-1-

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE BOARD

- IMMIGRATION DIVISION -

Record of a Detention Review held under the

Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, concerning

MUHAMMAD AQEEQ ANSARI

HEARING: PUBLIC

HELD AT:

Immigration Holding Centre

DATE:

October 31, 2014

BEFORE:

Marilou Funston

- Member

Muhammad Aqeeq Ansari

Mr. Anser
Ms. Lourenco
Mr. Oliveira
N/A

- Person Concerned
- Counsel
- Ministers Counsel
- Ministers Co-Counsel
- Interpreter

APPEARANCES:

-2-

MEMBER:

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

Good morning.

This is a review of the reasons for detention of Muhammad Aqeeq Ansari.

Is that you sir?
PERSON CONCERNED:
MEMBER:

That is correct.

Okay.

I am going to ask you to speak up.

PERSON CONCERNED:
MEMBER:

Yes maam.

Thank you.

Today is October 31, 2014.

The hearing is being held by way of video conference between the Immigration Holding
Centre in Toronto and the Central East Correctional Centre in Lindsay, Ontario.
My name is Marilou Funston, I am a member of the Immigration Division.
The Ministers counsels today are Ms. Lourenco and Mr. Oliveira.
Also present is counsel for the person concerned and you are Mr. Farooq Anser.
COUNSEL:

That is correct.

MEMBER:

And you are a barrister and solicitor.

COUNSEL:

I am.

MEMBER:

Thank you.

There are three observers to these proceedings, two individuals representing the media and an
individual from the Canada Border Services Agency.
Mr. Ansari, you have been arrested by the Canada Border Services Agency, I have received
request from them to conduct this detention review and in that request they indicate that you have
been arrested for the purpose of an admissibility hearing.
They also indicate on that request that they detained on two grounds, they have cited that you
are a danger to the public and that you are a flight risk.

-3-

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

The purpose of this proceeding is for me to determine if you can be released from their
custody.
And if I make a release order I can impose certain conditions on you and I can also require
that someone put up a financial guarantee.
I can ask either for a cash deposit or what is called performance bond both involve money,
one you pay upfront the other is a promise to pay if there are any breaches of conditions.
So, the way this matter will proceed is I will hear submissions and I will hear submissions
from the Ministers counsel first and then I will hear what your counsel has to say before I make my
decision.
Before we went on the record I actually received some disclosure material from the Minister
with respect to this review.
Counsel I just want to confirm with you that you received this types of material, about five
items and 31 pages.
COUNSEL:

Yes, I did get 31 pages.

MEMBER:

Okay.

All right, so I will make this package of documents DR-1.

All right, is it going to be you Ms. Lourenco or Mr. Oliveira doing submissions?
MINISTERS COUNSEL:
MEMBER:

It would be me.

Okay.

Go ahead, Ms. Lourenco?

MINISTERS COUNSEL:

Thank you.

Mr. Ansari is not a Canadian citizen.

He is a permanent resident of Canada and a citizen of Pakistan.
On November 27, 2007 he arrived in Canada and was granted permanent residence as a
member of the family class.
On December 12, 2007 Mr. Ansari returned to Pakistan.
On August 22, 2008 Mr. Ansari returned to Canada from Pakistan.

-4-

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

On August 30, 2012 Mr. Ansari came to the attention of the Ontario Provincial Police and
Toronto Police Services after police were notified by members of the community that Mr. Ansari had
acquired a suspicious amount of restricted firearms over a short period of time.
A warrant was executed on his residence where he was residing with his brother and Mr.
Ansari was charged with 21 firearms related offences.
The details of this interaction and the charges that were laid are found in DR-1 at pages 1
through 6.
For the record they include breach of firearms regulation 13 counts, occupant of a motor
vehicle knowing there was a firearm four counts, and possession of a firearm at an unauthorized place
four counts.
At the time that Mr. Ansari was arrested a --- it was discovered that he was attempting to
conceal a thumb drive.
That drive was recovered and the contents were examined.
That was a catalyst for the beginning of a project by INSET, the Integrated National Security
Enforcement Team.
The thumb drive contained a number of files named Taliban as well as Shahadat S-H-A-H-AD-A-T.
MEMBER:

Spell that again please.

MINISTERS COUNSEL:

Certainly S-H-A-H-A-D-A-T.

It is my understanding is a translation --- translates to martyr.

Audio files containing song supporting jihad, six sermons conducted by --- and I am going to
spell this name for the record.
M-A-U-L-A-N-A Muhammad M-U-H-A-M-M-A-D Ilas I-L-A-S Ghuman G-H-U-M-A-N
who is believed by the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team to be the present leader of a
group that is the subset --- and I am going to spell all of these names for the record.
The name of group is I-T-H-E-H-A-A-D next word H-A-L-E-S-U-N-N-A-T. Next word WA-L next word J-A-M-A-A-T.
This is believed to be a subset of a group known as A-H-L dash E dash A-H-L sorry, dash E
dash...
MEMBER:

Okay.

I am sorry, start again?

-5-

MINISTERS COUNSEL:

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

Certainly.

A-H-L dash E dash S-U-N-N-A-T Wal Jamaat, the same name that I provided previously
same spelling W-A-L J-A-M-A-A-T. And this is a group that the Minister alleges Mr. Ansari is a
member of.
This group is a militant organization whose objective is to have Pakistan declared a Sunni
state.
This group is a listed entity both in Pakistan and the United Kingdom.
This is a group that has engaged in act of terrorism and it is a group that the Minister is
alleging is linked to another organization called Lashkar-E-Jhangvi.
I am going to spell it for the record. L-A-S-H-K-A-R dash E dash J-H-A-N-G-V-I.
This is an organization that is a listed entity in Canada as well as the United States.
It is commonly known as the death squad and it has --- this group has --- is responsible for
the kidnapping and beheading of the United States Journalist Daniel Pearl in Karachi in 2002.
Following that it was designated as a terrorist entity in a number of countries.
So this was the beginning of the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team
investigation.
Mr. Ansari was granted bail on the firearms charges, he was further charged on the January
31, 2013 for mischief.
The details of that arrest are at DR-1 pages 7 to 19.
The details of this offence deal with Mr. Ansari attending a store and taking a stack of
newspapers that are published for the Ahmadi (ph) Muslim community.
I would note at page 16 it deals with the fact that Mr. Ansari would not provide police even
with the most basic of information at the time of his arrest.
That charge of mischief was later withdrawn by the Crown.
On March 7, 2013 Mr. Ansari pled guilty to one of the firearms offences stemming from the
arrest in August, specifically the offence deal with firearm contrary to regulations.
He received a conditional discharge and one year probation.
On March 17th...

-6-

MEMBER:

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

The other charges?

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
The other charges did not result in a conviction I believe
they were withdrawn as part of the guilty plea.
MEMBER:

And the conviction again was what?

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
the Criminal Code of Canada.
MEMBER:

Deal with firearm contrary to regulations Section 86(2) of

Okay.

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
Pakistan.

On March 17, 2014 Mr. Ansari once again travelled to

He returned to Canada on April 12, 2014.

At that time he was interviewed by a Canada Border Services regional intelligence officer at
Pearson International Airport.
Told that officer that he is --- he visited Pakistan to see his brother and sister-in-law who are
employed by the Pakistani military.
That during his time there he met with religious clergy to try and set up a non-profit charity
for Sunni Muslims.
At the time of this examination Mr. Ansaris tablet revealed a number of pictures of firearms
and firearm parts, specifically the photographs included a variety of firearms, forward looking
infrared system, a holographic site, as well as a photograph of a Glock 17 loaded in a tactical chassis
with an extended magazine, an extended capacity magazine for being a prohibited item.
Mr. Ansari told the officer that all of these guns and weapons had been seized because of the
way he looked.
On August 8, 2014 Mr. Ansari was reported as inadmissible by Canada Border Services
Agency for his membership in a terrorist organization pursuant to section 34(1)(f), specifically for
being a member of ASWJ which was previously known as the SSP, which is an acronym for Sipah-ESahaba, spelled S-I-P-A-H dash E dash S-A-H-A-B-A.
That 44 report notes that during the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team
investigation it was discovered that in fact Mr. Ansari created and maintained the website that was the
official media service to these organizations.
MEMBER:

Sorry, say that again.

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
media website for the organization.

He created and maintained a website that was the official

-7-

MEMBER:

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

The ASWJ you mean?

MINISTERS COUNSEL:

Yes.

