ruling affects those under 'security certificates'
A Security certificate under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) is one way for the Government of Canada to remove a person who poses a danger to national security or to the safety of any person. A certificate is only issued when there is a need to use sensitive information that needs to be protected for reasons of national security or for the safety of any person.http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/newsroom/factsheets/2005/certificat-e.html">GovCan
It's kind of meaningless if the State can simply declare everything national security, classify the evidence and 'rendition' the fellow anyway. Since these days, the State has expanded the working definition of a non-legal term like 'terrorist' to include pretty much everything, it's not much of a protection.
Moreover, if Country A under it's laws have different 'evidentiary' procedures and different legal customs, what is Canada saying?...Canada reserves the right to 'veto' that evidence if it doesn't muster up to our standards? What is the interpretation if the offense is against a countries' 'blasphemy laws'?
What do we do? Tell them, no dice, because we don't even recognize that type of stuff? Are Canadian judges suppose to waste a lot of time trying to figure out 'foreign court' systems and then guess that the proceedings might be fair based on OUR system?
Seems unworkable, but I predict a whole whack of lawyers have found a way to keep their clients money rolling in for a few more years, while they tackle these questions.