Bill C-219

Sergei Magnitsky International Anti-Corruption and Human Rights Act

An Act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act, the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), the Special Economic Measures Act and the Broadcasting Act

This enactment amends the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act to impose certain requirements on the Minister of Foreign Affairs in relation to international human rights.
It also amends the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) to provide that
(a) transnational repression be sanctioned;
(b) visas or other documents must not be issued to immediate family members of a foreign national who is the subject of an order or regulation made under section 4 of the Act;
(c) a copy of each order or regulation made under paragraph 4(1)(b) of the Act must be tabled in each House of Parliament;
(d) the Minister must respond to a report submitted by a parliamentary committee that recommends that sanctions be imposed under the Act against a foreign national; and
(e) the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada must provide the Minister with information that is relevant to the making, administering or enforcing of the order or regulation against a foreign national.
It also amends the Special Economic Measures Act to change that Act’s long title to “ An Act to provide for the imposition of economic measures against a person, entity or foreign state for grave breaches of international peace and security, gross and systematic human rights violations or acts of significant corruption ” and its short title to the “ Sergei Magnitsky Global Sanctions Act ”. It further amends that Act to provide that
(a) transnational repression be sanctioned;
(b) visas or other documents must not be issued to immediate family members of a foreign national who is the subject of an order or regulation made under section 4 of the Act;
(c) the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada must provide the Minister with information that is relevant to the making, administering or enforcing of the order or regulation against a foreign state or person;
(d) every order or regulation made under paragraph 4(1)(b) of the Act must be tabled in each House of Parliament; and
(e) the punishment under paragraph 8(a) of the Act be increased.
Finally, it amends the Broadcasting Act to prohibit the issue or renewal of a licence in relation to a broadcasting undertaking, or to revoke the licence of a broadcasting undertaking, that is vulnerable to being significantly influenced by a foreign national or entity that has committed acts or omissions that the Senate or the House of Commons has recognized as genocide or that is the subject of sanctions under the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) or under the Special Economic Measures Act .‍

Sergei Magnitsky International Anti-Corruption and Human Rights Act

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

moved that Bill C-219, An Act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act, the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), the Special Economic Measures Act and the Broadcasting Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank all members of this House for their understanding of the personal situation I am going through right now and for accommodating me tonight by moving up my time slot so we could start the debate on my private member's bill. As most of my colleagues who have been here for a while know, it sometimes takes a long time to get up in the draw and get a private member's bill into debate in the House and into committee so that maybe at the end of the day, it can be successfully adopted, become law and appear in the statutes of Canada.

I am very proud to present my new private member's bill, Bill C-219, the Sergei Magnitsky international anti-corruption and human rights act. I want to thank my seconder from Peterborough—

[Philip Lawrence]

Northumberland—Clarke.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, I was close enough. I should have written that down.

The hon. member brought forward a bill in the last Parliament, as I did. In this Parliament, we have stuck them together and expanded on them to deal with corrupt foreign officials and kleptocrats from the many different theocracies and dictatorships. In these regimes, especially Communist regimes, people continue to use their powers and positions of influence to be kleptocrats, be corrupt and commit atrocities against their own people.

This bill would make amendments to the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act and the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, also known as the Sergei Magnitsky Law, which Senator Raynell Andreychuk and I brought in back in 2017 and became law. The bill would also update the Special Economic Measures Act to rename it to the Sergei Magnitsky global sanctions act. It would also amend the Broadcasting Act.

Just so everybody knows who Sergei Magnitsky is, in case they have not been exposed to his story, a gentleman a lot of members might know, Bill Browder, wrote a book called Red Notice. He was American and was the largest foreign investor in Russia until 2005. In 2008, it became evident that kleptocrats in the Kremlin were using his former company to commit tax evasion and tax fraud, so he hired a lawyer and accountant by the name of Sergei Magnitsky, who uncovered the largest tax fraud in Russian history. He was then arrested, detained, tortured and killed. It was a horrific thing that happened. He died in detention in a Russian prison on November 16, 2009.

None of the individuals who were responsible for the fraud, the false accusations and the criminal charges that were brought against him, and none of the individuals who enriched themselves from government coffers through the tax fraud they committed in the name of Bill Browder, were ever sanctioned and brought to justice. We cannot allow Canada or our allies to sit on the sidelines while gross human rights violators and corrupt foreign officials continue to commit atrocities, enrich themselves, abuse their citizens and ultimately walk away. Canada cannot be a safe haven for that.

Parliament started engaging with this back in 2012. Bill Browder, former Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Kara-Murza of the People's Freedom Party were here in Parliament to call on the government of the day to adopt Magnitsky sanctions to protect human rights activists in Russia and make sure that pro-democracy activists around the world were better protected, because we were going to name, shame, sanction and ban those individuals from allied nations.

In 2012, the United States adopted the first Magnitsky legislation. It was followed by the European Parliament in 2013. As we all know, on February 27, 2015, Nemtsov was assassinated just outside the Kremlin, on the bridge right beside it.

In March 2015, here in Canada, both the House and the Senate brought forward resolutions, which were passed unanimously, calling on the government to install Magnitsky sanctions. In 2017, the Sergei Magnitsky Law was adopted unanimously after it was brought forward by Senator Andreychuk in the Senate and me in the House.

