Stripping criminal pardon from alleged terrorist was constitutional: Ottawa

OTTAWA — Parole officials did not trample on the rights of an accused terrorist by revoking his criminal pardon based on the unproven charges he faces, the federal government argues in newly filed court documents.

There was “no abuse of process” when the Parole Board of Canada moved last year to pull Raed Jaser’s pardon for various convictions after he was charged with plotting to derail a Via passenger train, federal lawyers say in the court submission.

Jaser, 36, is asking the Federal Court of Canada to reverse the parole board’s decision, saying officials made a “perverse and capricious” finding that he was no longer of good character due to the new terrorism charges.

“A charge is nothing but an unproven allegation,” Jaser’s counsel say in their filing with the court. “On its own, it does not constitute evidence of the truth of the allegations and, thus, cannot constitute evidence that this applicant is no longer of good conduct.”

He is also challenging the constitutionality of a section of the Criminal Records Act that officials used to revoke his pardon.

Jaser, a Toronto resident, and Chiheb Esseghaier of Montreal

A charge is nothing but an unproven allegation.

COURT FILING

COUNSEL FOR RAED JASER

face terrorism- related charges for allegedly plotting to derail a Via passenger train.

Arrested in April last year, the accused plotters were said to be targeting a train that travels from New York City to Ontario, operated by U. S. rail service Amtrak south of the border and Via Rail in Canada.

After coming to Canada with his family, Jaser ran into trouble with the law but later applied for a criminal pardon, now known as a record suspension.

In 2009, he was pardoned for uttering threats and various fraud- related convictions between 1997 and 2001.

A pardon or record suspension does not erase a conviction but can make it easier for someone to get a job and travel abroad.

Under the Criminal Records Act, the parole board may revoke a pardon when the offender is convicted of a new crime of if the board is satisfied the person is “no longer of good conduct.”