Former British Member of Parliament George Galloway has decided that in spite of the fact the voters of the English constituency Poplar and Limehouse weren’t keen to elect him as their representative in Westminster in May (he received 17.5% of the vote), Canadians might me more inclined to listen to what he has to say in a multi-city tour of the country beginning in November. Although banned from entering the country last year because of the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration’s finding that he supports terrorists, Federal Court Justice Mosley in a decision rendered on September 27, 2010, agreed with Galloway and his supporters that, to quote at paragraph 8: “It is clear that the efforts to keep Mr. Galloway out of the country had more to do with antipathy to his political views than with any real concern that he had engaged in terrorism or was a member of a terrorist organization.” See also paragraphs 91 & 98.
In this case, Mosley J. found that the government had in fact overreached in concluding that Galloway was complicit in terrorist activities and was certainly not “engaging in terrorism” for the purposes of article 34 (1) (c) of the IRPA (para. 114), although the decision was not subject to judicial review because Galloway had not at that point attempted to enter Canada. Nevertheless had Galloway attempted to enter the country, Mosley J. said that the actions of the government would bring about a reasoned apprehension of bias (para. 148). Although the Court had to reject Galloway’s application based on the purely technical issues, it was clear that the judgment was a severe rebuke of the government’s actions. As a result of the decision, Galloway entered Canada on October 2nd, and it appears as though no one tried to stop him.