Skip to main content
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning speaks with reporters, after arriving at the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Va., May 16, 2019.

Cliff Owen/The Associated Press

Chelsea Manning, who was convicted of espionage and theft for supplying WikiLeaks with thousands of U.S. government documents, has told a federal tribunal she should be allowed into Canada because her only crime was to make principled disclosures.

“Now, people take it for granted the disaster of Iraq and Afghanistan,” Ms. Manning told Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) on Thursday.

Testifying via video from her home in the United States, she said the world would not know as much about calamities caused by these U.S.-led military interventions except for her past decisions to release massive amounts of classified material.

Story continues below advertisement

Canada aims to block Chelsea Manning from entering country

“The war on terror was being sold to different places and it was a broad, encompassing effort involving every country you could think of,” Ms. Manning told the IRB. “I wanted to show how the sausage was made – how these discussions were happening.”

Ms. Manning was turned away at the Canada-U.S. border four years ago under the routine laws that are used to block citizens of other countries convicted of serious crimes. She asked for an IRB hearing, to which she is entitled, in a bid to persuade the tribunal to reverse border guards’ declaration that she is persona non grata.

In 2013, she was sentenced to 35 years in prison for violating the U.S. Espionage Act. Three years earlier, as a U.S. soldier and an intelligence analyst in Iraq, she copied hundreds of thousands of documents and sent them to WikiLeaks.

The resulting disclosures stoked debates in dozens of countries about U.S.-led wars and counterterrorism measures. President Barack Obama commuted Ms. Manning’s sentence, but did not pardon her crimes. In 2017, when Ms. Manning tried to cross into Canada to attend a conference, she was turned away because of her record.

The IRB hearing started on Thursday. Lawyers acting for Ms. Manning argue she was punished for telling controversial truths. As evidence, they showed a copy of a WikiLeaks video that originated from Ms. Manning.

Known as “Collateral Murder,” this video shows cockpit footage from a U.S. Apache military helicopter as it strafed Iraqis on the ground. Two children were killed in that 2007 attack, and a dozen men, including two Reuters journalists.

Before the video’s release in 2010, the Pentagon said these killings were a response to insurgent aggression. “It was portrayed as an accidental by-product of war that can happen, and that doesn’t amount to any sort of violation of the law of war,” Osgoode Hall Law School professor Heidi Matthews testified in support of Ms. Manning. She said the video showed otherwise.

Story continues below advertisement

Other Canadians have made filings to the IRB supporting Ms. Manning’s arguments. They include Ron Deibert, the director of the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, and Jameel Jaffer, who heads the Knight First Amendment Institute.

Border guards can invoke criminal inadmissibility only if the same fundamental criminal offences exist in both countries concerned. Federal government lawyers say the U.S. Espionage Act and Canada’s Security of Information Act are essentially the same. Ms. Manning’s lawyers, Lex Gill and Joshua Blum, say that comparison undermines Canada’s press freedoms and whistle-blower protections.

The IRB hearing will continue on Friday.

On Monday, the board rejected one preliminary motion.

Government lawyers pointed out that most inadmissibility hearings happen only once a person sets foot in Canada. For that reason, they asked the IRB to delay the hearing until Ms. Manning tries to cross the border again.

However, adjudicator Marisa Musto said she saw little logic in inviting someone back to Canada just to hear arguments about kicking them out. She said it was perfectly fine to hear Ms. Manning testify via video from the United States.

Story continues below advertisement

“There is no reason to postpone the proceedings until such a time as she can be present in Canada.”

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies