Foreign Affairs Committee on May 10th, 2016

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Thank you very much for your testimony.

Do I still have a bit of time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Yes, you do.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

What you said about participation in the reconciliation or peace negotiation and things like that was very telling. We also see it in Syria where women are not involved at all.

As a follow-up question, when you talk of the need for support for civil society, I presume you're thinking in terms of funding, and also the fact that women are not included in the reconciliation efforts there. Could Canada do something?

[Yanar Mohammed]

Definitely. Money is part of the story, but the bigger part is that after 13 years of—I don't want to call it a struggle, but that's how we talk in civil society—working to spread a culture of egalitarianism, we have reached a point where we can negotiate with the government on issues such as sheltering women and ending honour killings. Believe it or not, the laws have not changed. Neither Paul Bremer wanted to change them, nor consecutive governments wanted to lift the honour killing law or do anything against the trafficking of women.

The whole world is looking at the trafficking of Yazidi women under ISIS, but nobody knows that tens of thousands of Iraqi war orphans are being trafficked in broad daylight in Baghdad, in Basra, and Iraq proper. The government officials are not lifting a finger because some of them are beneficiaries of the fact that women are poorer and more vulnerable. We need logistical support in empowering our voices in negotiating with the government for a women's conference to be set up, for these issues to be put on the table, and for answers to be required from the Iraqi government. They are receiving all the income from oil revenue, and women are being impoverished and made more vulnerable in society.

As for inclusion on the reconciliation committees, that will definitely be one of the demands or requests on which we will need your support in the coming negotiations with the government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Miller, please.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Welcome, Ms. Mohammed.

It's important to understand, when it comes to talking about reconstruction or aid, we're not starting from scratch when it comes to Iraq. If you examine the historical role of women in Iraqi society, relative to other similarly situated countries in the Middle East, Iraq started relatively higher with participation of women in civil society; they were active in the workforce and in political life.

Indeed, if you look at the provisional constitution of 1970, rights were guaranteed to women and the laws enacted thereunder gave rights to women or enshrined rights to women that were being exercised. Then in the 1990s it started spiralling under. Then, as you said in your testimony, the Security Council in 2003...and it's been even worse since then.

What are the elements in the current constitution that strip women further of their human rights guarantees and promote a more religious-based agenda? What do you think could bring us back, and then be better, to where Iraqi society left off before the various iterations of wars that have happened since the 1990s?

[Yanar Mohammed]

Thank you. That's a very good question.

In the constitution, article 41 is one that formally addresses freedoms. It says that all Iraqis are free to choose their matrimonial law, under which women are married or divorced, and under which all family issues are to be taken up. But it is a very tricky article, because it has allowed the Islamic court and Islamic judiciary to override our previous law, which was called the personal status law.

The current constitution is flawed in many ways, but in this article it has given the upper hand to the extremists to abort all our previous achievements in Iraq, which decades of struggle by Iraqi women had put on the table. Article 41 needs to be repealed. We have been demonstrating and speaking about it and writing petitions against it for 13 years.

Then again, the strongest idea of the Iraqi government is the religious extremist idea, at this point. If they repealed this article, it would be as if they were announcing the failure of their political message.

I would say this article is the most important one to address.

The other thing is that the constitution does not have an article that protects personal freedoms in Iraq. I don't know what to say, what we should repeal, because the personal freedoms have not been enshrined in our laws. The reason I'm addressing this is that almost 1,000 women are killed in honour killings, which continues to happen, and the Iraqi government does not want to address it.

Domestic violence, trafficking, and sectarian violence continue to be the rule, and there are no shelters for women to go to and to be protected in. Iraqi officials still continue to say that this is an issue that will destroy our traditional values and some officials say religious values. I don't know what values those are that allow violence against women, but we know for sure that we need legislation that allows the NGOs to function, to open the shelters at this point. We know that for the 30 to 40 women who are hiding in our shelters now, we need the legal cover to make the function acceptable in Iraq.

