Human Rights and Security Interests: Suresh v. Canada and its Uncertain Legacy

The Supreme Court of Canada is rightly praised worldwide for its jurisprudence respecting the protection of individual rights. Its constitutional work, particularly in the area of equality rights, has been described recently by the distinguished American legal scholar Owen Fiss as "profound and inspiring," providing "Americans with a standard by which to measure the work of our own Supreme Court."¹ But in Suresh v. Canada, the Court's 2002 seminal decision examining the tensions between human rights and national security, the Court compromised its robust commitment to individual rights. The leeway given to government in that decision has provided room for government, as in the case of Maher Arar, to unduly emphasize uncertain national security interests to the detriment of the protection of fundamental human rights.