Hearing on whether to dismiss terrorism charges will resume Wednesday

Article content

The judge determining whether terrorism charges against a Calgary man should be dismissed due to unreasonable delay has not yet heard all the arguments.

Judge Corina Dario heard extensive arguments for a second day Tuesday on whether Jamal Borhot’s right to a speedy trial had been violated, but at 5 p.m. she determined that more arguments would be needed Wednesday.

Article content

Article content

Borhot, 34, faces three counts of participating in the activities of a terrorist group. He allegedly went to Syria to help ISIS more than a decade ago.

According to court documents, Borhot is accused of traveling to Syria with his cousin, Hussein Borhot, in May 2013, after flying to Turkey from Calgary.

They were then met by others waiting for them in Syria and taken to training camps in preparation for fighting.

The cousins ​​eventually split up to continue their fight without each other, with the Islamic State, documents detailing RCMP allegations against them say.

An expert examination of Jamal Borhot’s Facebook records, examining nearly 5,000 posts, concluded that in 2014, he had clearly fought in Syria, around the city of Aleppo, in support of the Islamic State.

In some exchanges, Borhot indicated that he was in the land of jihad and that it was fun. “We played Call of Duty live,” the allegations suggested.

Borhot indicated that he had reached Syria on foot from the Turkish border and, although he thought it would be difficult, it was easy.

Article content

Defense attorney Pawel Milczarek wants Judge Corina Dario to rule on Borhot’s right to be tried within a reasonable time, arguing that the 44 months and eight days that will have passed between his arrest in September 2020 and the end of his trial on May 31, far exceeds the standard set by the Supreme Court in the Jordan case.

But Crown prosecutors Dominic Puglia and Kyra Kondro, in written submissions to the court, suggest the vast majority of that period falls on the defense.

In the Jordan case, the Supreme Court concluded that a delay of more than 30 months would be considered excessive, except for delay caused by the defense or in exceptional circumstances.

In his oral submissions, Milczarek suggested that the delay was not a result of the complexity of the case and that Darío should consider that his client’s rights were violated and that his charges should be judicially stayed.

He said the complexities cited by the Crown in terrorism cases “are a red herring” that the court should dismiss.

But Puglia responded that not only was it a complex case, but that was why Darío did not even have to consider the 30-month limit as applicable.

Borhot’s cousin previously pleaded guilty and received a 12-year sentence in May 2022, after admitting that he had become an ISIS fighter.

The defendant remains free on bail pending an outcome of the case.

[email protected]

X: @KMartinCourts

Article content