2 1 COLLEEN SWORDS, SWORN: 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. CHAMP: 3 1. Q. Good afternoon, Ms. Swords. 4 A. Good afternoon. 5 2. Q. Thank you for making yourself available on 6 such short notice. My name is Paul Champ and I am counsel 7 for the applicants in this matter, Amnesty International 8 and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association 9 versus Chief of the Defence Staff for the Canadian Forces, 10 Minister of National Defence and Attorney General of 11 Canada, Federal Court file number T-324-07. You'll find 12 once in a while I'll do that. It's just official things 13 for the Record. 14 I understand that just prior to us being on the 15 Record, you were sworn? 16 A. That's right. 17 3. Q. Ms. Swords, I have a few questions for you 18 with respect to the affidavit that you've sworn on this 19 motion. I understand you have a copy available for you to 20 take a look at? 21 A. I think so. Yes. 22 MR. GRAHAM: Yes, the witness has the affidavit. 23 MR. CHAMP: Thank you. 24 BY MR. CHAMP: 25 4. Q. Tab 1 at paragraph 4 you swear to the fact 3 1 that Canada is playing a vital role in the securing and 2 developing of Afghanistan, the role of Canada and its 3 allies is critical to addressing security threats. You 4 would agree with me that our role or Canada's role in 5 Afghanistan is critical to the stability of Afghanistan? 6 A. Well, I would say that Canada's role together 7 with all the allies that we're working together with are 8 critical to stabilization and the security situation and 9 ultimately to the future economic development and 10 stability in Afghanistan, yes. 11 5. Q. Would you agree with me that it's likely that 12 the Afghan government would fall if Canada and other NATO 13 countries withdrew from the country? 14 A. Sorry. Would you repeat the question? 15 6. Q. Would you agree that it would be likely that 16 the Afghanistan government may fall or be overthrown if 17 Canada and the NATO countries withdrew from the country? 18 MR. GRAHAM: That calls for speculation. I 19 object. *O* 20 BY MR. CHAMP: 21 7. Q. You don't have to go there but in your 22 affidavit at paragraph 33 you mention that the United 23 States --- 24 MR. GRAHAM: Can we just adjourn for a moment? 25 (SHORT RECESS) 4 1 BY MR. CHAMP: 2 8. Q. In paragraph 33 you indicate that the United 3 States is the only state with a military presence in 4 Afghanistan that maintains long-term detention facilities 5 of its own? 6 A. That's my understanding, yes. 7 9. Q. They've had long-term detention facilities 8 there since approximately 2002? 9 A. I'm sorry. I don't know exactly when their 10 detention facilities were built. 11 10. Q. What is your understanding of that? 12 A. I believe they started earlier with the 13 operation Enduring Freedom so I don't know exactly the 14 date that they started with facilities. 15 11. Q. You're not able to approximate? 16 A. No. Operation Enduring Freedom, as I recall, 17 started in response to the September the 11th, 2001 18 attacks --- 19 12. Q. October 2001. 20 A. --- so I presume that their facility, but I 21 don't know this as a fact, was developed, created sometime 22 after September 2001. 23 13. Q. You are aware that until December 2005 that 24 Canada was handing over detainees to the US? 25 A. I don't know that as a fact. I understand 5 1 based on some newspaper articles several years ago that 2 there were some that were handed over but I don't know 3 whether all were. 4 14. Q. How long have you been in your position, Ms. 5 Swords? 6 A. September 2006. That's last year. 7 15. Q. What was your previous position? 8 A. I was Canada's Ambassador to the Netherlands. 9 16. Q. What is your role in your current position 10 with respect to the Canadian mission in Afghanistan? 11 A. I think that's covered in paragraph 1 of my 12 affidavit. 13 17. Q. For the foreign policy aspects of Canada's 14 defence and international security relations? 15 A. That's right. 16 18. Q. When you assumed this position, Ms. Swords, 17 would you not have become apprised of what had occurred on 18 those files for the previous years before you took over? 19 A. Not absolutely every piece of information, but 20 yes, you get general briefings. 21 19. Q. Would any part of those briefings have to do 22 with the issue of handling of detainees in Afghanistan? 23 A. Yes, some aspects did particularly with 24 respect to our relations with the Afghan Independent Human 25 Rights Committee. 6 1 20. Q. So as early as September '06 you were learning 2 about the role of the Afghan Independent Human Rights 3 Commission in connection with these detainees? 4 A. That's right. 5 21. Q. Do you recall what was your understanding at 6 the time of their role? 7 A. I recall that we were speaking with them to 8 arrange for them to be able to monitor detainees that 9 Canada transferred to the Afghan authorities. 10 22. Q. So as early as September '06 we were 11 discussing with the AIHRC to fulfil that role? 12 A. Yes. They had agreed to do that but it was 13 important to work out some of the details on 14 confidentiality and maintaining the information that was 15 provided in a confidential basis. 16 23. Q. I gather at that time there was also 17 involvement of the Afghan government to come up with that 18 agreement as well or was that just between the Human 19 Rights Commission and Canada? 20 A. I'm not aware of the involvement of the Afghan 21 government but the Afghan Independent Human Rights 22 Committee does have a role that's recognised in the Afghan 23 constitution. 24 24. Q. With respect to the Afghan Independent Human 25 Rights Commission I understand that recently the Canadian 7 1 Forces played a vital role in obtaining access for the 2 Commission to the National Directorate of Security Prison 3 in Kandahar? 4 A. I'm not sure about vital role but I know that 5 we, the Canadian government, did speak with the NDS in 6 Kandahar to ensure that there was access for the AIHRC. 7 25. Q. It's my understanding that for whatever reason 8 the Commission did not have access at that time. 9 A. I believe that's something that was said by 10 them to the newspaper. 11 26. Q. It's my understanding that that's what was 12 learned by Canada as well, that there was not access --- 13 MR. GRAHAM: Are you asking what then witness' 14 understanding is or your understanding? You keep saying 15 "it's my understanding." 16 MR. CHAMP: Yes, and then I can ask her a question 17 after that if she agrees with it. 18 MR. GRAHAM: Fair enough. I thought that was the 19 question, "Is that his understanding?" 20 MR. CHAMP: That wasn't the question. Thank you, 21 Mr. Graham. 22 BY MR. CHAMP: 23 27. Q. Ms. Swords, what does Canada know about the 24 access that the Commission had to the NDS Kandahar prison 25 until last week? 8 1 A. I've only seen an indication that they were 2 having difficulty getting access in the last couple of 3 months and that's based partly on what we learned after 4 the newspaper article. We had not heard previously, as 5 far as I can recall, that they had specific problems in 6 getting access to NDS facilities. 