Search

Since 9/11, the issue of detention of non-citizens suspected of terrorism has been in the spotlight of political, academic and media debate. Many countries have implemented a special certification process for persons deemed to be security threats which allows for their detention and deportation. Given the complicated process of collecting intelligence in national security cases and lengthiness of its examination, such non-citizens can often be detained for months and even years before final decisions on their cases. Even those who are recognized as security threats often cannot be deported because of the risk of torture that they would face in a destination country. These individuals therefore face a potentially indefinite detention. The current security certificate schemes often fail to provide adequate solutions for the above-mentioned scenarios of lengthy detention. This paper argues for the need to find such a solution and offers a comparative analysis of existing practices in Canada, the UK and New Zealand that can serve as the first step in this direction. In scrutinizing the existing cases, the paper specifically focuses on two issues: (1) the different regimes of treatment (if any) of citizens suspected of terrorism and non-citizens held on similar allegations; (2) the possibility non-citizens' release from detention under certain conditions. Drawing on the array of available scenarios and reasoning, the paper attempts to generate a set of factors and conditions that can allow for release of security detainees yet effectively reduce risk of them absconding or posing a danger to community. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]