Legal options before attack in Edmonton
Accused was known to police since 2015
On Tuesday, Abdulahi Hasan Sharif made his first appearance in an Edmonton court for an alleged weekend rampage that’s being treated as an act of terrorism.
Sharif is accused of ramming a police officer with a car, stabbing the officer, and then trying to run down pedestrians in a U-Haul van, hitting four people. Miraculously, nobody was killed.
Though Sharif does not currently face formal terrorism charges, he is facing five counts of attempted murder and other charges related to dangerous driving and possessing a weapon. But police found an ISIL flag in his vehicle and had been tipped off in 2015 that Sharif was “espousing extremist ideologies.”
Questions remain about why Sharif was allegedly able to attempt this attack if police had already been warned about him. Here are a few of the issues. ❚ What options did police have in 2015 besides arresting Sharif ?
Canadian authorities have increasingly used peace bonds to restrain people who are thought to be terrorist sympathizers, but who haven’t done enough to justify an arrest. In these cases, a judge can issue a court order that imposes conditions such as restrictions on movement or a ban on using computers.
In July 2015, anti- terror legislation took effect and lowered the threshold required to get a peace bond. Instead of needing reasonable grounds for believing someone “will” commit a terrorism offence, they instead needed reasonable grounds only that they “may” commit an offence.
It is not clear whether that lower threshold was in place when police investigated Sharif. Neither the RCMP nor the office of Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale will say when in 2015 the investigation occurred or under what legal regime. But even if the investigation took place under the old rules, police could have reopened it when the new rules kicked in.
However, RCMP Assistant Commissioner Marlin Degrand has said that Sharif and others were extensively interviewed at the time. “At the end of that exhaustive investigation, there was insufficient evidence to pursue terrorism charges or a peace bond,” he said. ❚ If Sharif held extremist views, how was he able to obtain refugee status?
Sharif, a Somali, arrived at a Canadian border crossing in 2012 and claimed asylum, according to Goodale.
Later that year, the Immigration and Refugee Board granted him convention refugee status in Canada, which someone gets if they’re unable to return to their home country because of a “well- founded fear of persecution.”
The Safe Third- Country Agreement between Canada and the United States means a refugee claimant normally needs to make their claim in the country in which they first arrived. However, there are exceptions for which Sharif may have qualified, such as having family members in one of the countries.
On Tuesday, Vice News first reported that Sharif was ordered to be deported back to Somalia by aU.S.im migration judge in 2011. U.S. officials say he “had no known criminal history” when the order was made.
A Canadian government spokesperson declined to confirm whether it’s the same Sharif, but said that being denied refugee status in the U.S. does not necessarily mean they would be denied it in Canada.
Goodale has insisted the refugee process functioned properly in 2012, and that there simply wasn’t any information available that would have flagged Sharif as a terrorist sympathizer.
“The procedures that are in place ... are procedures that place a very high opinion on public safety and security,” he said Monday. He said officials check Canadian and international records to ensure there is no history of criminal activity or immigration violations that should prevent entry into Canada. ❚ Can Sharif be removed from the country as a security threat?
Currently, Sharif has only refugee status and has not been granted permanent residency, which is a separate process for someone who applies for asylum.
Canada has a process to deport a convention refugee deemed a security threat, but it requires a “danger opinion” signed off on by a senior immigration official. Canada generally does not deport people back to a country where they risk facing torture or other serious persecution.