Peter Van Loan announces a new bill on terrorism in Ottawa on Tuesday. (CBC)

Canadian victims of terrorism will have the right to sue — through this country's courts — those responsible for the attacks under new legislation introduced by Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan in Ottawa on Tuesday.

"We believe it's critical and important that we keep our citizens safe, that we fight the threat of terrorism here and abroad," Van Loan told reporters on Parliament Hill.

"[We're] providing an opportunity for victims of terrorism to seek justice that might otherwise be denied to them."

Covers terrorism dating back to 1985

The legislation is retroactive to 1985, which means it provides recourse to victims of terrorist acts such as the Air India bombing of June 1985 in which 329 people, mostly Canadians, died, as well as the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks at the World Trade Centre in New York that resulted in 25 Canadian deaths.

The group Canadian Coalition Against Terror — which represents families who have lost loved ones in terrorist attacks, including the 9/11 attacks and the Air India bombing — had long pushed for the law.

The issue in not just compensation, but also to expose people who sponsored the attacks for what they've done, said Aaron Blumenfeld, a Toronto lawyer with the advocacy group.

Under the proposed law, victims can sue individuals, organizations and foreign states that sponsor terrorism.

Van Loan declined to provide a list of such foreign states, saying that cabinet will determine that once the bill is passed.

However, he gave the example of Libya, which he said in the past was a state sponsor of terrorism in its involvement in the December 1988 bombing of a Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people.

U.S. only other country with such a law

The United States is the only other country with such legislation, Toronto law expert James Morton told CBC News in an interview.

While there was a judgment in the U.S. courts against Libya, it was not actually enforced because "there was no money to get," according to Morton.

"I am familiar, however, with a judgment against Iran, and they are taking active steps to attempt to enforce that judgment as we speak."

However, such a law is not a deterrent against terrorist groups, such as al-Qaeda, whose main aim is to kill and will not be deterred by the threat of a civil lawsuit five to 10 years down the road, said Morton.

Law won't deter terrorists

Such groups are not even likely to come to court to defend themselves, so "that is obviously a pointless lawsuit," he said.

Suing foreign states for being sponsors of terrorism makes more sense because they have assets. However, such a move is a potential minefield in international relations that "could lead to serious diplomatic problems," Morton said.

"What this does is it takes away sovereign immunity. The countries that would be sued would certainly not recognize a judgment of a Canadian court against them."

Collecting on a judgment awarded through our courts will be tricky if not impossible, he said.

For example, say 9/11 victims were able to successfully sue Saudi Arabia for allegedly sponsoring al-Qaeda in its attack on the World Trade Centre.

"The difficulty now is what do you do with it? Do you try to seize the Saudi ambassador's bank account? Do you seize an Arab plane? Do you go after the trade commission?" said Morton. "What do you do, and that is a really big issue and I am not certain it's been thought through."