Khadr案这次能派上用场----对我们有帮助:
The Federal Court of Appeal also pointed out [in Amnesty International Canada v. Canada (Canadian Forces), [2008] F.C.J. No. 356, 2008 FC 336 (F.C.), affd [2008] F.C.J. No. 1700, 2008 FCA 401 (F.C.A.), leave to appeal refused [2009] S.C.C.A. No. 63 (S.C.C.) that the disclosure order granted by the Supreme Court in Khadr :"remained territorial", in that it only encompassed Canadian documents.45 It characterized Khadr as “a case where a Canadian citizen obtained disclosure of documents held in Canada and produced by Canadian officials for a breach of his rights under section 7 of the Charter by Canadian officials participating in a foreign process that violated Canada‟s international human rights obligations.”46 According to the Court of Appeal, the factual underpinning of Khadr was “miles apart” from the situation in Amnesty, where “foreigners, with no attachment whatsoever to Canada or its laws, are held in CF detention facilities in Afghanistan”.47
In contrast, (a) the actors are Canadian, acting with respect to a totally Canadian issue; i.e., there is no foreign involvement; and (b) the files-at-issue, where held in a Canadian embassy or high commission, are, under international law, on Canadian territory. (Consulates are not treated under international law as being the territory of the country whose consulate it is.)