Using the name of Sergei Magnitsky in our sanctions regime delivers a strong political message against Putin's brutal dictatorship and his equally corrupt allies. In the bill's preamble, it asks the government to continue to engage with our friends around the world to establish the international anti-corruption court at The Hague. This is something that has been advocated for by Integrity Initiatives International. Canada, the Netherlands and Ecuador issued a statement back in November 2022 to work towards getting it established. I was on a call just last week, and that process continues.

We need to have the international anti-corruption court with the purpose that, if we can arrest and prosecute those corrupt foreign officials, we would be not only reducing the crimes against citizens in those countries, but probably also decreasing the number of crimes against humanity. Before anyone ever becomes a genocidal maniac, they always start off as a corrupt foreign official. First, they get stuff and money out of the treasury and into their own pockets, and then they start abusing their citizens. That is when we see genocides happen, war crimes happen, human rights violated, and political prisoners and people of conscience thrown in jail.

I will go through what this bill would do. First, it would require the Minister of Foreign Affairs to publish an annual report on what the Government of Canada is doing to advance human rights internationally, as well as include the names and the status of prisoners of conscience around the world, especially Canadians who are being held in other countries. This is important, and we now have a definition of what a prisoner of conscience is. I will get into it later.

We would also amend the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, the Sergei Magnitsky Law, and the Special Economic Measures Act, also known as SEMA, so they would better align with each other and the legislation would no longer be in conflict with each other, as well as align ourselves with what our allies are doing.

We would define what transnational repression is and sanction foreign nationals who commit it in Canada and elsewhere. We would ban immediate family members of sanctioned foreign nationals so Canada cannot be used as a safe haven, or as a way to hide their children, their spouse, their concubines and their girlfriends, as we often see, and use them as a way to illegally move their illicit funds into Canada, as well as protect their families from the very people they are abusing back in their own countries. The bill would require the government to table in Parliament the names of foreign nationals and entities that are added to the sanctions list to ensure there is better transparency. We would have that tabled back here in the House so we can look at it as parliamentarians.

It would require the RCMP and FINTRAC to report to the Minister of Foreign Affairs on the making, administrating and enforcing of sanctions. I will get into that a little bit later. It would allow parliamentary committees to recommend names and entities to be sanctioned, and require the minister to report back to the House on that decision, or to the Senate if the committee and the Senate should undertake these studies.

This is an opportunity for those in the diaspora communities across Canada to have direct input into the process of why people should be added to lists, or maybe why they should not. It would also amend the Broadcasting Act to immediately revoke licenses for media outlets that are operated by sanctioned entities, individuals or states that the House or the Senate has recognized as having committed a genocide. Immediately, those states would have all their media banned from the Canadian airwaves.

The definition of transnational repression involves the tactics used by a foreign state to intimidate, harass, surveil or threaten individuals or groups located outside the state borders, or to physically harm such individuals or members of such groups, including elected officials, political dissidents, human rights defenders, exiled journalists, diaspora communities, civil society activists and refugees for the purpose of silencing dissent and stifling activism.

We know the corrupt regimes of the People's Republic of China, the Chinese Communist Party, of Iran and of Russia are doing this in Canada right now. We hear these stories all the time. Just on November 13, the Globe and Mail reported, “CSIS director warns that China and Russia continue to target Canada”. When I meet with diaspora communities, they have story after story of somebody who is tied to the government of their nation, or the embassies and consulates they have located across this country, out there intimidating the families.

In the last election, Joe Tay, who was the Conservative candidate for the riding of Don Valley North, was told by the RCMP and by CSIS not to go out and door knock, because his life was in danger. This was based upon the intelligence they received from other individuals who were informing them about foreign agents working against him. Joe, of course, has celebrity status within the Chinese and Hong Kong community, and as an advocate for Hong Kongers, has now been targeted by both the Hong Kong executive council and the regime in Beijing.

We know the story of the Chinese police stations that were set up all across Canada to intimidate Chinese Canadians to ensure that they were not doing things China was not in favour of.

We have a very small Uyghur community in Canada; I had a number of them in my office just last week. One young woman told me that she came to Canada and started to speak out against the genocide and atrocities being committed against the Uyghur people, such as forced labour camps, sterilization and reprogramming, which is the brainwashing of children, taking away their faith and their language. The woman has a very sick mother, who is still in China, and she is being denied treatment because of her daughter's activities here in Canada in fighting for human rights and freedom.

I was in Halifax at the International Security Forum this past weekend, and I was talking to the executive director of the World Uyghur Congress. She said that she started speaking out against the Chinese government and the Communist regime in Beijing, and her sister was arrested in 2018. She has had no contact with her for the entire seven years.

We always have the Falun Gong practitioners and their activism; their families are also being targeted. We have the Hong Kong Watch patrons.

We also know about the Iranian community here and how it is being targeted by agents of the theocracy in Tehran. They are also driving around with police cars that are painted up just like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The one thing that we are going to require is for the minister to publish this report once a year on what they are doing on prisoners of conscience and on human rights activities. A prisoner of conscience is an individual who, in contravention of international human rights standards, has been detained or otherwise physically restricted solely because of their identity or their conscientiously held beliefs, including religious or political beliefs.