The officer noted what I have already stated for the record, the fact that this is a listed entity
in Pakistan and the United Kingdom and it is linked to the LEJ.
On October 24, 2014 that report was reviewed by Ministers Delegate who I did sign a
referral pending Mr. Ansari making humanitarian submissions in line with Hernandez.
On October 27th Mr. Ansari was further reported as inadmissible pursuant to section 34(1)(d)
for being inadmissible --- for being a member of an organization that poses danger to the security of
Canada, again a Ministers Delegate reviewed that report signing a referral pending Hernandez
submissions.
And on that day a warrant was signed for his arrest.
Mr. Ansari was arrested on October 27th by the Immigration Task Force.
He advised officials that he did not want the Pakistani government notified of his arrest and
that he will be making submissions as to why he should not be deported.
For the record those submissions are due by November 15, 2014.
It is also noted that at the time of his arrest Mr. Ansari indicated that he was living at xxx
xxxxxxx Drive, however his drivers license address --- address with the Minister was still listed as
what I believe is his brothers address in Peterborough, xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx .
The notice of arrest is found in DR-1 at pages 29 to 31.
It details a number of other concerns that I will go over in my submissions.
As noted in the notice of arrest Mr. Ansari had also made a number of public postings which
the Agency puts forth the position are in line with his extremist views.
And Mr. Ansaris response to being notified of the allegation against him was that they were
all non-sense.
And I would note for the record that the --- a small excerpt of the twitter postings done by Mr.
Ansari are found in DR-1 at pages 22 to 28 under the handle of convicted radical.
The Minister today is seeking Mr. Ansaris detention on both statutory grounds that Madam
Member indicated as well the Minister is arguing the ground of 58(1)(c).
Also with my submissions on unlikeliness to appear, Mr. Ansari is an individual who has ties
to Canada, his family is here.

-8-

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

He is an individual in the Ministers view who is not likely to willingly appear for an
admissibility hearing that would result --- that could result in him losing his permanent residence in
Canada.
It is also noted at page 20 of DR-1 that his brother has been in contact with the Agency and
has indicated that it is his belief that Mr. Ansari if deported would be tortured and that his life would
be at risk.
These statements raise a concern that Mr. Ansari would be unlikely to appear not only for the
admissibility hearing but for any future removal should that decision be made by the tribunal.
It is also noteworthy that the offence of mischief for which Mr. Ansari was charged occurred
while he was on a recognisance in relation to the firearms offences.
And as noted previously at page 16 he was less than cooperative with Toronto Police
Services.
In the Ministers view this indicates a lack of cooperation with law enforcement.
Certainly, the Minister would point out that the Twitter posts found at page 24 onward are
also in line with what the Minister puts forward as Mr. Ansaris general disregard and disdain for
government officials.
Further that lack of respect for legal requirements is evidenced by the fact that he was in fact
in violation of the firearms license and --- that was issued to him as noted by the fact that he did in
fact plead guilty to an offence stemming from the August 2012 arrest.
In regards to 58(1)(c)...
MEMBER:

Before you leave that...

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
MEMBER:

Certainly.

You mentioned that Mr. Ansari was on bail for the firearms charges.

MINISTERS COUNSEL:

Yes.

MEMBER:
Other than the mischief charge, is there any issue with any of his bail
conditions, any problems that you are aware of?
MINISTERS COUNSEL:
No, nothing further that I am aware of at this time, simply
what is set out at page 12 and 13 list what the recognisance was.
MEMBER:
Okay.

Mm-hmm.