This is a piece of negotiation that can be done. Between the years 2016 and 2017, we have reached the point, in our work in Iraq, at which some logistical support from the Canadian government can get us to the table of negotiation. We have addressed it to the head of the women's committee in Parliament, and we also included in the project building shelters for women in the transitional zone between ISIS and Iraq, where women have been compromised between ISIS rapes and Iraqi tribes' honour killings.

We have our projects on the table. We need logistical support to be taken seriously by our government and for them to step into the 21st century. It's unbelievable that in the 21st century, almost—I will throw the number out because I'm an activist, and activists throw numbers out sometimes—5,000 are sexual slaves in western Iraq, more than 6,000 women are being trafficked in broad daylight in Iraq proper, and 1,000 women are being killed in honour killings every year, and the government does not think of it as an issue of priority. For them to believe that women are real citizens there needs to be some talk from the international community who have supported their efforts so far.

I am not really an expert on the national action plan of Canada and how it supported efforts in Iraq, but I would like to know more about it, if there is any information. I will be going back to Iraq next month, and my colleagues will be interested to know more about that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you.

That's the end of the first round. Now we will go to Mr. Levitt.

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Professor Percival, in October 2015 you wrote that Canada's current approach to maternal health may keep girls and women alive, but it does not promote a context that improves their life chances. The reality is that in many countries pervasive discrimination and exploitation of women and girls is the root cause of maternal mortality.

Within the women, peace, and security lens, how would you see this issue addressed in the region?

[Valerie Percival]

That's an interesting question.

The UN Security Council original resolution on women, peace, and security in 2000 didn't really talk about health services at all. It was only introduced I believe in 2009.

The women, peace, and security agenda has a focus on providing health services, but not using those health services to try to change the context in which women and girls live. I would say the same statement would apply to the approach in the women, peace, and security agenda. It does not go far enough in order to try to change the circumstances in which women and girls live, because it doesn't promote gender equality in an unequivocal way.

It tries to undertake gender equality by stealth, as I mentioned before.

They think If we have this antenatal care and we have these many attended births, then we'll have achieved gender equality. But in study after study there are many gender-based norms that impact on women's decisions to seek health care and on the quality of the health services that are provided when they're at that health institution. Without addressing those broader gender norms, you can't make meaningful progress on health indicators.

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you for that.

I have a slightly more general question, and I'll start with Ms. Mohammed.

What are the most effective means of supporting and protecting women human rights defenders and local women's organizations working in fragile and conflict-affected states? In particular, let's deal with Iraq as a starting point.

[Yanar Mohammed]

Women defenders do run into danger from the local militias and paramilitary forces in addition to sometimes being intimidated by officials.

I will speak from personal experience. In the year 2008, I was in danger, which made me lose my Canadian passport. When I addressed it to the Canadian embassy in the region, there was absolutely no co-operation. I was compromised. We were at the height of the sectarian war, and I was left without a home and on the streets, but the Canadian embassy did not think of it as an important issue.

What women's defenders need is access to safe places, just like the jeopardized woman under ISIS. Your work entails that you challenge the governmental provisions for women, and our governmental officials are not the nicest at some points when it comes to women's issues. You find yourself grabbing your bags and running for safety.

I've been speaking about this for a decade. Women's defenders need some sort of a diplomatic passport to be able to go to safety when needed. If Canada can create a precedent and provide access in an honorary way to women who have a reliable track record and who are defending women, that would be a great thing, but I may be speaking fiction.

I feel that some of us with dual citizenship are privileged. We can go back and forth. We have seen the world at its best, and we live in places where it's at its worst. We can do a lot to alleviate women's pains in both countries, but we need to be given more privileges and more ability to move.

I think this is about women's defenders, but I don't want to make it just about women's defenders at this point. Was the other part of your question about women in general?

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Yes, about women's organizations, local women's organizations.