Again, we have heard from many different diaspora communities and families of prisoners of conscience that this is happening. Jimmy Lai is another one we hear about. He is a media mogul; he is 77 years old. He went through a show trial that lasted for months on end, and he has been held in solitary confinement for over 1,700 days without access to his medications. His health is failing, and he is being held there because he is an advocate for democracy within Hong Kong. Of course, they will not have any part of that in Beijing or in Hong Kong through the executive council.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, who is a supporter of this bill and has been here before, has been targeted and poisoned twice by Russian agents. He was left in a coma at one time, and then he was imprisoned recently, in 2022, because he criticized Putin and his war machine for invading Ukraine. He stood on the side of Ukraine, and he was arrested and held. Luckily, through a prisoner swap, he was able to get out and is now free again. He told me that the only thing that works is public attention. If it wasn't for public attention, he says he would be dead in Siberia now.

We kept on talking about Vladimir Kara-Murza. The House passed a unanimous motion, brought forward by my friend from Calgary, the current Deputy Speaker. He brought it forward to give honorary citizenship to Vladimir Kara-Murza. Because of that, he is free today, and it is the same for the two Michaels. When we can shine the spotlight on this type of corruption, these atrocities and human rights abuses, people go free and democracy, human rights and liberty are better served.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for introducing this bill. My personal view is that it is really important that Canada has a sanctions regime that allows us to not only uphold human rights, but also enforce the international rules-based order. That is not just the right thing for countries around the world to do; it is essential to protecting Canada's security and sovereignty.

Based on discussions I have had with colleagues and folks outside of this House, many folks have ideas or thoughts about how the bill could be further improved to further strengthen our sanctions regime. Is the member open to working with members of other parties in this House to amend the bill to make it even stronger and more effective?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, yes, I am always open to ways to make legislation stronger. I have already had a conversation with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs on ways we can strengthen the bill. I am always open to anything we can do to make it better.

There is one thing I never got to in my speech. My friend from Etobicoke Centre and I are very active with our Ukrainian communities. We want to make sure that any frozen assets, and I am thinking about Russian frozen assets, are forfeited in a reasonable amount of time for the benefit of Ukraine or any other victims, as with the shooting down of PS752 and the Iranian families that are still waiting for justice. When we think about the big Antonov plane that has been sitting at the end of the Pearson runway for the last two years, this bill would make it so the minister has to act within 12 months to forfeit assets and make sure the financial benefits are given to the victims of the aggressor.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his bill and his very interesting speech, and I am pleased to know that he is willing to work together to improve his bill.

I know that one aspect was particularly important to my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, namely the fact that the bill introduces the concept of transnational repression. The Bloc Québécois had been calling for this.

However, we do have some concerns. One thing that comes to mind is the request to publish the names and status of political prisoners, which could evidently have an impact on their immediate family members for a number of reasons. I would like my colleague to talk about that aspect.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, we are going to work with all members of this House to make sure we are not putting at risk anyone who is in a delicate situation. However, from what I am hearing from those who have been political prisoners, like Michael Kovrig and Vladimir Kara-Murza, it is the extra spotlight shined through the media and through statements made in this House and elsewhere that puts the governments holding these people falsely in a very uncomfortable position.

I know there are sensitivities around some prisoners of conscience and some families. We definitely do not want in any way, shape or form to disrupt any negotiations and discussions taking place that will result in their safe release.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this bill is clearly based on very commendable and noble ideas. Furthermore, we truly believe there are some elements that are interesting enough to warrant closer examination, but certain details still need to be worked out.

This idea seems to be inspired by the Americans and directly drawn from the 1990s. We know that when the Americans tightened sanctions against several countries, in the name of fighting corruption, for example, that was accompanied by the extraterritoriality of law, meaning that the Americans forced sovereign nations and companies in other countries not to do business with countries that the United States wanted to boycott.

Is my colleague concerned that with such a bill, Canada would be replicating this form of imperialism to some extent?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, I would just say that this is not about trying to force other governments to change their regimes. This is about changing the behaviour of individuals. This is about going after those who ultimately go and rob from the people they are supposed to be serving and then commit atrocities against them. We want to make sure that they are held to account. If we do not do that, they will turn into even worse criminals, worse human rights abusers and, ultimately, monsters.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured today to speak to Canada's active efforts to advance human rights; combat corruption, including through the use of sanctions; and continue to explore the possibilities of the bill.

Canada is committed to upholding the legacy left by Sergei Magnitsky in establishing a global framework to combat corruption and human rights violations. Whether by holding states accountable for violations, championing the rights of women and girls, indigenous peoples and vulnerable groups or by countering the threat of transnational repression, human rights remain at the core of our Canadian identity. These are values that are central to our foreign policy, as articulated by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. They are foundational and necessary for a secure society and to make a society prosperous.

I want to begin by thanking the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman for presenting this private member's bill, Bill C-219. The bill underscores a common objective that we share in the House, which is to work together to promote and protect human rights internationally and to modernize how Canada enacts sanctions.

I also want to acknowledge the work of the member for Northumberland—Clarke, who introduced a similar bill in the previous Parliament. Like its predecessor, Bill C‑219 highlights the important ways in which Canada protects international human rights.

