Former justice minister erred in extradition case: court
Wilson-raybould chastised for decision on accused Indigenous money launderer
The B.C. Court of Appeal has rebuked Jody Wilson-raybould for shortchanging an accused money-launderer’s Indigenous heritage by agreeing, when she was justice minister, to extradite him to the U.S.
Two of the three justices on the division ordered Ottawa to reconsider her decision because, ironically, the first Indigenous justice minister failed to consider the history of colonialism and the damage that Glenn Harley Sheck’s children will suffer if he’s handed over for trial on numerous sophisticated, drug-related offences.
They said it would “shock the conscience, or be unjust or oppressive, to extradite an Indigenous man, separating him from his four Indigenous children, and perpetuating the systemic destruction of Indigenous families and communities.”
The dissent in the split decision, however, may prove to be equally controversial because Justice Mary Saunders maintained extradition is a political, not a legal decision.
“To set aside the minister’s decision in these circumstances is, in my view, to improperly interfere with her decision,” Saunders said.
The ruling by the majority — penned by Justice Susan Griffin supported by Justice Bruce Butler — highlighted the huge disparity in sentences between the two countries: In Canada, Sheck faced between two and four years in prison; in the U.S., between 19 and 27.
But its fulcrum was the fallout of colonialism.
“The minister did not mention the impact of separating Mr. Sheck’s children from their father, in light of their shared Indigenous heritage and the legacy of residential schools, and in light of the much longer separation that would occur if he was convicted and sentenced in the U.S. versus in Canada,” Griffin wrote. “This is an overriding flaw in her analysis.”
Accused of being a money broker connected to drug dealers, Sheck allegedly moved more than $7 million in roughly two dozen transactions from 2007-12 between Canada, the U.S. and Dominican Republic.
Griffin noted Sheck — who is free pending a final extradition decision — was convicted in February 2012 of possession of a loaded prohibited firearm, and that prosecution in Canada was not a “realistic option.”
Born in B.C., Sheck graduated from high school and studied wood products technology in college. The charges relate to his conduct between the ages of 26-31.
The court said he now operates a company that provides waste water treatment and works with his father as an electrical apprentice. Sheck has four Indigenous children, ranging from five to 15. The mother of his three older children has sporadic involvement in their lives because of substance abuse.
He asked for a judicial review after Wilson-raybould ordered him extradited May 28, 2018, before she was shuffled out of the cabinet and turfed from the Liberal caucus during the Snc-lavalin affair.
“The minister’s consideration of Mr. Sheck’s Indigenous status did not inform her analysis of his personal family circumstances and his children’s best interests,” Griffin explained.
“Nowhere did she consider the impact on them, as Indigenous children who bear the legacy of government-sponsored separation of Indigenous parents and children, of having their only Indigenous parent separated from them for potentially decades longer if he was to be prosecuted and sentenced in the U.S. as opposed to in Canada.”
Griffin continued chiding Wilson-raybould: “Furthermore, the historical context of
Canada’s legacy of separating Indigenous parents from Indigenous children, and the need to reconcile this history, were relevant factors in considering the best interests of Mr. Sheck’s children. The minister’s decision is silent in this regard. The circumstances of Mr. Sheck’s Indigenous children were not just the same as any other children whose parent faces extradition, yet, with respect, the surrender decision reads as though they were.
“The impact on Mr. Sheck and his Indigenous children of the Canadian history of separating Indigenous parents and children, and the resultant destruction of Indigenous communities, which, in some ways, may have contributed to Mr. Sheck’s alleged criminality, were important factors in informing the minister’s view of whether surrender was unjust or oppressive, or would shock the conscience.”
Saunders stridently disagreed. “It is our role to read the minister’s decision as a whole, and to accord her deference, recognizing the comity between nations engaged by the treaty and appreciating that the minister’s determination of whether to surrender a person is an essentially political task,” Saunders wrote.
“The minister was bound to perform that task taking into account ‘the requirements of good faith and honour of Canada’ and weighing ‘the political and international relations ramifications of the decision.’ ”
She added that Sheck was “not young, and the offences on which Mr. Sheck is sought are numerous, allegedly occurred over a significant period of time, are said to be organized and sophisticated, and are serious crimes of corruption.”
Citing portions of Wilson-raybould’s decision, Saunders said she did her job and considered Sheck’s “childhood, his familial connection to residential schools, problems with drugs and alcohol, his and his mother’s membership in the Bonaparte Indian Band … his involvement in his children’s lives, his contributions to the family, and his advice to the minister that his ‘surrender to the United States would result in profound instability and financial disadvantage to his family.’”
Saunders found the now Independent MP properly acknowledged “the historical context of community fragmentation and intergenerational harm referred to by my colleague.”