[Yanar Mohammed]

In our 13 years' experience in Iraq, we witnessed the funding going to women's organizations who were very close to the government and who did not work toward meaningful change. The women's organizations who were challenging, who were protecting and empowering all those pillars that are in resolution 1325, lost their funding. Some of them were dismantled and got boiled down to individuals.

I would say that funding is an immense tool for survival in addition to access to safety.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Clement.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Thank you, Madam Mohammed. Thanks for being here.

Maybe I'll start with a general question. In terms of what is necessary to be done, obviously a lot of the context in Iraq is sectarian in nature. I'm wondering whether you have any thoughts on the role of women to bridge the sectarian divide, which creates a lot of the conflict. It's an open-ended question, but maybe you have some thoughts on it.

[Yanar Mohammed]

It's a main interest of women to stop violence against women in Iraq. From our experience with more than 40 organizations in the network for anti-trafficking of Iraqi women, we rarely ran into sectarian differences at meetings. The ones who brought up the sectarian differences were singled out and were told on the spot that this was not the future we were shaping for Iraq. Most women's organizations that we have run into and that we work with have a consensus on ending sectarian differences.

I would like to make the scope of the question larger. You would be surprised at how, in society, the sectarian differences and the conflict are usually politically driven. In 2003 we were told that we should represent ourselves according to our religious identifications. I remember, while in a meeting with a U.S. and a U.K. gender expert when I was speaking about women's issues, she told me to go to the mullah of my group, the cleric, the religious head of my group, and to talk to.... It was clear throughout the years that the religious political parties were the ones who were empowered and pushed toward the Parliament.

It was political planning for Iraq that imposed the sectarian differences. If the Parliament formula changes, and it becomes more open for groups from the grassroots to be candidates, without all the restrictions being put on the elections, you'll be surprised. Society doesn't want sectarianism, but the political parties, especially those who are supported by the Islamic Republic of Iran, are the bigger winners in this game. Those who have a sectarian agenda, who caused half of the country to split, also caused ISIS to have nice social support for them.

Women will definitely stand against the sectarian differences, and so will the civil society institutions. It's the political parties who are supported by the Islamic Republic of Iran or by Saudi Arabia who are to the detriment of the Iraqi people. They are the ones we are learning tactics to stand against. It's a tough fight in Iraq, especially when you want to see a secular, egalitarian future. You have to be very careful. You are walking over land mines. You have to be very nice and gentle to killers, to those who have perpetrated massacres, but we feel we stand a chance as civil society institutions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you, Mr. Clement.

Mr. Fragiskatos.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you to both of you for appearing today.

Professor Percival, among your areas of expertise is global health care. You've written about the connection between health care and gender equality. In your testimony you said that it's important to engage and include the health sector in post-conflict settings.

I think you've hinted at this answer with respect to the comments on decentralization, but could you look at that? Could you offer advice to the international community, to Canada, on ways to include the health sector in post-conflict settings? I think of states that are emerging from conflict and finding ways to rebuild society. The economy is focused on, as is rebuilding or transitioning to democracy and the political makeup of the country. That's always given attention, but could you speak specifically about the health care sector?

[Valerie Percival]

In terms of the health care sector, there's a lot of financial information and resources that are provided to the health sector in particular areas—and they reflect the millennium development goals—maternal health, HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, etc.

What tends to happen is that donor engagement focusing on those particular areas results in fragmented health care delivery. You have NGOs coming in and providing some services, and you have the government providing other services. It's not a comprehensive integrated health care system.

That's why continuing to support the government through sector budget support, such as with Mozambique, is important. You need to build the capacity of the health system in order to provide those services, and the provision of health services is an important component of the social contract between the government and its citizens.

That's a reflection on how important the health system is in post-conflict settings. If the government can show it can provide good-quality health care services free for the most essential needs, and at low cost for other needs, that can increase the population's confidence in the government and engagement in society.