Bill C-219, at its core, seeks to amend four laws, the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act; the Special Economic Measures Act, known as SEMA; the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, or the Magnitsky law; and the Broadcasting Act.

Bill C-219 is very well intentioned and includes important measures to modernize our approach. However, some provisions, as currently drafted, could inadvertently undermine individual or public safety and hinder the effectiveness of sanctions. We believe that the foreign affairs committee is absolutely necessary and is the right place to delve into this piece of legislation to make sure that it mirrors Canadian values and the objectives that we all share in the House regarding human rights and the protection of individuals and society.

I will summarize some of the key elements of the bill and identify areas where consideration in committee could add some important and significant value. While the government plays a central role in the protection of human rights, as governments around the world do, we are not alone in these efforts. Day after day, human rights defenders, activists, journalists, lawyers, community leaders and everyday citizens are the backbone of accountability and progress. Their insights, their lived experiences and their grassroots connections strengthen policy and democratic institutions around the world. Supporting them is not optional. It is an imperative. We need to especially stand by them when they are in peril.

“Voices at Risk: Canada's Guidelines on Supporting Human Rights Defenders” reflects the government's commitment to supporting their essential and courageous work. Canadian officials abroad adapt these guidelines to the local context and specific needs of each individual and each case. They do so to provide the most effective support and defence possible, often in close collaboration with our partners.

When a human rights defender who is at risk is a Canadian, regardless of whether they are a dual citizen, Canada considers this to be a consular case. These cases are monitored closely by Canadian officials providing consular assistance on a, usually, daily basis. This is part of the Vienna Convention.

While the bill seeks to protect human rights defenders, we have concerns that some of the specific elements could put the safety and security of human rights defenders, including Canadian citizens, at risk. I know that the safety and security of these defenders are paramount to all of us in the House, and I look forward to exploring these issues in greater detail at committee.

The government recognizes and values Parliament's role not only in studying sanctions but also furthering our sanctions regime, the tools to protect human rights and the tools to take on corruption and other crises.

The passage of a Senate public bill, Bill S-226, in 2017, was one example of Parliament's working to improve our sanctions regime as a response to human rights violations and acts of significant corruption. Two reports, tabled in the Senate and in the House in 2023 and 2024, respectively, showed how significant our work in this House is to make sure that government is responsive to the desires, the will and the aspirations of Canadians.

Sanctions are a key component in Canada's approach to protecting the rules-based order and in advancing human rights. Recently, we have seen the use of sanctions increase significantly as conflicts escalate in nature, such as in the case of Ukraine. Canada has sanctioned nearly 2,300 individuals and over 1,000 entities or vessels since 2022. It is an exponential increase in the number of sanctions that we have been doing. However, at the same time, we want to constantly re-examine our sanctions regime to make sure it is fit for purpose.

Our government remains firmly committed to ensuring that Canada plays a leading role in preserving and strengthening a rules-based international order. Sanctions are a critical tool for advancing this approach.

However, as I said, we need to update the sanctions tool box. I am very pleased that the member has added the concept of transnational repression, and I reflect on the fact that the Bloc Québécois has also seen this as an important new trigger for sanctions. We respectfully accept this and think it is an important addition.

However, we think the bill can be strengthened by adding some other triggers, such as migrant smuggling, foreign interference, cyber- and hybrid attacks, organized crime, undermining democracy and arbitrary detention. These are things that should also trigger the use of sanctions, as well as transnational repression.

I want to underscore that in all of this, we need to be evidence-based and thoughtful as we push on the sanctions to make them effective. We do not want to add cost to the system. We want to ensure that we find an effective way that is both profound and important, to ensure that the Canadian taxpayer is able to stand up and say, “These are dollars that are being well spent.” Therefore, I challenge the committee as well to look at the bill from that lens to ensure that we have an effective use of Canadian dollars as we promote human rights and as we defend our world against corruption. Transparency, accountability, parliamentary engagement, inter-agency co-operation and information are all things that could add costs but that could also be very effective and could be part of a tool box that would both be effective and save taxpayer money.

One section of the bill that, very frankly, I am less familiar with, because it is not in my wheelhouse, is the Broadcasting Act section. However, I understand, as we all do, that media is critical and important in the promotion of human rights. The broadcasting-related provision of Bill C-219 seeks to curtail the proliferation of broadcast content from licensed broadcasters found to be susceptible to influence from foreign actors, foreign persons or foreign entities, especially ones who have committed genocide or are under Canadian sanctions. This is something we all agree on. However, we want to test all the recommendations in the bill, which would become law, to ensure that they would actually accomplish this while preserving the freedom of the press.

In conclusion, we are eager for further debate on Bill C-219. We are ready to take it to committee. We want to support the member in his aspirations to look at the bill, but we also challenge and commend the committee to do its due diligence on the bill, to find out the way a parliamentary committee can make it more effective, to make it better to defend human rights and better to fight corruption, and to make it effective and sustainable to attack not only today's issues, but tomorrow's issues. This would be a piece of legislation that will last, so we want to make sure it is fit for purpose not only for today, but also for tomorrow.

