|
LadyEllen -> George banned from Canada (3/21/2009 9:42:46 AM)
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/20/george-galloway-banned-canada
UK MP George Galloway has been denied entry to Canada, a few days after delivering an aid convoy to Gaza which he handed over to an organisation with the means to hand it out, that is the democratically elected government of the territory - that is, Hamas.
This assumedly violates Canadian immigration rules about those aiding terrorist organisations since Hamas is classed as such by Canada and indeed the west in general. Since Mr Galloway has been a regular visitor to Canada in the past despite his contentious connections in the Middle East this decision must be accounted to his involvement with the aid convoy.
But is this a reasonable decision? Clearly, aiding a named terrorist organisation must fall foul, but in this case the terrorist organisation is not the intended recipient of the aid but the facilitator of its distribution as the elected government of the territory and so in possession and control of the means for that distribution.
My impression is that the aid convoy in truth has merely provided an excuse to ban Galloway - his previous visits having been impossible to prevent under the law since he hadnt broken it, though such refusal being the desire of those running Canada because of his views. My impression too is that this is something of a political rather than legal decision since Galloway might say things that are not at all helpful to the Canadian government at this time.
But the greater issue - alike with the banning from the UK of the Dutch MP over his anti-Koran movie - is whether this is in any way a proper way for democracies to proceed, banning certain people because they have things to say which contravene government policy?
E
|
|
|
|
