Canada-China Relations Committee on Aug. 17th, 2020

[Sharon Hom]

Thank you.

I wasn't casting any imperialist intentions on anyone through those questions, but, apropos of the question, which is relevant, as of July 7, 2020, there were 15,246,481 people who had participated in 1,096 protests. This is all being documented and tracked on a regular basis by Hong Kong people and groups supporting analysis and research of what's happening.

Are they monolithic? No, they are quite diverse in age and background. There are the young.... You should note that 80% of those arrested in the movement last year were young—not the Communist Party's definition of young, which goes up to 40 or 45, but young as in under 30. There are social workers, civil servants, journalists, medical workers. There is a rapid growth of trade unions in Hong Kong as a result of the movement. So there are many things happening, and the movement is diverse.

You've heard over and over “be water” and “leaderless”, but the bottom line is that there are the five demands, of which only one has been, reluctantly and painfully, responded to, and the other four are still demands: end of impunity for police violence, universal suffrage as promised in one country, two systems, and respect for rights and freedoms.

You can see that there were over 500,000 who voted democratic in the primaries, and the massive victory of 17 of the 18 districts taken over by pan-dems. They were all a vote of confidence. This is what Hong Kong people want, and those are pretty strong signals.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you, Professor.

I want to thank you, in particular, but also all three of you for giving us some hope that efforts are continuing, which Canada should support.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you, Mr. Harris.

Now we'll go on to the second round.

Mr. Albas, please go ahead for five minutes.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to say thank you to all our witnesses for their testimony today.

Mr. Chatigny, if you wouldn't mind, I'll start with you.

I am concerned about the safety of the 300,000-plus Canadians who reside in Hong Kong. I'm also concerned that the Canadian government may or may not be ready in case many of them decide to come home, and many may not have proper documentation, for example a Canadian passport.

I believe you've mentioned that the communist regime in China may exert some control over who can leave based on what travel documents they have. Is this a concern, and how does the Canadian government address it quickly?

[Stéphane Chatigny]

Once again, I must point out that my immigration expertise is limited to Quebec's immigrant investor program.

Beyond that, I believe that most expertise can currently be found inside the government, specifically in the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Okay. We've had in this committee former ambassador Mulroney come and talk to us about the need for Canada to take action, obviously working with allies, but to also, more importantly, rethink our foreign policy framework when it comes to China.

Now, just the way this has all happened in Hong Kong, it begs the question of whether or not China even respects its own policy of one country, two systems. I'm also concerned about what that may mean for other parts of that policy, including Taiwan.

I'll ask Professor Hom first, and then maybe I'll ask the other two to also speak to it.

Do you believe that Taiwan will be the next target after Hong Kong?

[Sharon Hom]

I can't presume to be inside the mind of authoritarian General Secretary Xi Jinping, but clearly Taiwan was in the minds of the Chinese leaders in 1984. The whole idea of one country, two systems was so that Taiwan would be convinced that this was the solution to the reunification with the mainland. That's because Deng Xiaoping thought that in 50 years the mainland would catch up and be more open and reformed. However, since 2013 those hopes have been very sadly dashed by what Xi Jinping has done.

But enough of that. I think Taiwan has very clearly looked at Hong Kong and said, “One country, two systems—not for us.” I think that's exacerbating the cross-strait tensions, because now it's very clear. The President of Taiwan has said clearly that they are not going to come back. They said that they can't declare independence. Well, they don't need to declare independence. It's already a country. Although geopolitics is not my area—I'm just a human rights lawyer—I think Canada should consider strengthening international support and recognition of ways to have diplomatic engagement with Taiwan that gives strength to Taiwan.

It's not just Taiwan; we saw it in the region of the South China Sea. Japan is kind of nervous. Everyone's nervous in the region. Getting away with not following the rule of law, trashing your own international obligations and ignoring international standards, not just in human rights law but under the international maritime law, under treaty law and under all of this, poses a danger to not only the 300,000 Canadians but really the 7.4 million people living in Hong Kong and in the region.

It is very important to hold the line on Hong Kong. We are the front line to defend the region.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes. I appreciate your testimony.