7 28. Q. Since that issue has arisen has the Canadian 8 government sought to verify that information? 9 A. Since that information we have spoken with the 10 Afghan government, particularly the head of the NDS 11 facility in question where there's a suggestion that 12 there's a problem of access for the AIHRC and reminded 13 them of the important role that the AIHRC plays and the 14 importance that we place on them having access to all the 15 detention facilities. 16 29. Q. It's my understanding from Colonel Noonan's 17 affidavit that NDS was suggesting there was some 18 misunderstanding over the issue of access and now they 19 were more than willing to provide access. Do you have any 20 information to that? 21 A. I'm not sure what you're referring to. I 22 think you would have to ask Colonel Noonan. 23 30. Q. I'm asking you if you have any information. 24 A. About? 25 31. Q. About the NDS saying that there was a 9 1 misunderstanding and that's why access was not provided. 2 A. I haven't seen that myself that I can recall 3 in any report, that the NDS had a misunderstanding, but 4 I'm sorry, there's many messages and I don't recall the 5 NDS misunderstanding. 6 32. Q. There are many messages coming from the AIHRC 7 and NDS at this time? 8 A. No. We don't get messages directly from the 9 NDS and the AIHRC. We get messages from Canadian 10 government officials in the field. 11 33. Q. Who are meeting with AIHRC? 12 A. That's right. 13 34. Q. Those are the messages? Canadian government 14 officials in the field are getting messages from them? 15 A. That's right. 16 35. Q. That's what I was referring to. From the 17 messages that you're getting from Canadian government 18 officials in the field, the messages are a bit 19 conflicting? 20 A. Messages on what? Sorry. 21 36. Q. The messages that we're getting from Canadian 22 officials in the field about whether the NDS is providing 23 access or not providing access, that information is 24 conflicting? 25 A. The information that I have now is that the 10 1 NDS has promised access and understands. The NDS 2 facilities in Kandahar understands the importance of it. 3 I really couldn't say what all has been going on in detail 4 in the past on the basis of the information that I 5 actually have. 6 37. Q. You can't provide the details of the 7 information you have, I understand, because of operational 8 security? 9 A. The information that I can provide is 10 contained in my affidavit. 11 38. Q. I did ask in the Notice of Examination for you 12 to produce documents regarding discussions, meetings of 13 the AIHRC or the NDS, and it's my understanding now that 14 the Attorney General is objecting to disclosure of that 15 information? 16 MR. GRAHAM: You have our position on that issue 17 which is that we have given notice to the Attorney 18 General. 19 MR. CHAMP: So there's an objection to us having 20 that documentation to review with you? 21 MR. GRAHAM: Yes. *O* 22 BY MR. CHAMP: 23 39. Q. Ms. Swords, I understand the Canadian 24 detainees may be at other NDS prisons in Afghanistan other 25 than Kandahar. Is that your understanding as well? 11 1 A. I do not have information, personal 2 information, about exactly where all the transferred 3 detainees or detainees transferred by Canada are held in 4 Afghanistan. 5 40. Q. I appreciate, Ms. Swords, you aren't in 6 Afghanistan. You're not posted there, but have you 7 received information from Canadian government officials 8 that would lead you to believe that Canadian detainees are 9 at different NDS prisons in Afghanistan? 10 A. We've asked the Afghan government to advise us 11 what the location is of the Canadian transferred detainees 12 and which ones have been released but I have not seen a 13 reply. 14 41. Q. Other than that we have no other information 15 about the location of the detainees? 16 A. I'm trying to think if there's absolutely any 17 little piece. What I've seen is that -- what I do recall 18 seeing in messages is that when Canada transfers they 19 could be transferring to the Afghan army or the Afghan 20 national police or the NDS so there are different 21 organisations within Afghanistan and different detention 22 facilities that they each maintain. 23 42. Q. In some occasions the detainees will transfer 24 between the different agencies after they're already in 25 Afghan custody? 12 1 A. I honestly don't know the exact answer to 2 that. I couldn't tell you whether they get transferred 3 further on because we have not been monitoring every 4 detainee because we've followed an approach that that's 5 something that we would like the Afghan Independent Human 6 Rights Committee to be doing. 7 43. Q. Ms. Swords, I've got a report from CBC on 8 April 29th. I'm just going to give a copy to yourself and 9 to Counsel. It's my intention to ask you a couple 10 questions about this report and whether you have any 11 information about it. The key paragraphs are just 1 to 3, 12 the first three paragraphs. The other bits are about what 13 all those people are doing in Parliament and I don't think 14 it's relevant to us right now. 15 Ms. Swords, had you heard about this information 16 that the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission had 17 visited the prison run by the National Directorate of 18 Security on Sunday? 19 A. I read this article. I did see this article 20 in the newspaper. I do note that it says that they have 21 had access two times so obviously at some point in 22 addition to this one they had access to the NDS 23 facilities. I honestly -- I don't know whether since 24 Monday a report has come in from the field reporting on 25 this. In other words, I don't know whether the AIHRC has 13 1 said "By the way, we've now had access." I would have to 2 check that. I don't know. 3 44. Q. Do you have any information about the manner 4 in which the visits are conducted by the AIHRC generally? 5 A. I do not. 6 45. Q. Do you have any information as to whether the 7 AIHRC is allowed to have private interviews with 8 detainees? 9 A. I see in this -- is it in this article? 10 46. Q. Yes, it is. 11 A. Yes. They had the sense that prisoners 12 couldn't speak freely and that two agents followed them 13 around. 14 47. Q. I'm asking you in the capacity as Assistant 15 Deputy Minister for Foreign Policy of Canada's Defence and 16 International Security Relations whether you've heard that 17 the AIHRC does or does not have private interviews 18 detainees. 19 A. I have not seen a report to that effect other 20 than what's here in the newspaper. 21 48. Q. Would that be something that the Canadian 22 government would ask the Commission to have? Would the 23 Canadian government insist that the AIHRC have private 24 interviews with detainees? 25 MR. GRAHAM: Are you asking "Will the Canadian 14 1 government do that?" or "Has it done that"? 2 BY MR. CHAMP: 3 49. Q. I'm asking has it in the past. They've been 4 in discussions with the AIHRC I understand since at least 5 September 2006. I'm wondering in those discussions since 6 September 2006 has Canada ever discussed with the 7 Commission whether they have private interviews and 8 whether Canada is advocating that they should have private 9 interviews with detainees in Afghan prisons. 