-9-

0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
In regards to 58(1)(c) the Ministers position is that the
Agency is taking the necessary steps in investigating a very reasonable suspicion that Mr. Ansari is
inadmissible for grounds of security.
Now, of course the Minister fully acknowledges that the reports have been written, however
this investigation is not concluded as noted by the fact that there is still further time for submissions
to be made by Mr. Ansari, and it is unclear what the substance of those submissions will be.
The Minister is actively reviewing digital information that was obtained through the
production orders and warrants executed by the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team.
This is an investigation that continues to involve based on information that is continually
being located as early as this morning.
The Minister wishes to rely on the case law that deals with detention under 58(1)(c).
Minister submits that Justice Near in the decision of Canada v Confidential case reference
IMM-6436-09 in which Justice Near makes the statement that 58(1)(c) provides for continued
detention while the Agency necessary steps to investigate a reasonable suspicion, and that release
specifically in this case also dealt with a security case, would undermine the objectives of
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act as well as Canadas international obligations with respect to
terrorism.
In the Ministers view this case as well as the other case law in this matter is informative
particularly Mr. Ansaris circumstances as there is an investigation into security.
I cannot state that the Agency, as I noted is in constant ongoing contact with partner agencies
in regards to this investigation, so the Ministers position is that the Agency is acting diligently and
taking the necessary steps as required by the legislation.
In regards to danger to the public, the Ministers position is that Mr. Ansari is a member of a
terrorist organization which has been known to carry out attacks on civilians.
This is an organization as I submitted earlier that is a listed entity in Pakistan and United
Kingdom, and is closely linked with another organization which is listed in Canada, both of which
have committed acts of terrorism in targeting civilians.
It is troubling in the Ministers view that Mr. Ansaris conduct in Canada not only paints a
picture of being a member of this organization but an integral member, an individual who created and
maintained a website that was used by this group to spread its extremist message.
By virtue of doing that, and operating that website, in the Ministers view Mr. Ansari has
demonstrated that he is a threat to the Canadian public.

- 10 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

Also the information that was provided today about Mr. Ansari amassing what can only be
described as a significant amount of firearms as well as other tactical equipment is particularly
troubling in conjunction with his documented views and memberships.
It is also noteworthy that at page five of the Ministers disclosure when the warrant was
executed and the firearms were located, according to the report the firearms were located in plain
view in the basement area or residence.
The firearms were not trigger locked, none of them were secure, and there was a quantity of
loose ammunition scattered throughout the basement.
The police note that this area of the house was readily available to any member of the family
including children.
In the Ministers view this demonstrates that Mr. Ansari is someone who has shown himself
to be careless in regards to the safety of others storing firearms that are not trigged locked with a
amount of ammunition in a home where children had access is troubling in and of itself apart from
Mr. Ansaris ties to a terrorist organization.
Mr. Ansaris tweets that is found in the Ministers disclosure in the agencys view
demonstrate not only his radicalized views but our cause for concern in that they are readily available
to the public and they demonstrate a disdain and anger towards Canadian officials.
Also noted by the Minister that according to the information from Integrated National
Security Enforcement Team Mr. Ansari posted about the group on numerous public forums, as I stated
this is an ongoing investigation but from what the Minister has gathered so far there have been a
number of posts on a variety of social media.
The notice of arrest details a post on Facebook.
At page 30 Mr. Ansari had a number of photographs of himself using firearms on his
Facebook account as well as a picture of a downtown Toronto high rise with the caption if I only had
a plane.
In the Ministers view Mr. Ansaris history details that he is very clearly a danger to the
public.
It is based on these concerns that the Ministers position is that detention is necessary in this
case in regards to not only the 58(1)(c) findings of the court that release would be contrary to the
objectives of Immigration and Refugee Protection Act but also as I stated with the public safety
concerns as well as the unlikeliness to appear.
This is a case that is clearly constantly evolving and further disclosures will of course be
forthcoming.
In terms of length of future detention Mr. Ansari is being given the opportunity to make
submissions in line with federal court decision of Hernandez and is given until mid November.

- 11 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

Following his submissions this case will be reviewed by a Ministers Delegate which is done
locally now on a priority basis since the delegations have changed this no longer goes to our national
headquarters.
The Minister anticipates that a final disposition of the referral will be made in very short
order.
If the case continues to be referred to an admissibility hearing this case will be given priority
of course if Mr. Ansari remains in detention.
All this is to say that at the present time the Ministers position is that there is no reason to
believe that future detention will be lengthy and that that future length of detention would outweigh
the very serious concerns in this case.
Thank you.
MEMBER:
under 58(1)(c)?

Now, can you elaborate a bit more on the reasons you are seeking detention

MINISTERS COUNSEL:

Certainly.

