Controversy helped spread message, Galloway says
By Joseph Brean and Shannon Kari, National PostMarch 30, 2009
TORONTO — Controversial British MP George Galloway took shots at Immigration Minister Jason Kenney on Monday night as he gave a speech he was not permitted to deliver in person.
"It is poetic justice that the message I would have brought . . . will now be heard and seen by so many more people than Jason Kenney could have imagined," said Galloway.
He was speaking to a Toronto audience by video link after a Federal Court judge declined to issue an injunction that would have allowed him to enter Canada Monday.
Justice Luc Martineau said Galloway has not suffered "irreparable harm" as a result of a finding by Immigration officials that prevented Galloway from entering the country to speak at a series of antiwar and pro-Palestinian rallies this week.
It is just not credible, he said, to suggest he is a threat. The real terrorists, he said, are the "right-wing occupation government in Israel. ... that you (Kenney) seem determined to be an ambassador for."
In his decision, Martineau cited a lack of information.
"A proper factual record and the benefit of full legal argument are lacking at the present time," said the judge in his ruling. "I am not ready to exempt Mr. Galloway from the provisions in the (Immigration and Refugee Protection) Act and Regulations respecting entry and examination," he wrote.
The judge issued his ruling Monday afternoon after a rare Federal Court hearing on the weekend.
Barbara Jackman, who represented Galloway and his supporters, said she was disappointed with the decision.
"The court was asked to do something courageous, to defend free speech," said Jackman, who added that she is not aware of any other British MP ever being denied entry to Canada.
Jackman smiled when asked if the decision to rule Galloway inadmissible has resulted in his receiving more publicity for his causes than if had he been admitted into the country.
"It was Mr. Kenney who brought this up in the first place," she said in reference to federal Immigration minister.
The supporters of Galloway had gone to Federal Court as a result of a letter dated March 20 that he received from a senior Canadian government official.
The letter stated Galloway was inadmissible because of his "material support" for Hamas, which has been listed as a terrorist organization.
While Galloway was informed he could seek a temporary residence permit, "it is unlikely that the application would be successful," said the letter from the Canadian High Commission in London.
After the contents of the letter were made public, Kenney denied that the Conservative government played any role in the decision. The minister indicated he would not take steps to overturn the findings and allow Galloway into the country.
Galloway participated in a convoy of food aid to Gaza earlier this year.
"Support for the Palestinians does not mean you are calling for the destruction of Israel," Jackman said outside court Monday.
Martineau noted it was not for him to decide on the credibility of what he called "hearsay" evidence against Galloway. Instead, the judge explained he was ruling on whether there were grounds for an injunction.
Galloway would have to try to enter the country and be detained, before the court could properly rule on whether immigration officials acted correctly, said Martineau.
National Post
© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service
(The Canadian Government is not only going to control what is being said in Canada- they are going to try control and limit our access to IDEAS. Without access to other people's ideas, we won't learn to analyze and critique; we will have a lower ability to reason and make informed decisions. We have the right to information and ideas; just because the idea isn't popular among them and their friends, doesn't mean they can decide for the rest of us. Last time I checked, I didn't sign myself over to the Government. I have never expressed any concern about my ability to care for myself or educate myself... Why has the Government decided to very blantantly appear to be "over-protectively parenting" us? Do they really think nobody will see beyond their rhetoric? The beauty of freedom is that we all have the choice of what we listen to, where we go, what we read, etc. So if some Canadians don't agree with his message, the answer should be clear: You don't have to listen/read/ see anything about him, unless you freely choose to do so. You can close newspapers, turn off the radio... whatever you want to do. The same should also be true if you want to hear him. Freedom implies that we have a choice. As human beings- we would like ALL of the information BEFORE we choose and we sure as hell don't want others choosing for us without our permission!)-W