Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 26th, 2020

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Ms. Triggs, I'd be very interested in your response. As Mr. Genuis said earlier, if you want to send us your written comments on this issue afterwards, I'd greatly appreciate it.

That said, a number of things have been rolled out as a result of the pandemic. We can assume that these things are having a tremendously positive impact. However, one thing initiated as a result of the pandemic is the collection of information on people, particularly health information. New practices have been developed. We can clearly see this on a technological level.

Do you have any concerns about this technological development and these new measures for collecting data on Canadians in terms of possible human rights violations?

[Peggy Hicks]

We have been following that issue pretty closely. As in many cases, when you roll out something quickly in the midst of a pandemic, it's not always the best way to make good policy. I think we have learned a lot about the use of contact-tracing apps and what are appropriate ways to safeguard privacy and data more effectively, through using data localization, through making sure that the process is transparent and that there are limits to how long data can be saved. All sorts of measures need to be in place when that type of technology is rolled out. Unfortunately, in a few places, we have seen the consequences when they haven't been in place.

Therefore, I do think those lessons learned really need to be put in place. There's also such a diffusion of the different contact-tracing apps and the ways they are being used that it would be good to have some cross-fertilization of that learning across contexts to make it easier for people to ensure that this technology is something they can rely on in terms of their privacy and their rights.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

Ms. Hicks, thank you very much.

The final series of questions in this round goes to Ms. McPherson, for six minutes, please.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much to both of our witnesses. This has been very interesting. I have the pleasure of going fourth, so many of my questions have already been addressed.

I'm going to focus a little on what my colleague from the Bloc Québécois has brought forward in terms of the impacts that COVID-19 has had on women.

Ms. Hicks, you were very eloquent when you spoke about those impacts, about the violence, the failure of women to be able to go back to work, the burden of house care and child care. What I'm interested in is how you would predict or how you would see Canada doing a better job, improving our role in addressing this, both domestically and internationally, because as my colleague Mr. Bergeron mentioned, this is not something that happens elsewhere; this is something that also happens in Canada. Could you comment on that?

Ms. Triggs, if you wouldn't mind, I might get you to comment on that as well.

[Peggy Hicks]

Thank you for the opportunity.

I do think this is an area where more attention has been paid, but there's never enough engagement on these issues. Therefore, it is really important that we look at what's happening and try to outline clearly what types of responses are effective.

One of the things we've emphasized is that when there is a crisis such as this, we know there is a need immediately for more referral services and more access for people for shelter. People need other options even in the midst of a pandemic, and I think we were somewhat slow to roll those out and to recognize that need. Both in Canada and through Canada's support elsewhere, those types of solutions are very important.

As we've also seen, and this has been well documented, women's access to health care during the pandemic has been greatly diminished. For example, women have not been able to easily access sexual and reproductive health and care, which has an enormous impact on their lives as well. Emphasis in that area is a second piece that I would urge Canada and other governments to look at.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That's wonderful. Thank you.

Ms. Triggs.

[Gillian Triggs]

Thank you very much.

I think the question of gender-based violence in the context of COVID has really been one of the most disturbing impacts of COVID, because it has existed, of course, as we all know, in all our societies, but COVID has shone a light on this and expanded our understanding. However, also, the lockdowns have increased family tensions and we've seen an exacerbation of an existing situation.

What do we do about it? Perhaps before I mention what one might do, one thing that has been so interesting is that within weeks of COVID we were getting reports from our call centres in many parts of the world, but particularly Africa and Latin America, where in one instance we were getting 10 times the number of calls on gender-based violence in these countries. It has been true all over the world. It's not particular.

It's a very worrying phenomenon. What do we do? At UNHCR, one of the things we're doing is developing call centres. We're massively or very significantly increasing call centres to give greater access to women to call in. We can then provide mechanisms for getting out to legal advice, to health centres, to psychosocial support where necessary and to other social services. We think that's one way of achieving it in the context of a COVID that continues.

