Applicant was born in Algeria in 1960 and immigrated to Canada in 1987, becoming Canadian citizen in 1993. In May 1999, applicant was arrested in Jordan and extradited to France, where he was convicted on terrorism charges. After serving half of his eight-year prison sentence accused was released and returned to Canada in January 2005. In June 2005, applicant applied for new passport, which was refused by Minister under s. 10.1 of Canadian Passport Order. Applicant brought application for judicial review of decision of Minister, which was allowed in part. Minister successfully appealed to Federal Court of Appeal and leave to appeal to Supreme Court of Canada was refused. Applicant filed second passport application, which was refused. Applicant unsuccessfully brought another application for judicial review. Applicant appealed. Appeal dismissed. It could not be concluded that Ministerial decision did not meet criteria of necessity. There was causal link between national security and Minister’s refusal to issue passport to applicant, who was sentenced in France for crimes closely connected with terrorism, including falsification of passports.

Kamel v. Canada (Attorney General) (Apr. 16, 2013, F.C.A., Pierre Blais C.J., J.D. Denis Pelletier J.A., and Johanne Trudel J.A., File No. A-377-11) Decision at 207 A.C.W.S. (3d) 633 was affirmed.  233 A.C.W.S. (3d) 710

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?