Again, I want to thank the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman for his ongoing co-operation and conversation about the bill. I look forward to getting it to committee and having all members of the House, through their committee, be sure to make it the most effective bill possible.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am really pleased to be able to give this speech this evening because what I have to say is very important to me.

Since the new Parliament began, many of my colleagues in the House will certainly have noticed, as I have, that the importance of parliamentary and committee work seems of little interest to the Prime Minister of Canada. He seems far too busy meeting with leaders of what I would call dubious countries, to put it politely, including China, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

In the meantime, parliamentarians are working hard in committee to improve bills or collaborate on drafting reports and recommendations, often involving complex files, based on testimony that is frequently heart-wrenching or hard to hear. On this point, I am thinking more specifically of the colleagues I have the honour to serve with on the Subcommittee on International Human Rights or my friends on the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, with whom I recently studied Bill C-3 on lost Canadians, and whose amendments, though supported by the majority of committee members, were defeated once they arrived in the House.

Today, I feel I must highlight the importance of the work carried out by parliamentarians in committee. I know that this aspect of our work requires thoroughness, precision and, above all, a willingness to collaborate and improve things. Unfortunately, as we know, committee proceedings are not the most exciting thing to watch on television. However, committees are where the most important work is done for the future. Committee work has a concrete impact on people's lives.

Unfortunately, as I said at the outset, I do not believe that this government fully understands the legislative implications or the scope of the work involved. Without wanting to make puns like my Conservative friends do, who cares about committee work? That is probably what the Prime Minister would say. I say this because, while the bill before us today incorporates several aspects of Bill C‑281, some elements are quite different.

Bill C-219 was introduced by our Conservative colleague from Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman. I would like to send him my thoughts because he is an extraordinary person and a pleasure to work with, and he is going through some difficult times these days. Bill C-219 is similar in some ways to Bill C-281, which died on the Order Paper in the Senate after receiving unanimous support in the House of Commons at third reading, including support from the Bloc Québécois.

As I was saying, Bill C-219 incorporates some aspects of Bill C-281, but with a few significant differences. Committee work will therefore be essential—as I think my Liberal colleagues have said—to verify the scope and impact of the bill and to propose amendments as necessary. More specifically, as my colleague from Jonquière mentioned in a question earlier, I am thinking that the request to publish the names and status of political prisoners may not sit well with immediate family members for a number of obvious reasons. For example, a family could be afraid of reprisals from the country in question and could be totally opposed to making the information publicly available. This point was raised by the Bloc Québécois during the study of Bill C-281.

The bill also introduces the concept of transnational repression, a request that was also made by the Bloc Québécois. We even included it in our election platform. I would like to thank my colleague, the sponsor of the bill, for including this concept in his bill. It is extremely important and it is certainly very timely. The world is changing at breakneck speed, and transnational repression is happening here, in Quebec and Canada. My Uyghur friends, my Tibetan friends, my friends from Taiwan, my friends from Hong Kong will attest to that. It is pretty obvious. In that sense, what would this bill actually do?

Bill C‑219 amends several laws, including the Sergei Magnitsky Law, to provide that “transnational repression be sanctioned”, which is very positive, and that “visas or other documents must not be issued to immediate family members of a foreign national who is the subject of an order or regulation”. The enactment amends the Special Economic Measures Act to change that act's long title and shorten it to the “Sergei Magnitsky Global Sanctions Act”. Mr. Magnitsky wound up in a Moscow prison where he was tortured for 358 days for alleged tax evasion. He succumbed to untreated pancreatitis in a grim way in 2009 at the age of 38.

The bill proposes a definition of “prisoner of conscience”. It reads as follows:

an individual who, in contravention of international human rights standards, has been detained or otherwise physically restricted solely because of their identity or their conscientiously held beliefs, including religious or political beliefs.

As I said earlier, the bill also adds a definition for transnational repression. I want to reiterate that this was a Bloc Québécois proposal made during the last election campaign. Since we have fewer members that can introduce bills, we appreciate when our colleagues incorporate our ideas into theirs.

The bill defines “transnational repression” as follows:

tactics used by a foreign state to intimidate, harass, surveil or threaten individuals or groups located outside the state borders or physically harm such individuals or members of such groups, including elected officials, political dissidents, human rights defenders, exiled journalists, diaspora communities, civil society activists and refugees, for the purpose of silencing dissent and stifling activism.

As I speak these words in the House, I am thinking of several members of various communities who, here in this very place, day after day, week after week, bear the burden of foreign repression, of transnational repression. They are human rights defenders, refugees and civil society activists. These people, who were once acquaintances, have now become friends. I do not want to identify them by name, but I know for a fact that they know who they are. I am thinking of people who care deeply about democracy and justice and who, simply because they believe in a better future for their loved ones, are subjected to intimidation, harassment, threats and even imprisonment and torture.

I am thinking of people like Jimmy Lai, a human rights defender who has become a prominent figure in the fight for freedom and democracy. Right now, Mr. Lai, who is 77 years old, is languishing in appalling conditions in a Hong Kong prison. His crime was that he supported journalism and freedom of the press. Obviously, my thoughts are with his son, Sebastien, to whom I once again express my solidarity.