Mr. Kaeding, you haven't had a chance to speak in my intervention. What do you think in terms of Taiwan? Will it be next?

[Dr. Malte Philipp Kaeding]

I agree with Professor Hom that it's very difficult to predict.

What I have tried to say is that because China is driven by all these fears, it could be very likely a miscalculation on one level in the Chinese regime, where they're saying, okay, maybe we have to please Xi Jinping; or Xi Jinping is worried about domestic unrest or the dropping of the GDP and then tries to deflect, feeding the hypernationalism in China. Unintended consequences, or maybe intended consequences, do happen.

So I don't think it's a specific strategy to take Taiwan next, but it's always on the list of something to be resolved.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Albas.

I will now give the floor to Mr. Dubourg for five minutes.

[Emmanuel Dubourg, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is now my turn to welcome all the witnesses taking part in this meeting today on such a crucial matter.

I do not have a lot of time, but I would like to direct my first question to Ms. Hom.

Ms. Hom, you have 18 years' experience as a professor. You have trained judges and lawyers in various institutions. I would like you to continue sharing your knowledge with us.

In a May 2020 interview with the Hong Kong Free Press, you said that change always starts with the people, not with government-enacted reform.

In the context of this new national security law, do you still believe that demonstrations by the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong will get results?

[Sharon Hom]

I need to retire for real so that I can reflect on the whole experience of the past many years.

Just quickly, one thing that's very important from the training work I did on the mainland is that you need to build the personnel infrastructure. You don't just build rule of law with no people. That's why it was very important to train the young lawyers and the young teachers. Indeed, they are the ones who are now having to carry and fight that steep challenge of legal reforms on the mainland. They are indeed still doing that.

I'm very intimidated that this committee, more than any government committee I've ever appeared before, has actually gone and read our writings and then come back and thrown our writings back at us. I think that's the human rights part. Intellectually I have a certain degree of pessimism, but as a human rights lawyer and activist, we really don't have the luxury of pessimism. Our job is to make sure that we provide solidarity and create a safe space for Hong Kongers to be able to continue the work. The Hong Kong student union took out a full-page ad saying that they would die, they would give their lives, for freedom, with a powerful opening letter that quotes Hannah Arendt on totalitarianism. Even in these dire circumstances, you are seeing these students, these young people, continue to speak out.

I have to add that on the mainland, where we have now seen more than 75 years of real repression in the ecosystem, you have support for Hong Kongers. They are being prosecuted. They have gone to prison. They have suffered harassment. Douban is the largest online social media platform for reviewing films and social media. They have millions of people. Someone just posted, despite all of this repression, a comment reviewing the national security law in Hong Kong. They had the nerve and courage to give it one star. To me that shows, “Why do we think we'll win? Because you can't kill us all.”

The big cartoon is the rooster: You can kill all the roosters, but it won't stop the dawn. It just won't. That's a fact.

[Emmanuel Dubourg, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Thank you so much. I have just one more question, if I have the time.

You trained those lawyers. You even said that a number of sections and aspects of the new legislation were poorly translated.

How are these young lawyers going to protect or defend the demonstrators? Can Canada provide support for the situation?

[Sharon Hom]

That's a terrific question and a terrific place to look. Canada was involved in many legal exchanges, rule of law exchanges, just like the U.S. and just like the EU. In those legal exchanges, if you're going to engage and do something helpful, then think about technical support. Mainland lawyers do not know Hong Kong common law. Hong Kong lawyers do not know mainland socialist legalities, or in whatever version you want to say it. We need to have some training on that.

I would also note that Hong Kong legal academics have been engaged since July 1 on organizing legal, detailed workshops on how we elaborate and understand...and we should be supporting those efforts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Dubourg.

Now we have Mr. Genuis for five minutes, please.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses. I think this has been a really inspiring panel.

Professor Hom, thank you for your call to optimism. We've seen how people-powered movements have been able to bring about incredible change in environments where maybe it wasn't expected. I think the courage you speak of from these Hong Kong protesters can be an example for us as parliamentarians. Sometimes we hear people say, well, we should be cautious, because we should be afraid of the consequences if the Chinese government retaliates, but we have this inspiring example of people who are aware of major consequences to their own lives and security and yet are courageously standing up for justice and freedom.