10 A. I haven't see a report. I'm not in the field 11 doing the discussions. I haven't see a report indicating 12 that they have raised this issue with us that they have a 13 problem with private access. 14 50. Q. I'm asking if Canada has raised that we want 15 to know or confirm that they have having private 16 interviews. 17 A. I think that we would raise that if we've got 18 some information that there is a difficulty with them 19 having private access. 20 51. Q. Are you then saying that we would assume they 21 would have private interviews and access? Is that what 22 you're saying? 23 A. Private interviews and access are something 24 that obviously they feel is necessary. I can see that in 25 this report, and that they would like to have. 15 1 52. Q. In your position you're aware that that is 2 something that's regarded as important to confirm the 3 integrity of the information that a monitor is getting 4 from a detainee. For example the International Committee 5 for the Red Cross insists on private visits with 6 detainees. Are you aware of that? 7 MR. GRAHAM: Are you asking whether the witness 8 agrees with that proposition? 9 MR. CHAMP: I'm asking if she's aware of that. 10 MR. GRAHAM: You stated a proposition and asked 11 her whether she's aware of it. Surely the question is 12 whether she agrees with what you've just said. 13 MR. CHAMP: Sure. 14 BY MR. CHAMP: 15 53. Q. Do you agree with that, that it is an 16 important thing for monitors to have private interviews 17 with detainees to ensure the integrity of the information 18 they're receiving? 19 A. I think that it's important for monitors to be 20 able to do quite a variety of things including meeting 21 with the head of the particular facility. Obviously if 22 they were able to meet privately with prisoners they might 23 get information. That's speculative but they might get 24 information that they wouldn't get in the presence of 25 others but they might not so it's one aspect of many with 16 1 respect to how one might monitor. 2 54. Q. But it's a method that would improve the 3 quality of the information they would receive from the 4 detainee? 5 A. It might in certain circumstances. It might 6 not. It depends. 7 55. Q. You indicated that you had heard of this story 8 before and in particular we referred to the passage where 9 it says "Out of 10 requests for visits, only two have been 10 granted." Are you saying that you haven't received any 11 other information about that? 12 A. The exact numbers, that there were 10 requests 13 and only two granted, I had not seen before, no. 14 56. Q. Have you received any other information about 15 that since that time? 16 A. No, I have not. 17 57. Q. Have you inquired into whether the Commission 18 is still having difficulty getting access to prisoners? 19 A. There have been discussions. As I mentioned 20 in my affidavit -- I forget which paragraph it is now. Do 21 you remember, Sandy? 22 58. Q. Take your time. 23 A. It's in paragraph 38. 24 59. Q. Were it says that Gavin Buchan, the political 25 director at the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team, 17 1 received a verbal commitment from the local head of the 2 Afghan National Directorate of Security for access to 3 NDS's Kandahar facilities on an ongoing basis? 4 A. That's right. 5 60. Q. And that such access was in fact granted to 6 members of the PRT on April 25th, 2007? 7 A. The next line. 8 61. Q. "Canada brokered a verbal agreement between 9 the AIHRC and the NDS on future cooperation in Kandahar." 10 So you did have a bit more knowledge about that agreement? 11 A. Which? 12 62. Q. The verbal agreement between the AIHRC and the 13 NDS. Canada brokered that agreement? 14 A. I know that there were discussions between the 15 NDS and the AIHRC that Canada ensured took place to 16 resolve this issue about AIHRC indicating that they had 17 difficulties getting access to the NDS facilities. 18 63. Q. Do we know how long the AIHRC was having 19 difficulty getting access to the facilities? 20 A. I don't know. I haven't seen a report on how 21 long that --- 22 64. Q. Have we inquired into that? Do you know? 23 A. We may have but I don't know that right now. 24 I think the important point we were trying to ensure was 25 access for the future rather than just looking at the 18 1 past. 2 65. Q. I appreciate that, but of course we know that 3 in the past there are still detainees being held, correct? 4 There are people that the Canadian Forces have captured 5 and have handed over to Afghan authorities and are still 6 being held in detention? That's our understanding? 7 A. As I indicated, we've asked the Afghan 8 government to let us know which ones have been released 9 and which ones may still be in, so I don't know the answer 10 to whether or not there are any specifically still in 11 detention. 12 66. Q. Does the Government of Canada know how many of 13 the detainees that have been transferred have been charged 14 or taken to trial? 15 A. No, we don't. I do not. I don't know if 16 there's somebody else in the Government of Canada who 17 might but I do not. 18 67. Q. Are you aware if the Canadian Forces have ever 19 been contacted to provide evidence or anything like in any 20 kind of legal proceeding against detainees? 21 A. I do not have that information. Perhaps you 22 would want to address that to the Department of Defence. 23 68. Q. Ms. Swords, do you know what are the kind of 24 people that we are capturing and detaining? It's my 25 understanding that it's not simply belligerents but we 19 1 capture in fact a wide spectrum of people who we may also 2 just feel in some way might be interfering with our 3 mission? 4 A. Again that's something that you might best 5 address to the Department of Defence because they're the 6 ones who are actually doing the capturing. The difficulty 7 with using the word belligerent is that depending on the 8 nature of the engagement someone may actually be 9 committing a criminal offence. For example, acts of 10 terrorism are in our Criminal Code so it's a criminal 11 offence as well potentially as an act of belligerency in 12 certain contexts so it's very difficult to characterize 13 what kind of person is being picked up. 14 69. Q. But someone is stopped in the wrong area and 15 perhaps has a cell phone or a mirror on them, that might 16 be enough for the Canadian Forces to detain them? 17 A. I do not have information on that. 18 70. Q. What is your understanding of the kind of 19 people that Canada is detaining? What are the grounds for 20 capturing individuals? What is your understanding or your 21 department's understanding of that? 22 A. Again it would be best to speak with the 23 Department of Defence but my understanding is that they 24 are people who are considered to be a security threat 25 either to the Canadian Forces, to Canadian PRT, or to the 20 1 Afghan people. 