Federal lawyers broke no rules in Hassan Diab extradition case, review finds

Ottawa academic Hassan Diab is rejecting the findings of an external review of his extradition case, saying its only purpose was to absolve senior officials and shield them from further scrutiny.

The review written by Murray Segal, a former deputy attorney general in Ontario, and made public Friday concluded that federal lawyers on the case did their jobs ethically and within the law.

It said Canada's extradition law is largely misunderstood and the system could work better — but that nobody who worked on Diab's extradition broke the rules.

The review focused on Diab's case, and not a broader examination of the Extradition Act.

Diab said he refused to take part in the review, fearing it would be a "whitewash."

Speaking at a press conference on Parliament Hill, Diab said it would a gross understatement to say he is disappointed in the review.

"Its purpose is not to provide transparency or accountability or to prevent future miscarriages of justice, rather its purpose is to absolve the Department of Justice from any accountability and to shield senior officials at the department from further scrutiny," he said.

The 126-page review, presented to the federal government in May, looked at the actions of federal lawyers and the Justice Department section that reviews and co-ordinates extradition requests — the "international assistance group," or IAG for short.

Segal's job was to decide whether they behaved properly in building and presenting the case for Diab to be sent to France on accusations related to a 1980 synagogue bombing.

Segal wrote that none of the criticisms lodged against the Justice Department has "any merit." He concluded federal lawyers "acted in a manner that was ethical and consistent" with the law and federal policies, "based on a firm factual foundation."

French authorities suspected Diab was involved in the Paris synagogue bombing that killed four people and injured dozens of others. Diab has always denied the accusation.

The RCMP arrested him in 2008 following a request by French authorities. Diab, who is a Canadian citizen, was sent to France six years later despite an Ontario judge's acknowledgment that the case against him was weak.

French judges eventually dismissed the allegations against Diab in January 2018, after he spent years imprisoned there.

At the press conference, Diab talked about how his ordeal left him with his reputation tarnished, his savings wiped out, his health damaged. He missed the birth of his son and three years of his children's lives — all due, he said, to the conduct of the Justice Department.

Diab's lawyer Donald Bayne urged the federal government to hold a full public inquiry into his case and to reform the Extradition Act to ensure others aren't caught in the same situation. The external review, he said, does nothing to meet similar calls from academics and human-rights groups.

"This will happen again after this report. It is a disservice to Canadians who deserve better and it's glaring proof that Canadians need and deserve a full public inquiry into — as the prime minister said — what never should have happened, and should never be allowed to happen again."

He also said that he and Diab have discussed suing the federal government because they were "so disappointed in this report." It's too early to say what path Diab will take, Bayne said, beyond trying to meet with Justice Minister David Lametti and get the ball rolling on meaningful reforms to the extradition system.

In his report, Segal wrote how Diab's long detention in France and eventual return to Canada "sparked widespread debate about both his treatment and Canada's extradition process."

Critics, he added, have said the process "favours prompt compliance" with Canada's obligations to its international partners over the protection of individual rights of those targeted for extradition.

Segal pointed out that an extradition hearing is not a trial, and that the proceedings are intended to be fair but also to move swiftly.

He listed 14 recommendations that include:

— Creating a buffer between the lawyer acting on behalf of the requesting state and the lawyer responsible for advising the government

— Encouraging states seeking extraditions to complete their investigations before making requests unless public-safety worries demand quicker action

— Considering making more extradition-related information available to the public, including summaries of ministers' decisions on extraditions

Lametti said he is studying the advice.

"There are certainly recommendations there that will help — you can always make a process better," Lametti told reporters in Halifax.

"Obviously, I have a great deal of sympathy for Dr. Diab and for his family and for what they went through — nobody wants to see anybody sit in prison in a foreign country for that period of time waiting for their case to be tried."

Lametti's predecessor, former justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, ordered the review in May 2018. She asked for the investigation to focus on whether the Extradition Act was followed in Diab's case and if there are specific concerns that need to be addressed with regard to Canada's extradition treaty with France.

The findings of the external review were made public at a time when Canada's extradition law is under intense international scrutiny, following the December arrest of senior Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver at the behest of the United States.

Lametti said each extradition case is unique and dealt with according to the treaty with the country that makes the request.