Why are my kids on the no-fly list?
The first time I was unable to check-in online for a domestic flight, I assumed it was because I had a baby. Perhaps it was the amount of luggage, or the stroller I used to facilitate travel with my four children, all under the age of seven, to our cottage in Prince Edward Island.
When I arrived at Toronto’s Pearson airport, the agent asked me to identify two males in my party. I pointed to my 15- month- old, who was slobbering over a pear, and my seven- year- old, who was playing with Lego figurines, and her mouth dropped. She proceeded to make a few calls. I didn’t listen because I was making sure my kids didn’t sit on the luggage scale ( flying with children is so much fun!).
When I travel, I am prepared to be selected for “random extra security checks,” as I have brown skin and wear a hijab. But I didn’t have a clue that my second- generation Canadian children might be flagged as security risks. The idea did not occur to me because it was completely nonsensical.
A senior agent came by shortly thereafter and proceeded to enter information into the computer and make more phone calls. My patience was wearing thin. He hurriedly explained that there was an issue with one of my children. Eventually, we were escorted through security to the gate and settled into our seats. I didn’t think much of it. It had only taken an extra 40 or 50 minutes and we had arrived at the airport three hours early. Yet the actual issue would take over eight years to resolve.
We have struggled with this since my eldest child — Saif-ullah, now 15 — was seven years old. He’s no longer a precocious, round-faced child, and I can no longer shield him from what he knows. He’s a high school student who has conversations with his peers, some of whom are also on no-fly lists. All are of African, Arab or South Asian descent.
Sure, anticipating delays and going to the airport five hours early could be construed as normal. So could making up a story that did not involve explaining to my son that his name set off some type of alarm. But the truth is that such things are only necessary for people with names such as Ahmed, Khan, Hussain or Syed — names that are common in many other countries.
My family endured because we felt we had no recourse. For years, airline staff would not confirm or deny that Saif- ullah was on the DHP ( Deemed High Profile) list. We only got confirmation that Saifullah was on a no- fly list in 2014, when I tried to check him in to a flight from Halifax to Toronto. A kind West Jet agent finally told me that the directives came directly “from the ministry in Ottawa.” She could not elaborate further.
The most frustrating part was not being able to get straight an- swers from our political representatives, who are supposed to advocate for us. I took this issue to my MP in 2008. To say that my Conservative MP was completely unmoved by any inconvenience my child faced is an understatement. His office told me that “safety is paramount” and “there is nothing we can do.”
How could a government dedicated to combating terrorism not even implement a proper system to ensure the information being gathered is accurate? Were white men in their 20s with the surname “Bourque” — the name of the man who shot three RCMP officers in an act of domestic terrorism in Moncton in 2014 — also put on the DHP? Were there no other possible identifiers — date of birth, passport number, social insurance number — that could be used to ensure innocent people were not being singled out?
The current policy is unjust because it puts tremendous stress on young Canadians. Some terrorism experts have argued that since some people are being radicalized earlier in life, being less vigilant about potential threats posed by young people could allow some bad seeds to slip through the cracks. But this can be countered by properly identifying travellers. My son does not need to be subjected to this kind of scrutiny, now or in the future. A few weeks ago, Syed Adam Ahmed’s face was plastered all over the media. His father revealed that the adorable little hockey fan from Markham, Ont., is on a DHP list. They almost missed The Winter Classic hockey game, due to extra screening and security checks. Full disclosure: Adam Ahmed is my nephew.
Headlines called for the government to address this folly and public outcries began. As Adam’s story was covered by most major news outlets in Canada, his parents were kept busy conducting interviews. Hockey fans raged at the injustice, which included some humorous jabs at the family for being Montreal Canadiens fans. Late Night TV host Conan O’Brien even joked about it during one of his monologues.
As the story spread, dozens of other Canadian families — some Muslim, some not — came forward. Many of the families contacted my sister- in- law, who created a master list of the names and dates of birth of all the Canadian minors who had been flagged by the government, to give to her MP. As it turns out, there are now more than 20 children — children! — on the list of potential terrorist threats. The National Council of Canadian Muslims has asked families who identify as Muslim to report such incidents, so it’s possible that many more may come forward.
Many Canadians were mortified that children were being flagged as potential terrorist threats and called on officials to respond — which they did. When Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale released a statement, it seemed as if this nightmare might finally come to an end.
Yet the statement from Minister Goodale’s office reads: “We have heard the concerns of those who have gone through additional security screening that this situation can cause confusion and feelings of stigmatization.” This is where I disagree. There was no “confusion” on our part. We were stuck in a situation that seemed hopeless. The shoddy implementation of a half-baked process was the problem. And the current government is correct for wanting to fix it.
I WAS PREPARED FOR EXTRA SCREENING BECAUSE I WEAR A HIJAB. BUT I NEVER THOUGHT MY SECONDGENERATION CANADIAN CHILDREN MIGHT BE FLAGGED AS SECURITY RISKS.