2 71. Q. Returning to your affidavit for a moment, 3 paragraph 39 of your affidavit, we were just on that page, 4 I think. You state that the Afghan government has 5 initiated investigations concerning claims of detainee 6 mistreatment that have appeared in the Canadian media? 7 A. That's right. 8 72. Q. Do you have any details about the nature of 9 this investigation? 10 A. No, I do not at this point. The announcement 11 that they made was fairly recent. We did encourage the 12 Afghan government to investigate these allegations and 13 they have agreed that they're going to do that. We have 14 offered them assistance should they wish with respect to 15 that investigation. 16 73. Q. Do you know which branch of the government is 17 going to conduct the investigation? 18 A. No, I do not. 19 74. Q. Returning to paragraph 37, just at the top of 20 page 14 you say "There are negotiations, I understand, 21 with the Afghan government to supplement our arrangement 22 of December 18th, 2005"? 23 A. That's right. 24 75. Q. The objectives of the negotiations are to 25 clarify and make express the right of access to and 21 1 monitoring of detainees? 2 A. That's right. 3 76. Q. I note in the second point or bullet under 4 that you say "Limit the number of facilities in which 5 detainees transferred by Canada are held in order to 6 facilitate tracking of detainees and follow-up." 7 From that I understand that we do have some 8 knowledge that detainees are held in a number of different 9 facilities? 10 A. Well, the objective of that clause, again 11 that's an objective, that's not a negotiated arrangement 12 as yet, would be to ensure that in the future should we 13 wish to monitor exactly where our detainees are it would 14 be easier to get to the facilities. Recall that in the 15 Province of Kandahar the security situation is not good 16 and every time our civilian members of the PRT leave the 17 Kandahar airfield they do have to be escorted by the 18 Canadian Forces and therefore our thinking was that if we 19 could ensure that there were a limited number of 20 facilities, it would be easier for them to conduct that 21 monitoring and it would also be easier for us to try to 22 focus capacity building and mentoring and training on the 23 specific facilities that detainees transferred by Canada 24 might be ending up in. 25 77. Q. Do we have any knowledge then that there are 22 1 more facilities, that there are several facilities? 2 A. There are a number of detention facilities in 3 Afghanistan, yes. 4 78. Q. It's my understanding that the premise of this 5 point of negotiation is that there are Canadian detainees 6 in a number of different facilities. That's the premise 7 of that point of negotiation? 8 A. No. The premise is that it would be much 9 simpler for us to monitor, to the extent we are able to do 10 that, if there is a limited number of facilities. We do 11 know that the Afghan government maintains a variety of 12 different facilities, the police, the army, the NDS, and 13 since we don't know exactly where Canadian transferred 14 detainees go, it would make sense it seems to in the 15 future try to limit the facilities that they might end up 16 in. 17 79. Q. Ms. Swords, I'm asking you does that mean that 18 in the past it was the Canadian government's understanding 19 that they were held in a number of different facilities? 20 A. As I said, we don't know exactly what 21 facilities they've been held in. 22 80. Q. We're just assuming then? 23 A. We know there are a number of facilities. As 24 I understand, but this again should be checked with the 25 Department of Defence, we have handed over to the army, to 23 1 the police, and to the NDS so it would logically be that 2 they might start out in one of their facilities as opposed 3 to another but I do not have personal information on that. 4 81. Q. And your department doesn't have any 5 information on that? 6 A. Since we have just asked the Afghan government 7 to inform us which detainees have been released and where 8 the others are, to get complete information we would need 9 that response. 10 82. Q. On the third point there you say "A 11 negotiating point is that we would like notification of 12 release, legal proceedings, or other change in 13 circumstances of detainees transferred by Canada" --- 14 A. That's right. 15 83. Q. --- because from what I understand in your 16 testimony, we have no idea about legal proceedings at this 17 stage, if any have taken place? 18 A. That's correct. I do not. You say "we." I 19 do not. 20 84. Q. The department does not? 21 A. I have not seen any reports with respect to 22 legal proceedings against detainees transferred by Canada. 23 85. Q. In your position if there were such reports 24 they would likely pass your desk at some point? 25 A. That's a very good question. I hope they 24 1 would but I couldn't guarantee they would. 2 86. Q. I understand. You say "change in 3 circumstances." What are you referring to there? We've 4 got release, legal proceedings and I gather assumed is 5 continued detention. What does change in circumstances 6 mean? 7 A. It could be possible that someone might 8 actually be transferred to some administrative agency or 9 body that we're not familiar with. It could be that the 10 person is actually from a different country, for example 11 Pakistan. It's possible that we would have information, 12 they would tell us that they were deported back to 13 Pakistan. I think that's the kind of general unknown 14 circumstance that we're trying to get at so we have an 15 idea of whether or not a particular detainee we've 16 transferred is still someone where in the country in a 17 detention facility. 18 87. Q. Or whether they've been perhaps transferred to 19 another country? 20 A. That would be, I think, a change in 21 circumstance although we might want to actually ask that 22 if that happened that they were transferred to another 23 country, that they also informed us of that. 24 88. Q. Or that is a detainee died, would that be a 25 change in circumstances that Canada would want to be 25 1 notified about? 2 A. I think that a death would be something we 3 would want to be notified of because again the idea is for 4 us to know which detainees are still in detention 5 facilities that we may wish to continue monitoring and if 6 a person has died then they're not in the detention 7 facility. 8 89. Q. And they're not released, not legal 9 proceedings, died in custody. I see then in the fourth 10 point enhanced ability of the AIHRC to monitor including 11 private access to Canada transferred detainees. In fact 12 that was an objective of the Canadian government after 13 all? 14 A. That is something that we have indicated to 15 the Afghan government that we would like to negotiate 16 based on the information we've received in this article 17 that they have made a complaint that they don't have that 18 private access. 19 90. Q. Ms. Swords, I want to show you a document from 20 the Motion Record, Volume I, of the Applicants. There's 21 an affidavit in there. 22 MR. GRAHAM: Sorry, which affidavit are you 23 referring to? 24 MR. CHAMP: Applicants' Motion Record, Volume I of 25 III, the Supplementary Affidavit of Alex Neve. 26 1 MR. GRAHAM: This is the one sworn April 26th, 2 2007? 