Mr. Speaker, I rise today to also speak to Motion No. 169 which deals with the abduction of a young Canadian from Quebec.
The hon. member for Rosemont is asking the Canadian government to bring the appropriate political pressure to bear on the Government of Egypt to ensure the immediate return to Canada of Karim Noah who was abducted illegally on January 17, as we have heard.
I would first like to note my respect for the hon. member's obvious concern for one of his constituents. I congratulate his efforts to represent his constituent in the House.
Child abduction is a serious and complicated matter in Canada, as it is in many other countries of the world. Canada has been a good example to the rest of the world in matters like this, one in which we have consistently showed our concern for the rights of children.
It is especially noteworthy that Canada played a leading role in drafting the process of the convention of rights of children and in convening the 1990 world summit for children.
Canada is also a member of The Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction. This convention was created out of the desire to protect children internationally from the harmful effects of wrongful removal and to establish a procedure to ensure their prompt return to their habitual state of residence.
This convention was adopted by the 14th session of The Hague conference. The convention sets ground rules for dealing with child abduction cases, both when the harbouring nation is a signatory of the convention and for those cases when the harbouring nation is not a signatory.
In this case the harbouring nation is Egypt, which has neither signed nor ratified this convention. In cases such as this one, when the harbouring state has not ratified the convention, the Department of Foreign Affairs can provide some assistance, as has already been done in this case.
It is my understanding that the Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke with his Egyptian counterpart in November 1995. We have been updated regarding the progress that is occurring there.
Unfortunately because Egypt has not ratified The Hague convention, this case is governed by domestic law in Egypt. Therefore the Egyptian government is not solely responsible for the resolution of this case and the Egyptian courts will also have to become involved.
The authorities in Canada have also become involved by issuing a warrant for the father's arrest and ensuring the mother receives aid from the missing children's registry. While this is not a lot of help to the mother desperately seeking the return of her son, I have been informed that the role of the federal government in abduction cases is rather limited.
Family law falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Canadian provinces, therefore it is the provincial authorities that deal with the hands on work related to The Hague convention and associated child abduction cases.
I am sure all members in this House would urge the province of Quebec, along with the federal government, to work as diligently as possible to secure the return of this child.
Generally the federal government only acts as a conduit between foreign authorities and Canadian provincial authorities. The federal government does play a significant role along with the Canadian Department of Justice in liaising with the provinces regarding the access of new states to The Hague convention. Mostly it assists in general matters requiring liaison between foreign governments and those provinces.
The Canadian government assisted in this way when the Department of Foreign Affairs contacted the Egyptian minister. This was
the appropriate political action outlined by The Hague convention. Therefore while the motion of the hon. member for Rosemount clearly shows his desire to help his constituent, I would hope the Canadian government has done and is doing and will continue to do everything to help move the case forward.
Because family law falls under the jurisdiction of the provinces there is not much more that the Canadian government can do, according to my research of this case. However, due diligence is required.
While the Canadian government is restricted in its dealings with this specific abduction case, I would argue that we can become more involved with the broader issue of international child abduction.
We can start by persuading other nations to ratify the Hague convention using whatever pressure we may have, through aid or other things, to put pressure on countries to sign. For those states that were members of the 14th session of the conference on private international law, the convention enters into force between them and the other member states as soon as they deposit their instruments of ratification with the ministry of foreign affairs in the Netherlands.
There are currently six member states at this conference that have failed to ratify the convention. One of these is Egypt, the harbouring state in this case.
Those states that were not members of the 14th session can also be persuaded to ratify the convention. Once they register their ascension with the foreign affairs ministry in the Netherlands their ascension will have effect with the contracting states and they will be quickly accepted.
Once on board, the convention aids in the return of wrongfully abducted children by setting up the formalities between the harbouring state and the initial resident state of the child. Under The Hague convention these two states co-operate with each other and promote co-operation among the competent authorities in their respective states to secure the prompt return of the children. The convention also outlines the appropriate measures to be taken by both states.
The more nations that ratify this convention, the better the co-operation will be among nations in abduction cases, allowing for the speedy return of abducted children. This is an area in which the Canadian government can get more involved and can put more pressure on governments.
Too often we do not tie things like this to aid programs, to co-operative programs. I think it is time we started to do that. This is a serious problem not just for this one child but for many parents throughout this country and others. The Canadian government can also help end international child abduction by encouraging the use of a preventive method promoted by the convention.
The new ease with which people can move around the globe has caused an increase in international child abduction. Therefore the use of preventive methods must be increased. Ultimately prevention is the only true way to combat this rising phenomenon.
While the motion's purpose seems to have already been partly played out, the role of the Canadian government in dealing with international abduction cases has not. I challenge the government to increase its involvement in the issues of child abduction by encouraging states like Egypt to ratify The Hague convention and by promoting the preventative methods highlighted by that convention.
Again I point out that we write off debts for countries like Egypt. Maybe we should tie some other requirements before we do that sort of thing. I believe we can pull some strings so that we will not have to deal with cases like this in the House.
Being a parent, I can understand the terrible pain the parent is going through and I certainly sympathize with her.