In terms of gender, the health sector has been underutilized and under-examined in the effort to promote gender equality in post-conflict settings. It's ironic that the institution individuals interface with most throughout their lifespan, which is the health sector, was completely ignored in the women, peace, and security agenda.

The women, peace, and security agenda said we need to encourage women to be integrated into the armed forces and into the police. We need to encourage participation of women in peace processes, and also encourage in places like Iraq, using a quota system, 30% women parliamentarians. The organization individuals have the most contact with was left out of this effort to promote gender equality.

One of the things the research I'm doing with the University of Liverpool recommends is to look at human resource strategies in the health system. You think about how to promote women as leaders within health institutions, and also to use the health system as a way to promote changing gender norms and social norms in society so that women and girls are better valued.

It's an interesting question. It's a very underutilized institution in post-conflict settings as a way to build the capacity of the state, to build the public's confidence in the state and their participation in civic life, and also to promote gender equality.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much for that.

In your testimony you made a comment about men and boys being included in, I think you said, sensitization programs. Can you point to specific examples of success stories where you've seen that, or relative success stories, if I can put it that way? Or is it a comment in the abstract?

[Valerie Percival]

There has been small-scale research that has looked at including men and boys in efforts to reduce the incidence and prevalence of gender-based violence. It was research that was undertaken in Côte d'Ivoire. It was spearheaded by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

I don't know the precise details off the top of my head, but it was successful. It was a successful strategy. I think there are efforts to study this in other settings.

I know the provision of antiretroviral drugs to women in Africa.... As you know, more women than men are HIV-positive. One of the challenges is that women will stay on antiretrovirals.... They're often discovered to be HIV-positive when they're pregnant. They stay on antiretrovirals throughout the pregnancy. After they give birth, they no longer go to the health clinic to access the antiretrovirals. There are a variety of reasons for this, but one is that often they're prevented from doing so by male members of their family and their community.

In Malawi, there's a project that looks at community engagement as a way to break down those beliefs about women, and promote their need and their right to access health care, and it has been found to be successful. There are efforts to learn lessons from that and replicate it in places like Mozambique. I have a friend who works for the CBC here. They're exploring if and how they can implement a similar program here.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much. Throughout this study, we have clearly examined women, peace, and security in a very broad way—and in a very specific way, looking at post-conflict settings, but in broad terms. If we are going to speak about that subject and deal with it, I don't think we can ignore the need for including men. The sensitization programs you mentioned are very interesting. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you very much to all the committee members.

I want to take this time to thank both our witnesses, and of course, Ms. Percival has been up all night waiting for us patiently—a big thank you to you.

Ms. Mohammed, I was very interested in the conversation you were having with the committee members about how to protect women's groups on the ground. That is a very important discussion that we have just started, and we have had other presenters talk about that. As you know, we are trying to put a report together that will deal with some issues on the ground like that because, if it is true that organizations, and the women on the ground trying to work with women who are in crisis, are running in fear for their lives, it would be to our benefit to find a way to deal with that particular dilemma. I very much appreciate your sharing this with us. You have given the committee something to think about, for sure.

Last, you asked about countries of focus. As you know, Mozambique is a country of focus. We are going to be starting the discussion about countries of focus and giving the government some advice about not only countries of focus but the partnership countries, and whether that should be expanded or, as has been discussed here, whether we should expand some of the areas, such as health and the like.

I want to take this opportunity to thank you both on behalf of the committee and I look forward to further discussion. Feel free to give us information—or if there are any other papers you think we should have a look at, we would appreciate that. Again, on behalf of the committee, thank you very much.

Now, colleagues, we are going to take a five-minute break. Then, we are going to go in camera and start dealing with drafting instructions for this particular study.

I will take this opportunity to take a short break. Those who shouldn't be here should leave; those who have to be here, please come back in five minutes. The meeting will be suspended for five minutes.

[Proceedings continue in camera]