3 MR. CHAMP: That's right. 4 BY MR. CHAMP: 5 91. Q. At Exhibit A of that affidavit, Ms. Swords, is 6 a newspaper article about Canada losing track of Afghan 7 detainees. It concerns the National Investigation Service 8 investigation into the three detainees who it was alleged 9 may have been abused by Canadian soldiers and it's my 10 understanding from this article the NIS was trying to find 11 these individuals and they were unable to do so. 12 MR. GRAHAM: What's the relevance of this line of 13 questioning, Counsel? 14 MR. CHAMP: I'm seeking to confirm if Ms. Swords 15 is aware if these detainees have been found. 16 MR. GRAHAM: These detainees have nothing to do 17 with this case though. This case is about the transfer of 18 detainees from the Canadian Forces to the Government of 19 Afghanistan. This case is not about allegations of abuse 20 of detainees by Canadians. 21 MR. CHAMP: I'm not going to ask any questions 22 whatsoever about allegations of abuse of detainees by 23 Canadian soldiers. The issue that I want to ask is about 24 where these detainees may be now. It's my understanding 25 from the article that these detainees were transferred to 27 1 Afghan custody and now they have disappeared in Afghan 2 custody and that's what I want to ask because that is very 3 much a relevant issue. If there's Canadian detainees who 4 have gone missing in Afghan custody, that is a relevant 5 issue to these proceedings. 6 MR. GRAHAM: Fair enough. 7 BY MR. CHAMP: 8 92. Q. Ms. Swords, you're aware of this issue that 9 some detainees or Canadian detainees were transferred to 10 Afghan custody, Canadian military investigators are trying 11 to get access to them to ask them some questions but the 12 Afghan authorities are unable to say where they are? 13 A. I do not have any information on this other 14 than what's in the newspaper article. The actual 15 investigation is something that's being done by the NIS of 16 the Department of Defence. I don't think that 17 investigation is completed and I don't have any other 18 information. 19 93. Q. So your department doesn't have any 20 information about these three detainees going missing in 21 Afghan custody? 22 A. I have not seen any other information on that 23 other than what's been reported publicly in the 24 newspapers. 25 94. Q. Ms. Swords, are you ever involved in drafting 28 1 or preparing briefing notes or talking points for 2 ministers? 3 A. Involved, yes. Usually they're prepared by 4 other officers and then reviewed by people more senior. 5 95. Q. Like people in your position? 6 A. That's right. I don't see them all though. 7 I'm not always in Ottawa but I do see some. 8 96. Q. Have you ever seen talking points for the 9 Minister of Foreign Affairs concerning this issue of the 10 missing detainees? 11 A. I do not recall seeing any, not talking 12 points. 13 97. Q. Briefing notes? People change what they're 14 called. Sometimes they're QP talking points. Other times 15 you get briefing notes. 16 A. I believe there has been information provided 17 but I don't know exactly to which level in the department 18 right now about all of the litigation that's going on and 19 to the extent this is one piece of that litigation, not 20 litigation but one piece of the legal proceedings that are 21 going on, that would likely be part of it but that would 22 just be information of the minister since these are, what 23 you're referring to as an investigation being conducted by 24 the Department of Defence. He would not have talking 25 points on that per se normally. It's an issue for them. 29 1 MR. CHAMP: Would this be a good time to take a 2 break? 3 MR. GRAHAM: If you don't mind. 4 (SHORT RECESS) 5 BY MR. CHAMP: 6 98. Q. Ms. Swords, continuing with my questions about 7 this Affidavit of Mr. Neve, at Exhibit B there is another 8 newspaper article and this is talking about a fourth 9 detainee who went missing or had vanished. This detainee 10 does not have anything to do with the MPCC investigations 11 or the criminal investigation of the National 12 Investigation Service. 13 MR. GRAHAM: Where do we see that? 14 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure -- B? 15 MR. GRAHAM: What we have at B seems to be the 16 second page of an article. 17 MR. CHAMP: Exhibit B? 18 MR. GRAHAM: Exhibit B, tab B. 19 MR. CHAMP: Tab B. 20 THE WITNESS: It's not the same, I don't think, as 21 what you're looking at. 22 MR. GRAHAM: It says "O'Connor calls process 23 fair." We don't have the first page of that article in 24 this copy. 25 MR. CHAMP: Do you have your motion record? 30 1 MR. GRAHAM: We just have the supplement to the 2 affidavit. Is the record there? 3 MR. CHAMP: Motion record, Volume I. What you 4 have there is the second page of the same story. 5 MR. GRAHAM: Thursday, March 15th. 6 MR. CHAMP: Yes. As you'll see there, it's 7 "Detainees from page A1". 8 MR. GRAHAM: Right. We don't have the first page, 9 though. 10 MR. CHAMP: I'm asking do you have Volume I of the 11 Applicant's motion record? 12 MR. GRAHAM: No. It would be the supplementary 13 affidavit. Counsel, I haven't seen your record before but 14 what we have here is the Notice of Application followed by 15 the Notice of Motion. Then we have the Byers Affidavit, 16 the Mollard Affidavit, the Neve Affidavit of February 27th 17 and Hameed Affidavit of March 7th. That takes up Volumes 18 IV to X and the Supplementary, at least according to the 19 index, doesn't seem to be in there. Are we overlooking 20 something? 21 MR. CHAMP: You do have it. It's been served on 22 you and confirmed by the service with the court. 23 MR. GRAHAM: Fair enough. It just doesn't seem to 24 be part of this record. 25 MR. CHAMP: I'm trying to figure out an 31 1 expeditious way to resolve this issue. 2 MR. GRAHAM: Sure. If you've got another copy or 3 if you want to make a copy of the page. 4 BY MR. CHAMP: 5 99. Q. Well, Ms. Swords, I'll just ask you a few 6 questions and if we have problems we can stop. First of 7 all, you obviously have been following this issue of 8 detainee handling quite closely? 9 A. Yes. 10 100. Q. That's part of your role in your position? 11 A. Part. I have many other aspects to my role, 12 yes. 13 101. Q. I'm sure you have. There was information that 14 had come out in the middle of March about a fourth 15 Canadian detainee who had gone missing. The details that 16 were reported were as follows, 17 "A Taliban fighter captured by Canadians last 18 summer went missing within hours and placed in Afghan 19 custody. During and after a frenzied battle in the 20 Panjwai District", that's P-A-N-J-W-A-I --- 21 MR. GRAHAM: For the Record, Counsel, you're 22 reading from page 1 of the Globe and Mail? 23 MR. CHAMP: Yes. 24 MR. GRAHAM: March 15th is it? 25 MR. CHAMP: That's right. 32 1 BY MR. CHAMP: 2 102. Q. --- "of Kandahar province that left one young 3 Canadian dead and three others wounded. Canadian soldiers 4 claim six prisoners the documents show. One of the men 5 captured was sent by helicopter to military hospital. 