Repression can be insidious, so insidious that it can be hard to see at times. Anyone who encourages repression must be held accountable for their actions. Bill S‑219 therefore adds something to the legislation. It adds the fact that sanctions can be imposed in cases of transnational repression. The bill would also force the minister to respond to a parliamentary motion calling for sanctions against a corrupt foreign leader.

This means that I, along with my Bloc Québécois colleagues, will support Bill C‑219 introduced by my colleague from Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman. While the provisions of the Sergei Magnitsky Law and the Special Economic Measures Act both allow for targeted sanctions, only the Special Economic Measures Act is currently used for this purpose. The Sergei Magnitsky Law has not been used to implement targeted sanctions since 2018. My colleague's bill also helps reignite discussions on this subject, which I think is extremely positive.

I will conclude my speech by commending my colleague's work and confirming that the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C‑219, which will, however, have to be studied in committee. We will be thorough and we will collaborate, as usual. I am more than ready to work with my colleagues. This bill is likely to be studied by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, of which I am a member. We will be there. I believe this is a bill that can truly make a difference and have a real impact on people who are fighting for the freedom of their loved ones.

I am very pleased to have had the opportunity to deliver this speech tonight.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Madam Speaker, from my days as an adviser for the Harper government to today, I have had the privilege of working alongside the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman on several files, observing first-hand his steadfast commitment to human rights, accountability and the rule of law. Throughout his career, he has consistently demonstrated a deep understanding of international affairs, a tireless work ethic and a principled approach to defending Canadian values. I have seen it up front as we walked the cobblestone streets of Kyiv amid jubilant protesters, and then later amid burned buildings and the same stones ripped from the ground in self-defence.

He does not act for political convenience; he acts with clarity, conviction and a sense of responsibility to Canadians and those whose freedoms are imperilled. To stand with him on this legislation not only recognizes the urgency of the issue before us, but also honours the dedication and leadership he brings before this House. He has championed measures to protect Canadians and to confront the very real threat posed by authoritarian regimes that seek to project their influence into our own communities. This bill would enable the Canadian government to confront, in addition to human rights abusers, dictator corruption and transnational repression.

Across our country, people who have fled persecution and violence rightly expect to be safe. They expect their homes to be sanctuaries, free from the nightmare of the dictator they now deny, yet reports show that authoritarian regimes are following their citizens into Canada to intimidate, to coerce and to silence them. This is real; it is ongoing.

Current laws have not kept up with the tactics of these regimes. Bill C-219 provides clarity, accountability and enforcement mechanisms. It would prevent Canada from being used as a safe haven by individuals responsible for corruption and human rights abuses.

Let me cover three parts of this issue in my remarks: the context, why this legislation is critical and our duty as parliamentarians.

Sergei Magnitsky was tortured to death for exposing Kremlin corruption and, from his grave, gave the free world its most potent weapon against the new authoritarians: targeted sanctions that strike the torturers, the kleptocrats and their enablers where it hurts most, their bank accounts and their visas.

Today, the long arm of Beijing, Tehran, Moscow and their proxies reach into Canada itself. There are death threats, bounties, covert police stations and intimidation of dissidents, all on our soil. This is not mere crime; this is transnational repression, the export of tyranny into the heart of the free world.

Thanks to the persistence over a decade by the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, we already had established human rights violations as Magnitsky powers almost a decade ago. We must now sharpen them into a dedicated tool to confront transnational repression with swift, automatic and merciless consequences for any regime that dares hunt its critics on Canadian streets.

In the Cold War, we drew a line and said “not one inch further”. Today, we must say the same. Canada will never be a hunting ground for dictators. We will find them, we will freeze their assets and we will make them pay.

Magnitsky's story is not simply a tale of courage; it is a reminder that one person armed with the truth can expose an entire system of lies. His murder was meant to frighten others into silence, but instead it triggered an international movement that forced democracies to confront a hard question about themselves: Do we still believe in moral consequence, or are we willing to let power excuse anything?

That is what makes today's debate more than a matter of policy. It is a statement about who Canadians choose to be in an age when authoritarian regimes think the world has grown too tired, too distracted or too divided to stand up to them. Our answer must be calm, clear and confident. Canada will not retreat from its role as a defender of those who risk everything to speak truth in countries where truth is treated as a crime.

We cannot talk about this without talking about the world we now live in, a world in which authoritarians are emboldened by new technologies. What once required secret agents crossing borders now only requires a phone, a television, a consulate or a proxy group operating quietly in our communities. Transnational repression is not abstract theory. It is happening in cities across the country, and it targets the people who trusted Canada to give them what their homelands denied them: safety, a voice and freedom.

If authoritarian states can reach into our cities to intimidate their critics, then we no longer control the space we claim as our own. That is why the response cannot be symbolic or slow; it must be predictable enough that dictators understand the cost before they act and swift enough that victims understand they are not alone.

Renaming the Special Economic Measures Act to the Sergei Magnitsky global sanctions act is part of that clarity. There is power in naming something after a man who died telling the truth. It signals that the purpose of the law is not hidden behind technical language or bureaucratic jargon; it is a law built around a moral line that should never have been blurred. The name teaches every Canadian what the law stands for and tells every authoritarian what it means when Canada acts.