So in terms of the legislative reference, the act speaks of the Minister taking necessary steps
to inquire into a reasonable suspicion that an individual is inadmissible on grounds of in this case
security.
The Ministers position is that is exactly what the Agency is engaging in.
First of all the test in the Ministers view for this ground is whether the suspicion --- the
Minister is taking the necessary step to whether this suspicion is reasonable.
The Ministers position is that quite clearly from the limited disclosure alone and from the
submissions that have been made the suspicion in the Ministers view is more than reasonable.
It is an investigation that is in line with the primary objectives of the Immigration and
Refugee Protection Act and this is in the Ministers view certainly line with parliamentary intent in
writing this legislation, is a ground that has been added to the act in the Ministers view for cases just
as this.
Again, appreciating that the reports have been written and that the preliminary investigation
has been completed by the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team, the Minister would note
that that investigation happened and was --- the catalyst for that was the firearms arrest.
However, the Agencys investigation, Canada Border Services Agency investigation is
ongoing.

- 12 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

Mr. Ansari was interviewed on the day of his arrest that I would say a clear indication of the
continued investigation.
So, also as I stated there are a number of pieces of electronic media that the Agency still
needs to go through.
This could in the Ministers view result in further reports.
There is always the possibility, it is also in the Ministers view exactly what the legislative
intent is.
So although the reports are written what the Minister is respectfully submitting is that the
investigation has in fact not concluded, and as stated previously Mr. Ansari even has the opportunity
to make submissions.
It is unclear what those submissions will be, they could be of no substance to the
investigation or they could be integral, it is unknown at this point in time what Mr. Ansari will tell the
Agency and where that will lead.
So, it is on that basis that the Minister would submit that this ground also applies apart from
the two other statutory grounds.
MEMBER:

Thank you.

Counsel?
COUNSEL: Well, a lot of what the Minister said comes in the mixture of the disclosure
that have been provided and there is a lot of information that the Minister has provided at this point
that I really do not have.
Minister has indicated there is an ongoing investigation, I have a number of concerns at this
point before I think Mr. Ansari is going to be in a position to be able to address this hearing.
And one of them is my friend takes the position about the ongoing investigation.
She says it is going to be not lengthy, I do not know how, when, where we are going to be
getting that disclosure and to what extend my friend intends to produce that if she is going to rely on
them in this hearing.
There is clarifications that I require as far as Mr. Ansaris position today, we do not have the
bondspersons necessary or --- we are not in a position to proceed forward today, but certainly we
require a clarification for a lot of things that my friend has said so that we can move forward in a
more productive fashion when we are back here.
I understand most of this commence from the original allegations with respect to the firearms
and my friend I believe has conceded that that matter resulted in a conditional discharge.

- 13 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

And, I just want all the facts accurately on record so then I can appropriately deal with it on
the next occasion and know what I have to provide.
And I also understand my friend to have conceded that the mischief charges was withdrawn,
so he has a conditional discharge on the weapons charge.
He has --- and the mischief charge was withdrawn, also I think conceding my friends
position is the fact that there were never any breach charges laid against Mr. Ansari.
So while he was on recognisance and that was an appropriate question, a very relevant
question, during the entire period of time when he was charged in 2012 onwards, there were any
breach of recognisance charges laid.
While --- my friend makes some reference to how the mischief charge shows that he is less
than cooperative, lacks respect, the fact that that matter was withdrawn in itself speaks a lot more to
the nature of that charge than submissions about my clients lack of respect and so on.
My friend has also made reference with respect to photographs and items, you know, infrared
and holographic sites, and photograph of a Glock in a magazine, I do not have any disclosure of that
on the 31 pages that were provided, and these are photographs as I understand it, not the actual
weapons.
There has never been any allegation that once he was detained on the criminal charges that he
has ever tried to get a hand on any firearms.
I in fact have, I mean in a very short period of time to try and arrange these things, so I do
have his plea that was entered and I think that will be of use to the member, I can provide that to the
member as well as my friend that was entered before the courts.
I also have obtained and I am going to be in efforts to obtain the original bail hearing that was
conducted in the weapons offence, so the Minister will have that, and as well...
MEMBER:

Just so you understand counsel I have to make a decision now.

COUNSEL:

I appreciate...

MEMBER:

Okay? So if --- if you have got that material now you have to give it to me

COUNSEL:

I can provide that to you.

now.

What I am saying is...

MEMBER:

Now.

COUNSEL:

What I am saying is I have almost 200 or 300 pages of material.

- 14 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

MEMBER:

Uh-huh.

