Evidence of meeting #18 for Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was detainees.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:20 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
Exactly, sir.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
True.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I think it's fair to say, and I do believe most Canadians understand, that Afghan facilities are not what we anticipate in Canada, and as for anticipating or expecting that they would be like Canadian facilities, it would be wrong to make that assumption.
During your time there, have you seen improvements that have been made as a result of Canada's efforts, people like you, and also investments that we've made?
4:20 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
Most definitely. Through the work we did and the planning we did, through DFAIT and the global peace and security fund, we were able to upgrade the septic systems, which impacted the health and safety of the prisoners and the staff who lived there. We were able to provide training, equipment, uniforms, vehicles, security towers, and solar lighting, to the point where the infrastructure assessments that came out after our being there indicated that Sarposa was one of the better prisons in Afghanistan. That was directly as a result of the work we did there.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
In those prison visits...are there female prisoners held in Afghanistan prisons?
4:20 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
I can't speak to that point in a public forum, sir.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Okay, fair enough.
One of the other changes that we may or may not have seen was the medical attention given to prisoners in Afghanistan. Can you elaborate on that?
4:25 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
Prisoners who had been injured on the battlefield were always accorded medical treatment in the Kandahar Airfield detention facility. Following that, it was our role as correctional advisers to make sure that doctors came out to the prisons on a regular basis and treated any medical concerns that were brought to our attention. But in addition to that, through Canadian moneys we were also able, in my time there, to restock the Sarposa clinic on two separate occasions and to provide the prisoners with appropriate medications and medical care.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I'd like to go back a little bit. You indicated that prisoners in those facilities were not necessarily military transfers.
4:25 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
In the NDS, yes, they were not strictly military detainees. They could have been there for other high-profile crimes.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Okay. Not everyone there would be a transferee from the Canadian military, and there may very well have been other complaints. Would you have dealt with those also, or at least interviewed them?
4:25 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
You have to understand that the detainee file was just one small part of what I was doing over there. My role was to deal with all prisoners and all prisoner complaints across a variety of jurisdictions, which included NDS; the Afghan National Police, which fell under the Ministry of Interior; and Sarposa Prison, which fell under the Ministry of Justice. I was dealing with all those jurisdictions and all those prisoners, whether they had been convicted or were awaiting trial.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
Thank you.
We're right on schedule.
Go ahead, Mr. Dewar, for seven minutes.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair, and thank you to our guests.
I want to start off with Ms. Swords, go to Mr. Proudfoot, and then finish with Ms. Garwood-Filbert.
Ms. Swords, in your testimony to the Federal Court, which I have here, you stated that there had been a problem around tracking or monitoring detainees in terms of what facility they were going to. In the testimony you said:
We do know that the Afghan government maintains a variety of different facilities, the police, the army, the NDS, and since we don't know exactly where Canadian transferred detainees go, it would make sense it seems to in the future try to limit the facilities that they might end up in.
That was a concern. Do you still support that evidence you gave at court?
4:25 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
That evidence was given before we entered into the MOU of May 3, 2007. Subsequent to that, we've developed a pretty rigorous tracking mechanism to start--
4:25 p.m.
NDP
4:25 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
At the time--
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
They were going out, and you couldn't track all of them. They were going to different places.
4:25 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
At the time, we discovered that the Afghan government's records weren't very good. In fact, one of the things we've been doing with capacity-building is to get better record-keeping.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Mr. Proudfoot, in your testimony you suggested the same thing. In the Federal Court, when asked, “Do we know now where Canadian Forces' detainees are being held currently?”, you answered, “We have approached the Government of Afghanistan to ascertain the whereabouts of all transferred detainees. I do not know the status of the response.”
Then the question from the lawyer was, “So you don't know if Afghanistan has been able to locate all the detainees?” You said, “ I do not know.”
The lawyer asked, “Once Afghanistan provides that information, would that information at some point cross your desk?” You replied, “Probably not.” When asked, “And why is that?”, you replied, “The reporting on this issue has a very narrow distribution....”
That's fair enough, but would your evidence be the same as Ms. Swords' evidence, in that you had concerns about the arrangement that up to that point had been in place, because it was hard to track where people were going?
December 2nd, 2009 / 4:25 p.m.
Director, Sudan Task Force, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
One of the improvements that were made in the May 2007 arrangement--and I was alluding to this in my answer to Madame Lalonde just a moment ago--was paragraph 7, which stipulated that in future the Afghan government would hold detainees transferred by Canadian Forces in a limited number of facilities. This was in order to facilitate our follow-up, tracking, and monitoring of those detainees. If we knew they were in a small number of facilities, we'd more easily be able to go there and identify them and follow up on those individuals.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
I have a document in front of me from May 17, 2007, just after arrangements were made to redo the transfer. It's a document from Kerry Buck. It basically says, “The team reviewed the register of detainees transferred February 1 to determine their whereabouts. This was a painstaking process. The team advises that it is not foolproof...the standards of record-keeping. All detainees transferred by Canada since February 1 have either been released or transferred to other institutions. Canadian officials do not know and therefore are not able to interview any detainees transferred by Canada. The team will recommend that additional assistance be helped...”.
This just supports what you're saying.
Ms. Garwood-Filbert, I have a document that is your reference. You mentioned in your opening statement that there were some concerns about the treatment of prisoners. You made it known. When you talk about international standards, is it fair to say that it's not an international standard--and when you say international standard, I'm thinking of international law--to have people in shackles for 24 hours a day?
4:30 p.m.
Manager, Assessment and Intervention, Correctional Service Canada
Actually, the UN standards do support the use of restraints. What it does not support is the use of restraints for punishment and it does not support the use of chains or straight metal bars. Because of equipment issues, which we tried to reconcile through my time there, the only resource these two facilities had was the use of chains. That's why it was cited as an incident, because the UN standards prohibit the use of chains.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
You also noted the fact that they were being transferred from the NDS in chains and remained in chains and that when the warden was asked to actually take them out of chains, the key couldn't be found. This is part of the evidence that you have provided. That was obviously a concern of yours at the time, as it would be of mine.