But aside from these publicly available comments and views, the person who may know Omar and his family best would be his defence counsel, who in front of this very subcommittee offered condemnation of Maha and Zaynab Khadr.

The use of the double criminality check is justified under the Framework Decision as it merely requires States to "take into account" convictions handed down in another Member State to the same extent as previous national convictions and that "equivalent legal effects are attached to them".

According to the Convention, the sentencing State may request another Contracting State to enforce a sentence only if one or more of the conditions set out in Article 5 are fulfilled, namely: (a) if the sentenced person is ordinarily resident in the other State; (b) if the enforcement of the sentence in the other State is likely to improve the prospects for the social rehabilitation of the sentenced person; (c) if, in the case of a sentence involving deprivation of liberty, the sentence could be enforced following the enforcement of another sentence involving deprivation of liberty which the sentenced person is undergoing or is to unde ...[+++]rgo in the other State; (d) if the other State is the State of origin of the sentenced person and has declared itself willing to accept responsibility for the enforcement of that sentence; or (e) if it considers that it cannot itself enforce the sentence, even by having recourse to extradition, and that the other State can. In addition, the judgment handed down in the requesting State must be final and enforceable and the offence in respect of which the sentence has been passed must also constitute an offence under the law of the requested State ("double criminality" requirement [76]).

The transfer of enforcement of a sentence needs the agreement of the sentencing State and the administering State and may take place only if it satisfies all the conditions set out in Article 5 of the Convention, namely: (a) the judgment is final and enforceable; (b) the acts or omissions on account of which the sentence has been imposed constitute one of the offences referred to in Article 1(1)(a) according to the law of the administering State or would constitute such an offence if committed in its territory ("dual criminality"); (c) under the laws of the sentencing State or the administering State, the enforcement is not barred by t ...[+++]ime limitations; (d) final judgment against the sentenced person in respect of the same acts has not been delivered in the administering State; and (e) when a final judgment against the sentenced person in respect of the same acts has been delivered in a third State, the transfer of enforcement would not run counter to the principle of prohibiting double jeopardy.

- 2 - Although the decision went against Greece in both cases and although fresh infringement proceedings have been instituted, with the Commission having already issued a reasoned opinion on 22 January 1990, the Greek authorities have so far failed to amend the legislation at issue.

May I remind this House that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects individuals against double convictions.