THE Federal Court of Appeal on Wednesday dismissed an appeal by Bhagat Singh Brar and Parvkar Singh Dulai of British Columbia to get off the no-fly list after the Federal Court had ruled that the Public Security Minister’s decisions to maintain them on the list were reasonable.

The Federal Court had found that “many of the appellants’ explanations and justifications were not credible,” “there were reasonable grounds to suspect the appellants might travel by air for the purpose of committing acts or omissions” that are offences under the Secure Air Travel Act; and “the evidence before the Federal Court was sufficient in quality and quantity and was sufficiently reliable to support maintaining the appellants on the list.”

Judge David Stratas, who wrote for the three-judge panel, said in the ruling: “In dismissing the appellants’ appeals in this case, the Federal Court found that the evidence supporting the placement of the appellants on the list was more than sufficient in quantity and quality to meet the statutory standard of “reasonable grounds to suspect”. The Federal Court found that it was reasonable for the Minister to form a reasonable suspicion that both appellants would travel by air for the purpose of committing one of the broad range of terrorism offences identified in para. 8(1)(b) of the Secure Air Travel Act. These findings stand: the appellants have not shown any error of law or palpable and overriding error. In fact, on the evidence, I agree with the Federal Court’s findings.”

The court also noted: “In this case, the record, both public and confidential, including the appellants’ submissions, shows that when the Minister and the Federal Court assessed the reasonableness of the listing, they were well aware of the rights, freedoms and interests of the appellants, including anything that might conceivably qualify as “Charter values”. But they were also aware of the public and confidential evidence, the need to continue the international fight against terrorism, and the imperatives of public safety. In this case, the balance fell in favour of maintaining the listing of the appellants, decidedly so. Here, the Federal Court did not commit any legal error or palpable and overriding error.”

DECISION:

https://decisions.fca-caf.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/521425/index.do