COUNSEL: And I think in order for me to be appropriately deal with this, given that we
do not have the bondsperson and so on, my first instinct was to have this matter --- I know you have
to make a decision but we are not in a position to address all of the concerns that the Minister have.
I do want some of the disclosure that the Minister is talking about to be able to appropriately
and accurately address these issues.
Our preference would have been to put this over to about --- and I can provide a date that I
am available, and I think...
MEMBER:

Okay.

I would not put this over because of the statutory requirement that I conduct this hearing and
I also am required to give a decision regarding what is submitted to me today.
So if you are not prepared to address the --- all of the issues then I will simply rely on what I
have been presented with to come to my decision.
COUNSEL:

So...

MEMBER:
And you are aware of course that if your client does remain in custody, he
gets another review in 7 days.
COUNSEL:

Absolutely.

And what we will do is we will provide that material (inaudible) and I wanted to be a more
organized (inaudible) approach and probably will have a binder for your --- probably 200 to 300
pages of documents I have already gathered together and there is information that I require from the
Minister so that we can have a more informed position.
I appreciate that they have indicated they require an ongoing investigation, I would like to
know --- and I have dealt with a number of these matters in the past and the investigation goes on for
years and years.
So what is the timeline? My friend says, look, I am going to provide or I am --- I saw my
friend flipping through a number of photographs that she had in her hands, I have not been provided
with those, I do not know when I --- when my friend expects to give me those.
I certainly would like that but I think the conceptions that I have --- one thing also, there was
one organization my friend mentioned, and I just wanted clarification myself, it was ASWJ, did we
give --- what does that stand for, did the Minister actually --- because that is the website that the
Minister alleges my client created and maintained, and that is not in the disclosure that both the
member and I have been provided, it is a representation my friend just made off the cuff, she may
have documents for that I do not know.

- 15 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

So what is that organization and where does the Minister get that information?
MEMBER:
So if I understand your position today is that you are not prepared to put
forward any argument for your clients release.
COUNSEL:

Yes.

MEMBER:

Okay.

COUNSEL:

Not at this point.

I would like to have a more comprehensive understanding, a lot of stuff what my friend has
said today is not from the --- the 31 pages that I was provided.
I would like to get some more information and be in a more informed position to be able to
both have a fair and reasonable hearing.
MEMBER:
at this time?
COUNSEL:

Is there anything else you wish to say in regard to the Ministers submission
I just need the additional disclosure that has been talked about.

That is all I am going to --- I mean I want that clearly on the record.
Without that being present, if my friend is indicating that there is ongoing investigation, I
would like to know when I can have that material so that I know and my client knows what are the
allegations that he is facing and what is the basis for it.
Is the Minister also intending to produce a representative from Integrated National Security
Enforcement Team, is there going to be an officer coming forward to support any of these allegations
and if there is one then I would like to know who that is going to be, I would like that information in
advance.
MEMBER:

Okay.

I think you are drifting off into the admissibility portion which is a separate proceeding, and
will involve more comprehensive evidence (inaudible) and whatever.
COUNSEL: My concern is when the Minister makes --- and the allegations, and when --I do not know if you had an opportunity to go through the --- because I expect you were just given
them right now.
All that was said in the allegations was simply that Mr. Ansari has ties to organizations,
terrorist organizations in Pakistan, that was the line.
MEMBER:

Mm-hmm.

- 16 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

COUNSEL: And the rest of the information that my friend provided today I had not heard
before, so it is news to me.
So I would like to know where that came from and then I can decipher whether I need to
chase that down further or if that is the extent which the member has to review and what do I have to
(inaudible).
MEMBER:
What I --- what I am basing my decision on is exactly what I have heard, I do
not have anything more than you have.
COUNSEL:

Right.

MEMBER:

And so this is what I am relying on for my decision.

COUNSEL:

All right.

So, the information that is provided by the Minister, I appreciate some of it is documented but
most of it then just comes merely as submission.
Along with that there are some evidence even in fact being given by the Ministers
representative as to what terminologies mean.
I do not know where she is getting that from.
Instance of that is when she defines what the word S-H-A-D-A-T.
MEMBER:

Mm-hmm.

COUNSEL:

Shahadat means.

The Minister volunteered her position I think it means martyr.

