Fair trial down the drain

I am all for greater security for all nations. This, however, chills my blood. Barring defendants and lawyers from hearings where testimonies and evidence against them are being presented is nothing more than due process flushed down the toilet.

Protecting intelligence comes with better intelligence, i.e. one uncovers the whole gang rather than just an individual member. Protecting witnesses can be done in other ways, such as sworn declarations and witness protection programs.

I hereby allege that a kitten dies every time Stephane Dion makes a promise. Fearing violent reprisal, I ask that my testimony be heard under Section 86, thus not allowing Dion to know when, where and how he allegedly came to commit the heinous crime of kitten murder. I declare that I am the only person who could know of the when, where and how, therefore revealing such information would lead directly to me, thus Dion shouldn't be informed of these details. However, he should still defend himself and prove that he didn't kill those fluffy creatures.

If this sounds ridiculous to you, Section 86 and security certificates should do too.

Section 86 and Security certificates belong in the same group: laws that shouldn't be. They deprive the individual, whoever he or she may be, of the right to due process and fair trial. When we begin recognizing lower rights for some, we sin against our own rights because they too might be taken away at some point.

Relishing in one's perceived immunity from such measures with the pretexts of "I am a law abiding citizen" and "I have nothing to hide" is fallacious as well. Some day, somewhere it could be YOU. If, while in a foreign country, you or I would ask for due process we must do the same for those facing the Canadian justice and immigration systems, however despicable their beliefs, actions or intents might be.

Kill someone's rights and you kill your own.