I would note as well that we just celebrated 75 years since victory in the Pacific, honouring Canadian soldiers who gave their lives for the freedom of Hong Kong. I hope that we as a committee, and as parliamentarians, continue with their example in mind, as well the example of these protesters.

I wonder if you could speak to the potential positive downstream effect of the stand being taken by people in Hong Kong. We've talked about the downstream negative effects of how the Chinese government might follow up what's happening with action in Taiwan and elsewhere. What about the downstream positive effects when people stand up for their fundamental rights inside of Hong Kong? What is the likelihood that this will impact people's response to abuses of human rights on the mainland?

[Sharon Hom]

Thank you, Mr. Genuis. I'm so sorry I missed meeting with you in February when I was speaking in Vancouver. I'm so glad I get to finally see and meet you, and I hope we have some follow-up opportunity.

First, there are actually downstream positive effects for everyone in the movement, and when we see them, each voice, each ad, each action is so inspiring to us.

The second is that downstream affects us, and that's why Beijing censorship must control it. It has the downstream positive effect of inspiring mainland human rights defenders and just ordinary citizens on the mainland.

Third, it's not just a downstream effect flowing one way; it's one big global trend against authoritarian regimes. We see it in Belarus and we see it against police violence in the U.S. and also in Tibet and in the Uighur movements. These are all mutually inspiring each other and learning from each other in terms of strategies, but I think the Hong Kong movement has been particularly inspiring because Hong Kong people have taken on, against all odds and incredibly, what the diplomatic community views as impossible to take on because the diplomatic community is too cautious.

I would say that the time for naïveté is indeed over, but it's also clear that the time is over for the 30-year assumption that the strategy of engagement with China was working. I think it's time for a reset of that strategy, and at the core of that strategy should be people.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you very much.

I wonder if you can follow up on the question of sanctions as well, because there have been discussions in both panels about sanctions. I didn't hear any of our witnesses today say they were against targeted Magnitsky sanctions. I heard concerns about making sure that our sanctions were targeted against human rights abusers, that we weren't imposing broad, poorly targeted sanctions against a whole economy. Frankly, the trend in sanctions anyway is to be focused on those who are guilty while trying not to impact those who are innocent.

Do you want to comment on how we can effectively target sanctions to not impact the wrong people but to impact those who are responsible for repression?

[Sharon Hom]

I agree with Mr. Kaeding that they should be as broad as possible on targeted individuals, and those would be individuals who are in the United Front, in the police, in the administration of the the Hong Kong SAR.

I also want to direct you to the fact that extensive lists of individuals and what they have done have already been compiled by Hong Kong people. I would urge the committee to review those lists and, when you urge targeted sanctions, to pick your targets, because I'm telling you there are hundreds.

The second part of targeted sanctions is that threatening a sanction is not good enough. There has to be an actual follow-through, and you have to actually see it.

Third, mainland leaders in Hong Kong have literal investments in the outcome in Hong Kong that protect their invested, privileged positions in real estate and everywhere. I think they need to be targeted broadly, and these individuals have all been identified.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

That's the key to Magnitsky sanctions, right? They're targeting the individuals, not the people.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you, Mr. Genuis.

Now we'll go on to Ms. Zann for five minutes, please.

[Lenore Zann, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry to keep asking questions of the same witness, but I am very curious.

You had mentioned, Madam, that there were also a number of people in mainland China who were concerned about what is going on in Hong Kong. I mentioned at another committee the other day that I had also seen on television interviews with people living in the Republic of China who did not seem to think that this new law was particularly a problem, who felt it was more to protect China as a whole and to protect them.

Could you please elaborate on just how much people in mainland China actually know about what is going on and what the majority of thought is when it comes to the changes that the government is trying to implement in Hong Kong?

[Sharon Hom]

I think that if we say that 7.4 million people in Hong Kong are quite diverse, certainly over a billion people are also quite diverse—