I do not know where she gets that from.
So if we are going to be relying on information provided from the Minister and she is now
representing making herself a witness with respect to interpretations of these terminologies, I do not
know, I would like to know the source of those.
So obviously at the end of the day when you are going to be making decision based on what
the Ministers representative has provided there has to be distinction between what is factually being
put forth by other parties, what is a legal argument being put forth by my friend, and what are factual
pieces of information where she has added her own understanding and interpretation to.
Disclosure is something that I do need on that so that I can appropriately address the concerns
that you are going to have at the end of the day and hopefully when I will have a package together,
and I can get everything to you in advance as well.

- 17 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

MEMBER:

Okay.

If you have nothing specific to address at this time regarding the submissions of the
Ministers counsel, and that is what I am understanding.
COUNSEL:

Yes.

MEMBER:

Then what I will do at this point --- one second, did you have any reply?

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
MEMBER:

I just wanted to clarify about the translation that is all.

Sure, go ahead.

MINISTERS COUNSEL:
Just for the record when I stated it is my understanding is
this is how it is translated in the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team report, it is not my
personal understanding of the (inaudible).
MEMBER:

Okay.

What I would do at this point is take a recess and then I will come back with my decision.
And as I said depending on which way it goes, if --- if I end up ordering that your client
remain in custody then I will set a date for the next detention review.
COUNSEL:
with my availability.

And we try to --- hopefully we can schedule a date when --- that coordinates

MEMBER:

As long as it also is...

COUNSEL:

Within the seven days.

MEMBER:

...within the statutory timeframe, yes, that is fine.

We can generally make those arrangements.

Okay, well, in that case then I will recess now and I will come back with my decision.
I will say --- I will try to have it by 11:30.
COUNSEL:

Thank you.

MEMBER:

That is what I will aim for.

HEARING RECESSED

- 18 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

HEARING RESUMED

MEMBER:

Okay.

We are back on the record, all the same parties are present.

DECISION

MEMBER:

Mr. Ansari, I can give you my decision.

The Minister is seeking your continued detention on three statutory grounds.

They are taking the position that you are a flight risk, that you are a danger to the public and
that you are a security risk.
And, the information that I have been provided with today that you are not a Canadian citizen
but that you are a permanent resident of Canada and you have been since November 27, 2007.
You are therefore still subject to the statutory provisions of the Immigration and Refugee
Protection Act.
While it is as a result of an investigation that was initiated by organization that has been given
the acronym INSET which stands for Integrated National Security Enforcement Team and that is now
being --- an investigation that is now being followed up by the Canada Border Services Agency that
you have become the subject of two reports of inadmissibility.
You have been reported under paragraph 34(1)(f) alleging membership in a terrorist
organization, and paragraph 34(1)(d) alleging that you are a danger to the security of Canada.
Both reports are waiting a final decision on referral to the Immigration Division and that they
are currently pending as a result of the fact that you have an opportunity to make submissions
regarding those reports and any humanitarian and compassionate consideration.
The information I have been provided today is that that is something outstanding as you have
until middle of November to make those submissions.

- 19 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

The information provided to me today is that you became a person of interest to the
Integrated National Security Enforcement Team upon your arrest on a number of firearms offences.
It was at that time that a thumb drive was discovered that contained various information
relating to radical Islam.
The Minister is seeking your detention today as a result under section 58(1)(c).
That section states that the Minister is taking necessary steps to inquire into a reasonable
suspicion that you are inadmissible on grounds of security, violating human or international rights,
serious criminality, criminality, organized criminality and specifically in your case security concern.
In addition to the initial discoveries on the thumbnail drive the Minister points to information
that you are responsible for creating and maintaining the officials media website of a group called
Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat, which the Minister maintains is a militant group that has engaged in acts of
terrorism and which has ties to other militant groups, also accused of engaging in acts of terrorism.
They further point to the fact that you have recently on two occasions travelled back to
Pakistan since becoming a permanent resident.
They point to you having a history of amassing a rather large number of firearms and they
point to you having publicly expressed certain militant points of view.
Their position is that the cumulative effect of these circumstances has led the Canada Border
Services Agency to report you for inadmissibility and to continue to investigate their security
concerns.
The Ministers suspicion that you are inadmissible on security grounds is not in my view
unreasonable.
Minister --- the Ministers intended steps at the present are to examine and review electronic
media which is a continuation of the initial investigation that was undertaken by Integrated National
Security Enforcement Team.
When grounds for detention under 58(1)(c) are argued the federal court has stated that it is
not the role of the Immigration and Refugee Board to dictate how the Ministers ongoing
investigation should be conducted.
The Minister is entitled to a reasonable time to complete the admissibility investigation.
The question that must be answered by the member is not whether the evidence relied upon
by the Minister is true or compelling but whether that evidence is reasonably capable of supporting
the Ministers suspicion of potential inadmissibility.
It is for the Minister to decide what further investigatory steps are needed.

