Doc. 11302 Report 328. In the framework of this report, I do not, unfortunately, have the resources to analyse and comment on this important work in any detail. This is very regrettable, but it is highly desirable to draw on the work done by the Canadian Commission of Inquiry in the process of the follow-up that must be given to the Assembly’s recommendations by the Committee of Ministers, to ensure that similar abuses and mistakes never happen again in our member states. 329. Not surprisingly, a central issue for the commission on the case of Maher Arar was once again that of official secrecy and national security. But contrary to the situation in Europe and in the United States, Canada appears to have found a workable solution that safeguards both accountability and true national security interests. In simplified terms, the commissioner, an experienced judge, was given access to all the information required. Certain documents, which the government considered secret in the interest of national security, national defence or international relations, were examined in a procedure in which both parties were heard, and were not reproduced in the public version of the report (although attention was drawn to their absence). Thus it is not the government which is the sole arbiter of what should be regarded as a state secret. Such a procedure deserves the greatest attention in the preparation of the terms of reference for the new Council of Europe investigation mechanism which we propose to set up. 330. The Commissioner of the Inquiry, Justice Dennis O’Connor, stated that he was “able to say categorically that there is no evidence to indicate that Mr Arar has committed any offence or that his activities constitute a threat to the security of Canada”279– thus unequivocally clearing Mr Arar’s name. He was able to make this statement being “satisfied that I have been able to examine all the Canadian information relevant to the mandate. [...] I received some of the evidence in closed, or in-camera hearings and am unable to refer to some of the evidence heard in those hearings in the public version of this report. However, I am pleased to say that I am able to make public all of my conclusions and recommendations, including those based on incamera evidence.”280 331. I should like to conclude by citing Mr Arar himself,281who gave an excellent description of the role and function of the principle of accountability: “This is because accountability is not about seeking revenge; it is about making our institutions better and a model for the rest of the world. Accountability goes to the heart of our democracy. It is a fundamental pillar that distinguishes our society from police states.” 332. Explaining how he has been able to cope with the stress of surviving torture, the stress of not being able to find a job, the stress endured at the inquiry, he wrote: “I draw my strength from my faith; from my loving, caring, strong wife; and from the support and generosity I have received from Canadians. I have rediscovered Canada through its people, people who made me feel proud of being Canadian.” 333. These are impressive words coming from a man who was held for a year in the most abject conditions, including torture, in a prison run by the Syrian secret services, to which he had been handed over by the CIA, which had been able to rely on the co-operation of their Canadian counterparts, who had supplied completely baseless information about alleged links with al-Qaeda. Mr Arar’s ordeal continued after his return to Canada, which had been delayed by all kinds of setbacks, with leaks of information being organised with the intention of discrediting him and trying to justify the behaviour of the services responsible for his abduction. 334. Canada’s attitude deserves to be highlighted, for the way in which the country’s institutions coped with this serious and awkward case. Canadian society managed to resist some press attempts to condition its reaction, and unhesitatingly displayed solidarity with a man who had suffered such injustice.282Mr Arar also benefited from psychosocial assistance and received substantial compensation from the government for the damage suffered.283The Canadian public also expects the recommendations set out in the report to be implemented and those responsible to be brought to account for their conduct.284There are striking differences in every respect between the way in which the Arar case was dealt with and the attitude taken to the El-Masri case. In particular, it should finally be pointed out that neither the United States nor Syria saw fit to co-operate with the Canadian Commission of Inquiry. Mr Arar’s civil action against United States authorities has run into the same difficulties due to the doctrine of state secrecy as that of Mr El-Masri. 279. Report, available at http://www.ararcommission.ca, hereinafter: Arar Commission Report, p. 9. 280. Arar Commission Report, p. 10. 281. See http://www.maherarar.ca – A Message from Maher Arar. 282. Canadian society does seem particularly sensitive, as the recent arguments about alleged ill-treatment meted out to two Afghan detainees seem to show (see LeDevoir.com, http://www.ledevoir.com/2007/ 05/28/145116.html). 283. In January 2007, Mr Arar received 11.5 million Canadian dollars (about €7.5 million) in compensation, and a formal public apology from the Canadian Prime Minister. 284. See CBC news item of 29 January 2007. 63