6 Four others were also transported to the air base where 7 they were given medical clearance and turned over to 8 Afghan authorities as required under the 2005 deal but one 9 man never arrived at the base because he vanished near the 10 battle scene after Canadian troops handed him to members 11 of the Afghan National Army. Members of the 12 Edmonton-based Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry 13 battle group who had just taken part in what was described 14 as the fiercest fighting by Canadian troops in more than 15 four decades transferred him and two others to the local 16 force after they were captured during the battle. Hours 17 later, 'the ANA had lost contact with one of the 18 detainees', a Canadian military captain says in a 19 situation report included in documents obtained under 20 Access to Information." 21 I'm just wondering, have you heard of that 22 incident before, Ms. Swords? 23 A. I do not recall seeing anything in our 24 department reporting on that incident nor do I recall that 25 particular article. I see it's the Globe and Mail 33 1 March 15th but I don't recall the article. 2 103. Q. So you have no information on it? 3 A. No, I do not. 4 104. Q. In the same affidavit I'll take you to 5 Exhibit L. 6 MR. GRAHAM: The affidavit of Alex Neve? 7 MR. CHAMP: Of Alex Neve, yes. 8 THE WITNESS: Sorry. I'm looking in mine. 9 BY MR. CHAMP: 10 105. Q. Exhibit L is a story from the Globe and Mail 11 entitled, "What Ottawa doesn't want you to know". It was 12 published April 25th, 2007 and it's about a report by your 13 department regarding the human rights situation in 14 Afghanistan. Are you familiar with this newspaper 15 article? 16 A. I am. 17 106. Q. Are you familiar with the report that it is 18 speaking about? 19 A. I am familiar with it. I have not read it 20 from beginning to end. These reports are prepared for -- 21 prepared by the section that handles human rights 22 generally within the department and that does not fall 23 under my area of responsibility. 24 107. Q. When did you become familiar with the report? 25 A. When the newspaper article came out I asked to 34 1 see a copy of the report. 2 108. Q. Prior to the publication of this newspaper 3 article you were aware that the Department of Foreign 4 Affairs did have such country reports regarding human 5 rights? 6 A. Yes. We've -- we've prepared reports on not 7 all countries in the world but a number of countries for a 8 few years. It originated with the desire to have 9 information for the Commission on Human Rights, now the 10 Human Rights Council where they sometimes have resolutions 11 on countries' situation and we thought it would be useful 12 to produce reports that could feed into that, for example. 13 That was the origin of these reports. 14 109. Q. Why did you never ask to see a copy of that 15 report before April 25th, 2007? 16 A. I did ask to see a copy of the report back in 17 December, all the reports for the last few years and 18 unfortunately the Officer that I asked wasn't able to find 19 them quickly and we then moved on and did some other -- we 20 were working on some other things. 21 110. Q. But you now have had an opportunity to read 22 the report? 23 A. I've read the report very quickly, focusing on 24 the parts that relate to detentions. There's a number of 25 other things in them about how judges are picked and 35 1 indications of progress that's being made in some areas of 2 their human rights activities. 3 111. Q. You read the passage about "extraditial 4 executions, disappearances, torture and detention without 5 trial are all too common"? 6 A. Could I speak with Counsel for a minute? 7 MR. GRAHAM: Counsel, we're going to object to 8 this line of questioning. We objected to production of 9 that document. That's the first one you've asked for and 10 we're objecting on the same basis to questioning going to 11 that document. *O* 12 MR. CHAMP: Are you saying that she's not going to 13 confirm or deny whether that's in the report? 14 MR. GRAHAM: Yes. I'm objecting to that line of 15 questioning. 16 MR. CHAMP: Objection noted. 17 BY MR. CHAMP: 18 112. Q. Ms. Swords, did you have an opportunity to 19 review any of the other reports from 2002 to 2005? 20 A. Yes. I looked at them very quickly. They -- 21 each one is 20, 30 pages long approximately and covers a 22 huge range of -- of issues, as I said, you know relating 23 to some of the institutions, independence of the 24 judiciary, gender-related issues, they're quite lengthy. 25 113. Q. When you read the 2006 report, did what you 36 1 read cause you any concern about detainees in Afghan 2 prisons? 3 A. Well, obviously allegations that -- that there 4 are torture and abuse causes concern. These are general 5 allegations. There's no indication of basis for them. 6 There's no indication of basis for any of the -- of what's 7 in the report so it's -- it's difficult to tell whether 8 these need to be investigated as a question of -- we've 9 talked to the Afghan government about the importance of 10 abiding by their human rights and that's the sort of thing 11 we do with governments. When we see reports related to 12 areas of difficulty we speak with the government in the 13 first instance because it's their responsibility and they 14 who we want to be sure they can improve their human rights 15 procedures and activities. 16 114. Q. But you'd agree with me that Afghanistan is a 17 developing country? 18 A. Yes. Afghanistan, I think, under the Human 19 Development Index comes in at 173 out of 178 or something 20 and other reports they say they're the seventh poorest 21 country in the world. 22 115. Q. I've heard the same thing. You would agree 23 with me that there are patterns of torture in a number of 24 countries in the world? 25 MR. GRAHAM: How is that relevant? 37 1 THE WITNESS: That's a very general statement, 2 yeah. 3 MR. GRAHAM: How is that relevant to this 4 litigation? Don't answer. *O* 5 MR. CHAMP: I believe it is relevant. I think the 6 Department is aware that there are patterns of torture in 7 other countries. 8 MR. GRAHAM: The only questions that are relevant 9 is with the situation in Afghanistan. 10 MR. CHAMP: The government's knowledge and how it 11 acts or conducts itself with respect to other countries 12 where there are patterns and similar reports of torture 13 are relevant, Mr. Graham. Are you going to maintain your 14 objection? 15 MR. GRAHAM: Yes. 16 MR. CHAMP: I prefer that you don't communicate 17 with counsel while you're being examined. Can I see the 18 note that she wrote to you? 19 MR. GRAHAM: No. 20 MR. CHAMP: I insist on seeing that note, 21 Mr. Graham. 22 MR. CHAMP: 23 116. Q. Ms. Swords, could I ask you just to move a 24 little bit further away from Counsel during the 25 examination? 38 1 A. Certainly. 2 117. Q. Thank you. Ms. Swords, are you denying that 3 there are reports of widespread torture and abuse in 4 Afghan custody? 5 A. I'm not sure about the "widespread" aspect of 6 it. I believe the State Department Human Rights Report on 7 Afghanistan has some indications of -- of mistreatment and 8 abuses. Again, generally -- general statements. 