|
''United States v Burns'' () 1 S.C.R. 283, 2001 SCC 7, was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in which it was found that extradition of individuals to places where they may face the death penalty is a breach of fundamental justice under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The decision reached this conclusion through a discussion of evidence regarding the arbitrary nature of execution, although the Court did not go so far as to say execution was also unconstitutional under section 12 of the Charter, which forbids cruel and unusual punishments. The case essentially overruled ''Kindler v Canada (Minister of Justice)'' (1991) and ''Reference Re Ng Extradition'' (1991).〔Peter Hogg, ''Constitutional Law of Canada''. 2003 Student Ed., page 992.〕 In ''Burns'', the Supreme Court justices claimed to be considering different kinds of evidence. ==Background== The case revolved around two Canadian citizens, Glen Sebastian Burns and Atif Ahmad Rafay, who were accused of murdering Rafay's family by the police department in Bellevue, Washington, of the United States. After returning to Canada, Burns and Rafay confessed to undercover Royal Canadian Mounted Police. After the investigation was complete, Burns and Rafay claimed their confessions were fabricated, but plans were nevertheless made to extradite them.〔(CBC News - The Fifth State - True Confessions - Timeline of Events - Aired October 14, 2011 )〕 The extradition would be possible through an extradition treaty under which the Minister of Justice for Canada may seek assurances that the fugitive accused would not be subject to the death penalty. However, the Minister of Justice did not seek assurances in the case. Burns and Rafay launched a number of Charter challenges to the Canadian government's decision, including that section 6 mobility rights provided them rights against extradition and to be charged in Canada (since the murders occurred in the US, Canada could only charge them with planning the crime, so this option was ruled out). It was further argued that, while the ''Kindler'' case had held that it was not a breach of fundamental justice to extradite persons regardless of the risk of execution, the Burns case was special because it involved Canadian citizens; section 6 rights against exile were used to reinforce this argument. A documentary concerning this case was made in 2007 ''Mr. Big'' 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「United States v Burns」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|