Wanted: More Careful Language

No one wants war criminals hiding out in Canada. But is it worth compromising our centuries-old justice system to get them deported?

The federal government's list of 30 suspected war criminals hiding out in Canada and facing deportation has been greeted with knee-jerk boosterism from right-leaning editorial boards across the country. The Globe and Mail's editorialists, for example, ask “why it took so long to post the names and faces,” then answer that “privacy concerns” were holding the government back from doing so. Well, those “privacy concerns” amount to overlooking such trivialities as due process and the presumption of innocence, as the men listed are basically slandered as being war criminals with no evidence provided to support the claim. “A tough attitude toward those who take part in atrocities, or serve in groups, even at the margins, that commit atrocities, is entirely consistent with the liberal principles Canada espouses,” says the Globe. No one would disagree with that. But without assurances that these people are who the government says they are, there are a grab bag of other “liberal principles” being trampled for the sake of cheap political points.

The Sun chain's Brian Lilley manages to make it through an entire column on the subject without resorting to a single rhetorical question mark, fuming over CBC's decision to not publish the names and photos of those on the list. The public broadcaster says it's their policy not to name people suspected of crimes without charges having been laid, a principle which Lilley finds a little lacking as he's found “plenty of examples on CBC’s own website of the state broadcaster posting pictures and names of people 'wanted' but not yet charged in connection with various crimes.” Which is true, but police release warrants for those people's arrest, meaning they've been charged in everything but deed only. Lilley goes on to say CBC is pulling a publicity stunt over the matter because they “disagree with the government’s positions on crime and immigration.” We're of the mind that they're just far more interested in covering their behinds should defamation suits ever be laid by these supsects and their families. Maybe Lilley's tune will change if his bosses end up in court over his column.

The National Post's Chris Selley, thankfully, reminds us that “precisely none of the 30 has been tried or convicted of war crimes,” even if he considers the most-wanted list, in principle, a good idea. “Is 'alleged' so hard to type?” he wonders, considering reporters the country over use that resourceful word everyday to avoid defaming other suspects. The most-wanted list, otherwise, is entirely above board and would be a truly welcome addition to our immigration and refugee processes. But the press conferences, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney's relentless use of the noun “war criminal” and the vindictiveness underlying the whole affair is “a distinctly unedifying sideshow that, as always, we could do without.” Find the men, deport them, and be done with it. Their being here illegally ought to be enough of a reason to do so, tacked-on, spurious war-crimes claims be damned.