9 118. Q. The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission 10 in a similar report has said that, "Torture and detention 11 is routine"? 12 A. Sorry. I have not seen or I have not read the 13 Afghan Independent Human Rights Annual Report. 14 119. Q. An independent expert with the UN Human Rights 15 Commission investigated human rights conditions in Afghan 16 custody and concluded that there was torture throughout 17 Afghan prisons. Have you had an opportunity to ever read 18 that report? 19 A. No, I have not read that report. Who is the 20 expert? 21 120. Q. I have that name for you if you haven't 22 reviewed it yet. Louise Arbour, former Supreme Court of 23 Canada judge. You're familiar with her, Ms. Swords? 24 A. Yes. I know she was a former -- she's 25 currently the Commissioner on Human Rights for the UN. 39 1 121. Q. That's right. She's the High Commissioner for 2 Human Rights. You're aware that she issued a report in 3 March of 2006 that said that, "torture in Afghan custody 4 is common"? 5 A. I haven't seen that report. 6 122. Q. You've been involved in the detainee file 7 since September 2006? 8 A. Since September 2006 in my current job, yes. 9 123. Q. You're aware of when this litigation 10 commenced, on February 21, 2007? You're aware of that? 11 A. I know litigation was commenced. I don't 12 remember the exact date. 13 124. Q. You're aware it was commenced in February, a 14 couple of months ago? You're aware of that, Ms. Swords? 15 A. I'm sorry. I'm not sure exactly when it 16 commenced. 17 125. Q. You're not sure? 18 A. I know that there was litigation commenced. 19 Exactly when I don't know. 20 126. Q. Have you been involved at all in assisting in 21 providing information to people working on the litigation? 22 A. Well, I've sworn this affidavit. 23 127. Q. I've seen that. Yes. Have you been providing 24 assistance up until now? 25 A. What do you mean by "assistance"? 40 1 128. Q. Have you been involved in collecting 2 information and so forth? 3 A. Me personally? No. But people under my -- in 4 my branch have been assisting and providing information. 5 129. Q. The Affidavit of Yavar Hameed, have you ever 6 had an opportunity to see that before? 7 A. No, I haven't seen it. 8 MR. CHAMP: Counsel, can you provide Ms. Swords 9 with Volume 5 of Mr. Hameed's affidavit. 10 MR. GRAHAM: Volume 5 is -- 11 MR. CHAMP: Exhibit ZZ. 12 MR. GRAHAM: It's tab 10 of the Record and 13 Exhibit ZZ. 14 MR. CHAMP: 15 130. Q. This is a report by Madam Arbour. You haven't 16 seen this report ever before? 17 A. No, I haven't. 18 131. Q. Have you ever heard about it? 19 A. I'm trying to think of all the things that one 20 hears about. I don't -- I don't know if I've heard that 21 there might have been a statement by Louise Arbour or not. 22 I have not heard about this particular report. 23 132. Q. Who in the Department of Foreign Affairs 24 monitors such things? 25 A. Well, normally matters relating specifically 41 1 to human rights are handled in the Global Affairs Branch. 2 133. Q. Do you ever get -- 3 A. That's around the world. 4 134. Q. Do you ever get reports from the Global 5 Affairs Branch is there is any information they learn 6 that's relevant to files that you work on? 7 A. We could occasionally. I can't recall 8 specifically receiving something on Afghanistan from them. 9 135. Q. Ms. Swords, is it fair to say that you are the 10 most senior official dealing with the detainee handling 11 issue at Foreign Affairs? 12 A. No. 13 136. Q. Who is the senior official most responsible 14 for managing this issue for Foreign Affairs? 15 A. Well, overall we have a Deputy Minister who is 16 responsible for all the activities of the Department. We 17 also have an Associate Deputy Minister who is responsible 18 for all things related to Afghanistan and detainees is one 19 -- is one part of the entire Afghanistan file. 20 137. Q. Who is the Assistant Deputy Minister who would 21 be responsible? Would that be yourself? 22 A. I am responsible for the aspects that relate 23 to our capacity building in the country because we have 24 some projects that relate to this and other aspects of 25 stabilization and reconstruction and I'm responsible for 42 1 NATO policy and in that context detainee policy has been 2 -- been an area where we have tried to do some capacity 3 building projects so that falls under my area and NATO 4 policy falls under my area. Human rights generally around 5 the world does not. 6 138. Q. You testified before the Parliamentary 7 Standing Committee for Defence in December of 2006 --- 8 A. That's correct. 9 139. Q. --- on the issue of handling detention 10 detainees, correct? 11 A. That's correct. 12 140. Q. You're the only person from Foreign Affairs 13 who testified at that committee? 14 A. I believe so, yes. No. Well, I believe... 15 141. Q. There was Mr. Rigby from National Defence 16 testified. 17 A. No, but I believe Sabine Nolke who is one of 18 the counsel in the department gave some testimony as well. 19 142. Q. You said that you've been involved with NATO 20 detainee policy? 21 A. That's right. 22 143. Q. In your Affidavit you do say that NATO has 23 been discussing options with respect to detainee handling? 24 A. Well, our Minister has raised the issue with 25 NATO and with some of our partners in the south. 43 1 144. Q. In paragraph 40 of your affidavit --- 2 A. I don't seem to have my affidavit any more. 3 145. Q. In paragraph 40, the last sentence you say, 4 "Canada will continue to discuss options with cooperation 5 from NATO and ISAF partners including monitoring". 6 A. Right. 7 146. Q. That's to do with detainees? 8 A. That's right. 9 147. Q. What are some of the options that NATO are 10 discussing? Are building detention facilities one of 11 those options? 12 A. There has been some discussions about whether 13 one could create not a NATO-wide facility but perhaps a 14 wing of an existing Afghan authority detention facility 15 where detainees transferred by some of the NATO allies 16 might be kept. Recall that many of the NATO allies who 17 are in Afghanistan are in the north and west where there 18 is less of a security problem and it isn't clear whether 19 there actually is a problem or are any numbers of 20 detainees elsewhere so not all of the NATO allies have the 21 same -- have the same issues with respect to detainees as 22 those who are located in the south and east. 23 148. Q. It's my understanding that there is some NATO 24 or ISAF policy about transferring detainees within 96 25 hours? 44 1 A. I think I refer to that in my affidavit. I 2 don't remember the paragraph but it has been referred to 3 probably in Canada by one of the NATO spokesmen. I think 4 it's paragraph 33 and he refers to -- to that. It's in -- 5 Exhibit U is what he has to say. 6 149. Q. I think it's at page 177. 7 A. And 176 in my document. 8 150. Q. Okay. So you're quite familiar with it. All 9 right. 10 A. It's a question of how long the ISAF partners 11 would hold a detainee before transferring. This NATO 12 policy is to transfer detainees to the Afghan authorities. 13 That's consistent with the nature of the mission which is 14 there to help the Afghan government. 