The Cold War had a clarity that many in our era have forgotten. It drew a line between the world of fear and the world of freedom. Today the battle lines are not marked on maps, but they are just as real. They run through the phones of dissidents who receive threats at midnight. They run through the inboxes of activists who are told their families back home will suffer. They run through the hearts of communities of people who came to Canada believing they had escaped the regime, only to find that the regime had followed them here.

If we do not draw a line now, we teach these regimes that Canada can be bent, that our values can be shaped by intimidation, and that our borders are something they can violate. This is why we strengthen Magnitsky powers. This is why we direct them at transnational repression. This is why we sharpen the law into something that cannot be evaded with excuses or hidden behind diplomatic language.

Magnitsky's legacy is not only about his death; it is about the world that responded to it. Democracies came together because they recognized that a system that allows corruption, torture and murder to flourish unchallenged is a system that eventually threatens us all. The legislation before the House carries that same spirit; it connects the struggle of one man in a Moscow prison to the safety of a Canadian family in Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary or Montreal.

When we act, we are not only honouring Magnitsky's courage but also reminding the world that Canada is not passive in the face of cruelty. We are reminding people who fled oppression that this country takes their safety seriously, and we are reminding people who inflict oppression that they will face consequences even if they believe their borders protect them. This is the heart of the legislation: a line drawn clearly, without drama and without hesitation, a country's stating that its sovereignty is not for negotiation and its people are not for intimidation.

Transnational repression is a direct threat to the safety and dignity of people living here in Canada. It is carried out by regimes in Beijing, the Kremlin, Tehran and beyond. Our intelligence community documents that these governments have conducted operations across Canada, including intimidation; surveillance; harassment of activists, students and journalists; and persecution of diaspora communities. Whether people are Sikh, Hindu, Christian, Muslim or Jew, and whether they come from Hong Kong, the Donbass, Tibet or East Turkestan, or are among the Iranians who stand against their regime, all who come here to live in freedom now must contend with the designs of the dictators they fled.

Immediate family members of the very people we have sanctioned have lived in luxury in Canada while their relatives engage in corruption, theft or violent repression abroad. The tragedy of flight PS752 is a stark example. Families of the victims have waited years for compensation, despite frozen regime assets that could have been used to provide justice.

Russian assets could and should be directed to supporting Ukraine in its defence. Frozen funds should contribute to justice and accountability for people whose war for existence is waged this very day.

When foreign governments intimidate or threaten individuals on Canadian soil, it is not only a violation of the rights of the people affected but also a test of the strength of our laws and our institutions. Bill C-219 would ensure that Canada responds firmly, transparently and consistently. To people who have sought refuge in Canada, to those who live in fear of foreign regimes, and to Canadians who expect their government to defend their sovereignty, the bill would deliver clarity, protection and accountability.

It is now the responsibility of the House to act. Support for Bill C-219 is support for the rule of law, for victims of oppression and for Canada as a safe and principled country. May the bill not be a partisan one but pass as a parliamentary one instead.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to this bill.

For generations, people around the world have looked at Canada as a champion of human rights, of democratic values and of the international rules-based order. These principles define who we are as Canadians, but they also help keep us safe. They protect our sovereignty and security, and they shape how we engage with the world.

Today, as we consider Bill C-219, we are examining how Canada can continue to confront authoritarian aggression, defend human rights and protect those who are targeted by oppressive regimes, whether they live abroad or within our own borders here in Canada.

We are having this debate at a time when the global landscape has changed dramatically. Russia's unjust and illegal war on Ukraine is one of the clearest examples of why effective modern sanctions tools are so important. Throughout the brutal invasion, Russia is attempting to eliminate Ukraine as a sovereign nation. The invasion has been marked by mass atrocities, forced deportations of Ukrainian children to Russia, political repression, transnational intimidation of diaspora communities here at home, deliberate destruction of Ukraine's culture and identity, and more.

Canada has responded by deploying one of the strongest sanction regimes in the world to hold those who are responsible accountable. Canada has responded with concrete action, not just with sanctions, but with military, financial and humanitarian support to Ukraine to help Ukraine defend itself and help hold Russia accountable.

Since 2022, Canada has committed over $22 billion in support for Ukraine. I want to outline some of the support we have provided, because I think it is really important.

We have provided about $6.5 billion in military assistance. This includes air defence missiles, M777 howitzers, Leopard 2 tanks, drones, armoured vehicles and other critical equipment.

Canada's military training mission, Operation Unifier, has trained more than 44,000 Ukrainian soldiers, and over 300 Canadian Armed Forces members remain deployed in support of this mission. When I think about 44,000 Ukrainians who have been trained and prepared to fight to defend their country by Canada, it makes me proud. Canada has also committed $389 million to train Ukrainian F-16 fighter pilots and more than $140 million to support Ukraine's domestic drone production.

On the financial side, Canada has provided over $12.4 billion in direct financial assistance, which is the highest contribution of financial aid per capita of any country in the world. This includes more than $6.75 billion in loans through the IMF, $500 million in direct bilateral loans, Canada's $5-billion contribution to the G7's new extraordinary revenue acceleration loans for Ukraine and much more. Canada has also played a leadership role in strengthening Ukraine's economy and long-term resilience, including with the modernization and parliamentary ratification of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement.

