Ontario's highest court declined Tuesday to review a lower court's decision to deny bail to one of the alleged ringleaders of a homegrown terrorist plot that prosecutors say involved storming Parliament and taking hostages.

Amin Durrani, who has spent 2½ years in pre-trial custody, has applied three times for bail, all unsuccessfully.

The third rejection, which was the basis of the appeal, was handed down in June by a Superior Court judge.

On Tuesday, Ontario Court of Appeal Justice James MacPherson ruled that most of Canada's appeal courts are reluctant to interfere in lower-court bail decisions without any special or exceptional circumstances.

"If evidence is to be heard at the bail review, the Superior Court is better positioned to hear the review. It has the facilities, staff and mechanisms to respond to this necessity," he wrote.

"I conclude that, absent special circumstances, courts of appeal should deal with bail pending appeal and superior courts should deal with bail prior to, and during, a trial."

Durrani is charged with two counts of knowingly participating in or contributing to a terrorist group.

He has been in custody since his arrest in June 2006 as one of 18 people detained that summer in what police alleged was a plot to wreak havoc on numerous Canadian targets.

The appeal was heard in chambers two months ago.

Durrani argued it would be more fair to have the Superior Court decision reviewed by a higher court rather than have another Superior Court judge take up the issue and, in effect, have to pass judgment on a peer's ruling.

Durrani's situation is not unusual, MacPherson decided Tuesday.

One conviction so far

In the summer of 2006, an intense investigation involving CSIS — Canada's spy agency — and the RCMP ended with the arrests of 18 people in the Toronto area and the seizure of apparent bomb-making materials.

Seven accused have since had their charges stayed or dropped. One suspect, a minor at the time of his arrest, was convicted in September of conspiring to bomb several targets. The remaining 10 suspects, including Durrani, have yet to stand trial.

Following several months of a preliminary inquiry last year, the Crown opted in September 2007 to proceed against Durrani by way of a direct indictment.

In his ruling, MacPherson considered whether Durrani's trial can be said to have started because of the direct indictment.

The justice noted that while a trial judge has been designated and has been hearing motions that may still last many more months, Durrani has not been formally arraigned nor entered a plea.

As such, he concluded, Durrani's trial cannot be said to have started for bail-review purposes.