- 20 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

The members supervisory jurisdiction on this issue is limited to examining whether the
proposed steps has the potential to uncover relevant evidence bearing on the Ministers suspicion and
to ensure that the Minister is conducting an ongoing investigation in good faith.
This investigation is relatively early on, Minister has other avenues of investigation that they
intend to undertake.
I am satisfied that the Minister has establish on a balance of probabilities that section 58(1)(c)
is a ground for detention applies against your release.
With respect to the issue flight risk the Minister has argued that your disdain for authority as
it has been demonstrated in certain expressions of your view has led to a concern that you may not be
the most reliable or trustworthy individual to abide by conditions should they be imposed on you.
They also point to the fact you have very strong familial ties to Canada, you are of course a
permanent resident of Canada, they point to the fact you are facing serious allegations that could lead
to your deportation from Canada and the loss of your permanent resident status.
And it is their position that these are significant enough issues to raise flight risk concerns.
You have not challenged their position with respect to these concerns.
On the face of it I am satisfied that Minister has raised valid concerns and in the absence of
any mitigating factors it is my view that you are on the balance of probabilities a flight risk.
With respect to the issue of danger to the public the Minister is relying on their allegation that
you have links to terrorist organizations and that you have a role in spreading extremist messages.
They are also relying to some extend on your firearms offences.
Now any offences related to firearms is serious, and it is a factor set out in regulation 246D
which I am required to take into account in assessing the issue of danger to the public.
Minister has also in my view raised a valid concern regarding the carelessness with which
you have treated these weapons and the inherent danger to the public that posed by that kind of
carelessness.
You have not addressed these specific danger to the public concerns that have been raised by
the Minister and again you have not offered any sort of mitigating considerations that might offset
these concerns.
It is my view that the issues that have been raised by your alleged extremist views as well as
the attraction that you have for firearms establishes on the balance of probabilities that you are likely
to pose a present and future danger to others.
So I am ordering your continued detention on that ground as well.

- 21 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

Now this process is in the early stages, this is only your first detention review, it is difficult at
this time to determine the possibility of potential future detention.
I have no reason at this to conclude that your future detention is likely to be unduly lengthy or
that there are --- that there would be any concerns that you are admissibility hearing would not
proceed in a timely fashion.
So, the issue of future detention is not one at this time that in my view in and of itself
warrants your release particularly in light of all of the other concerns with respect to flight risk,
danger and security.
So for all of these reasons Mr. Ansari I am ordering your continued detention today.
You will have another review of the reasons for your detention, it would normally be a week
from today.
Counsel, you have indicated that you would like a little flexibility with that with your
available date.
COUNSEL:

Yes.

I think part of that is going to be...

MEMBER:

Let us just ignore it.

COUNSEL:
seven days.

The following Friday is the date that I am available, I think that puts us in

MEMBER:
can do it.

And that would be normally when we do it, so that is fine, but that is what I

COUNSEL: I just wonder if the Ministers representative could tell me in terms of the
ongoing investigation would we be able to get the material that the Minister intends to rely on?
MEMBER:

I will leave that up to you to discuss with the Minister outside the hearing

itself.
I am just at this point then setting the next detention review for next Friday, so that will be the
7-day review.
It will be November 7th and it will be at 9 o'clock in the morning.
This hearing is concluded.
----------REVIEW CONCLUDED----------

- 22 - 0003-B4-01887-1-1-DR-31-Oct-14-FUNSMA-58(1)(a)-58(1)(b)-58(1)(c)

I HEREBY DECLARE THAT THIS IS A TRUE

TRANSCRIPT OF THE RECORDING AND THAT I HAVE
SWORN THE OATH OF SECRECY

_______________________________________
Elizabeth Stavert, Transcriptionist
For DigitScribe Inc.
Security# 95662867
November 4, 2014