These are some of the things we have done to support the people of Ukraine since 2022. It is not an exhaustive list, but my point is that Canada is a global leader in supporting Ukraine on a number of fronts, with financial, military and humanitarian aid, diplomatic support and a whole range of measures.

There are also sanctions. Since 2022, Canada has sanctioned nearly 2,300 people and more than 1,000 entities in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. In total, about 4,900 people and entities are currently sanctioned under Canada's autonomous sanctions laws. These actions matter; they really do. They restrict financial networks, freeze assets and signal that Canada will not tolerate violations of international law. They also impose consequences on those who violate human rights and the international rules-based order that protects countries around the world and protects Canada's sovereignty and security.

I outline this because it shows the scale of the challenge before us and the importance of sanctions as one of the tools in Canada's response to authoritarian aggression of any kind. Bill C-219 speaks directly to this. Its intent, I believe, is to strengthen Canada's sanctions framework, improve accountability and modernize the tools we use to confront human rights abuses and authoritarian influence.

I want to acknowledge the sponsor of the bill for bringing these important issues forward. There is much in this bill that I believe deserves careful consideration.

Bill C-219 proposes some important and necessary changes that I believe are important for Canada to make. The bill proposes adding transnational repression, for example, as a trigger for sanctions under both the Special Economic Measures Act and the Magnitsky act. This is increasingly important. Around the world we see regimes harassing, threatening or even attacking dissidents living abroad, including here in Canada. Russia, Iran, China and others are using these tactics to intimidate communities, suppress free expression and extend their reach beyond their borders. Canada must have the tools to respond decisively.

I believe there are ways that Bill C-219 could go even further on transnational repression by broadening the scope of this provision to include additional triggers. The bill suggests that it would strengthen enforcement by increasing penalties for sanction violations and improving information sharing between the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the RCMP and FINTRAC. On its face, these would be constructive steps that I believe align with Canada's intention to combat corruption, cut off illicit funding flows and protect the integrity of our democratic institutions.

The bill would update the long and short titles under the Special Economic Measures Act to better reflect the seriousness of the threats we face. These changes bring greater coherence to our legal framework and mirror developments in the approaches taken by many of our allies. These elements reflect good intention and respond to some very important global challenges.

There are, however, important concerns that some folks have, that some of my colleagues have and that I have with what is proposed in Bill C-219. It is our duty as parliamentarians, every time a bill is brought forward, to examine carefully whether every aspect of the bill is workable and responsible. There are elements in the bill that, as currently drafted, may undermine public safety or hinder the effectiveness of the very sanctions on regimes that the bill seeks to strengthen.

First, the requirement for the Minister of Foreign Affairs to publish a detailed public list of what are called “prisoners of conscience”, including the number of access requests and foreign responses, raises some important risks that we really need to consider. Publicizing sensitive information about detained individuals could jeopardize diplomatic efforts to secure their release. Many governments that arbitrarily detain dissidents retaliate on those people when information becomes public or when those governments are publicly shamed. I do understand the intent behind this provision. However, I hope that, through working with colleagues and all parties across the House, we can achieve a result that shines a spotlight on important cases while protecting the safety of the human rights defenders and Canada's ongoing work to secure their release through various channels. I look forward to continuing this work and these conversations with colleagues in the months ahead.

The bill would also place new operational requirements on the RCMP and FINTRAC. From my perspective, it is important that we reflect on this and examine it. Before we impose new duties, it is important we make sure that these things are actually feasible, that they are executable and implementable, and that they do not compromise existing enforcement requirements or responsibilities. Several provisions would impose rigid procedural timelines or require actions that do not align with the machinery of how government works today or with ministerial authorities. These issues are fixable, but it is important that we reflect on them. They may require amendments to ensure that the bill is practical, enforceable and consistent with our existing laws and statutory requirements.

Additionally, on the proposed changes to the Broadcasting Act intended to prevent foreign influence from sanctioned states, we have to be careful that the language is drafted carefully to avoid thresholds or unintended impacts on media freedom and have the bill achieve what the member is trying to achieve, the intent of which I, of course, support.

None of the concerns I have raised detract from the core purpose of the bill. In fact, they reinforce the importance of getting this right, and that is what I want to do. The global context makes modernization of sanctions important, but getting it right through our work in committee and working with all parliamentarians to make the necessary amendments is critical.

Let me be clear: I support the intent of the bill. I think we support the intent of the bill. We support strengthening sanctions, improving accountability and standing firmly with those who are targeted by oppression, whether they are in Ukraine or anywhere else in the world. However, we have to ensure that the bill achieves its goals without endangering prisoners, putting in place requirements on enforcement agencies that cannot be executed or creating legal frameworks that do not work in practice. At the end of the day, we want this to be effective, and we want it to work. That is what I would like to achieve.

The next stage of committee study will allow MPs to examine each provision in detail, to hear from experts and to reflect on how we can improve the bill. I am looking forward to that and to working with the member opposite and all colleagues in the House to make our sanctions regime even stronger so we can continue to protect human rights and protect our security and the safety of Canadians.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired, and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

The House resumed from November 26, 2025, consideration of the motion that Bill C‑219, An Act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act, the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), the Special Economic Measures Act and the Broadcasting Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.