15 151. Q. Is ISAF policy binding on Canada? 16 MR. GRAHAM: We object to that question. It's one 17 of the documents you've asked for in your request, your 18 Direction to Attend, and we object to any questions on 19 that aspect. *O* 20 MR. CHAMP: Colonel Noonan has testified that, 21 saying that the ISAF policy is binding so I would say -- 22 MR. GRAHAM: Well then why didn't you ask the 23 question to Colonel Noonan? 24 MR. CHAMP: Because I'm asking Ms. Swords because 25 she's another one of your affiants for the same party. 45 1 MR. GRAHAM: Can you point out where -- 2 THE WITNESS: I'm not a party. 3 MR. CHAMP: Yes, I can. 4 MR. GRAHAM: Colonel Noonan deals with that issue? 5 MR. CHAMP: Paragraph 45 of Colonel Noonan's 6 Affidavit he says that, "We are bound by ISAF policy". 7 Noonan is N-O-O-N-A-N. 8 MR. GRAHAM: You're asking this witness whether 9 she agrees with that? 10 MR. CHAMP: Well, she's already testified that she 11 is the person responsible for dealing with NATO on 12 detainee policy so yes, I am asking her if she agrees with 13 that. 14 MR. GRAHAM: Okay. That's a fair question. 15 BY MR. CHAMP: 16 152. Q. Are we bound by ISAF policies? 17 A. Well, we are part of the ISAF force and just 18 recall that ISAF includes countries other than the NATO 19 countries so it's more than just NATO. We're working 20 together with all the other members of ISAF so we would 21 want to follow the policy. Is it something that's as 22 binding as legislation? That's -- I can't answer that but 23 if we want to work together within the context of ISAF we 24 would want to follow the policies. 25 153. Q. I'm going into another issue now. There have 46 1 been recent reports of Correctional Services Canada 2 officers hearing allegations of abuse. You heard about 3 that story? 4 A. I believe that was stated in the House by --- 5 154. Q. Minister Day? 6 A. --- by Minister Day. 7 155. Q. Do you have any other knowledge of it other 8 than Minister Day's statement? 9 A. I have seen -- I have seen the report, yes. I 10 believe that's one of the -- one of the documents that 11 you've asked to be produced today. 12 156. Q. When did you first see that report? 13 MR. GRAHAM: Objecting to further questions on 14 this. *O* 15 MR. CHAMP: I'm not asking for the document. I'm 16 just asking if she saw it. I'm not asking about contents. 17 MR. GRAHAM: I object. 18 MR. CHAMP: It's a separate issue. 19 MR. GRAHAM: I object. 20 MR. CHAMP: Sandy, it's a separate issue. 21 MR. GRAHAM: I am objecting to the question. 22 BY MR. CHAMP: 23 157. Q. Ms. Swords, are you aware if the individuals 24 who the CSC officers interviewed were formerly Canadian 25 detainees? 47 1 A. No, I am not aware. 2 158. Q. Are you aware one way or the other? 3 A. No, I don't -- I'm not aware one way or the 4 other. 5 MR. CHAMP: Just give me a moment. Actually, 6 could I just have two minutes? 7 MR. GRAHAM: Sure. 8 MR. CHAMP: I think I might be done. 9 (SHORT RECESS) 10 BY MR. CHAMP: 11 159. Q. Ms. Swords, I'm handing you a document I 12 believe is an excerpt from 2004 or 2005, Department of 13 Foreign Affairs report on "Good Governance, Democratic 14 Development and Human Rights in Afghanistan." I believe 15 you confirmed earlier that you had read this report? 16 A. This is the 2005 report. As I indicated, I 17 skimmed the previous reports. 18 160. Q. Does this look consistent with what you had 19 skimmed? 20 A. I'm sorry. I don't have that -- the actual 21 document so I -- I think it's consistent but I couldn't 22 swear to that. Yes, I notice it's just the first two 23 pages. Well, it seems to be page 1 and page 6 and as I 24 recall all of the human rights reports were, you know, I 25 don't remember the exact number but around 20 pages long 48 1 and this is just -- this is two pages. 2 161. Q. But I see the third sentence of this report 3 says "Extraditional executions, disappearances, torture 4 and detention without trial are all too common." I had 5 thought that would be a very important phrase or a 6 sentence that would stand out to you. 7 A. Well, I notice in the document that it's 8 highlighted and it says, "Section 15, 1" in the bracket 9 which to me indicates that we may have concerns about this 10 being injurious to international relations. 11 MR. GRAHAM: That's what it appears to me as well, 12 Counsel, and I would object to any questions on that 13 basis. *O* 14 MR. CHAMP: Okay, I'll just ask it be an exhibit 15 to her cross-examination, Exhibit A. 16 MR. GRAHAM: I don't think it's appropriate to 17 make it an exhibit. It seems to be an excerpt of a much 18 larger document. We don't have that document here and we 19 can't speak about it because of the objection I've just 20 made. In my submission it should not be. *O* 21 MR. CHAMP: I'm asking it be added as an exhibit 22 and that's an objection that we can address with the judge 23 tomorrow. 24 MR. GRAHAM: All right. We can deal with that 25 tomorrow then. 49 1 MR. CHAMP: Thanks. Just call it Exhibit 1, 2 subject to objection. 3 EXHIBIT NO. 1: "Good Governance, Democratic 4 Development and Human Rights in Afghanistan" 5 Report by Foreign Affairs, 2005. 6 MR. CHAMP: Those are all the questions I have for 7 Ms. Swords. 8 --- THE EXAMINATION ADJOURNED AT THE HOUR OF 2:33 IN THE 9 AFTERNOON. 10 11 WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT the foregoing was 12 transcribed to the best of our skill and ability, 13 from taped and monitored proceedings. 14 15 ................................................ 16 G R S / B L / S P 1 Examination No. 07-0465.1 Court File No. T-324-07 2 3 FEDERAL COURT 4 B E T W E E N: 5 AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL CANADA and 6 BRITISH COLUMBIA CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION 7 8 Applicants 9 10 - and - 11 12 13 CHIEF OF THE DEFENCE STAFF 14 FOR THE CANADIAN FORCES, 15 MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENCE 16 and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA 17 18 Respondents 19 20 21 ********************** 22 CROSS-EXAMINATION OF COLLEEN SWORDS ON AFFIDAVIT sworn May 23 1, 2007, pursuant to an appointment made on consent of the 24 parties, to be reported by Gillespie Reporting Services, on 25 May 2, 2007, commencing at the hour of 1:10 in the 26 afternoon. 27 *********************** 28 29 APPEARANCES: 30 Paul Champ, for the Applicants 31 J. Sanderson Graham, for the Respondents 32 This Examination was monitored by Gillespie Reporting Services at 33 Ottawa, Ontario, having been duly appointed for the purpose. 1 (i) 2 3 INDEX 4 5 6 NAME OF WITNESS: COLLEEN SWORDS 7 8 EXAMINATION BY: MR. CHAMP 9 10 NUMBER OF PAGES: 2 THROUGH 49 INCLUSIVE 11 12 13 14 15 ADVISEMENTS, OBJECTIONS & UNDERTAKINGS 16 17 18 *O* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 10, 35, 37, 44, 46, 48 19 20 21 22 23 EXHIBITS 24 25 26 EXHIBIT NO. 1: "Good Governance, Democratic Development and 27 Human Rights in Afghanistan" Report by Foreign 28 Affairs, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DATE TRANSCRIPT ORDERED: 02 MAY 2007 48 49 DATE TRANSCRIPT COMPLETED: 02 MAY 2007 50 51