As Peggy said, people need options, shelters, but perhaps what it comes down to ultimately is greater funding and stronger advocacy to ensure that this funding is in place, not just as a temporary measure but something that becomes a significant feature of the social safety net of all systems and includes women in the environment of a pandemic. This won't be the last pandemic. There will be others, and this is a continuing and societal problem.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Absolutely.

I might ask you my next question as well, Ms. Triggs. That was particularly focused on what we can do in terms of violence against women and protecting women around the world, particularly during this COVID time.

In terms of refugees, do you feel that Canada is doing enough? Do you feel that we are doing our fair share? If you aren't comfortable commenting on that, what could we do more of? I suppose that would be another way of looking at it.

[Gillian Triggs]

I would be reluctant to answer that question in many cases, but in the case of Canada, I have to say that I am delighted to answer. You really are one of the top leaders in the world. There's no question about that. We've all watched with great delight as Canada has held the line. You've understood the problem and you've stood by your understanding of the need for resettlement and for monies—that aren't always being expended in your own economy, but you've been prepared to provide funds in the COVID context internationally. That's been vitally important to UNHCR.

What more can you do? I've listed a number of things that you're doing so well for us. I won't go through them again. My reason for raising them is that you have a leadership position globally. You've stayed and delivered. You've been good to your values and you are known for that. We at UNHCR would greatly value your continued advocacy. You have a credibility on this question that very few countries have. We would like to see that developed and maintained. Continue, if you could, your advocacy on community sponsorship, on alternatives to dealing with these issues but also advocacy for investments, for dealing with the root causes that we were talking about a little earlier.

In the end, to achieve sustainable solutions, we have to have a maintenance and development nexus. We must invest, and we must deal with the root causes of, as you yourself raised quite clearly, such things as violence against women.

Thank you.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Ms. Triggs, and thank you, Ms. McPherson.

We'll go into our second round now. I'll keep a fairly close eye on time. There should be sufficient time for a member from each party to ask an additional question in accordance with the negotiated times. The first two are five-minute rounds, and the next two are two-and-a-half-minute rounds.

I would encourage you, witnesses and members, to watch the time frame as carefully as you can.

The first round goes to Mr. Genuis for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Hicks, thank you for your earlier responses. I would welcome written follow-up from your office on the situation in China as well as the challenges you are experiencing as a result of the Chinese government's efforts to redefine international doctrines around human rights. I would like to see Canada play a constructive role, pushing back against efforts of authoritarian states to redefine established doctrines of international human rights. The advice of your office on how to do that would be very helpful. I would just note as a general comment that obligations under the genocide convention are for states. Regardless of the actions of UN bodies, states have obligations under the genocide convention, including the responsibility to protect.

My remaining questions are for you, Ms. Triggs. We hear a lot in Canada from communities that are particularly following the human rights situation of members of their own community who are in other parts of the world, and they often raise concerns about the challenge of accessing the UNHCR certification process. There are a number of cases where this would apply. It would apply, for instance, to individuals who are not yet refugees but still face persecution, people like the Sikh and Hindu minority community in Afghanistan, where there are big challenges. There are efforts to sponsor members of those communities, but they have a greater challenge accessing our refugee system. If they are still in country, they are not formally qualified as refugees.

I'm thinking also about the situation of Pakistani minorities in Thailand, who are often quite vulnerable. Sometimes they're in detention camps. I know you have limits operating there, because Thailand is not a signatory to the refugee convention. As well, we hear about challenges from religious minority communities in the Middle East that may not actually feel safe in refugee camps.

I think this is important for you to hear, because when some of the world's most vulnerable refugees, persecuted people, have trouble accessing the UN certification system, it leads to greater pressure for us to draw refugees from outside of that process. I would appreciate your thoughts on this challenge and any feedback on what steps the UNHCR can take to better ensure that a larger proportion of vulnerable people can actually be identified and certified as refugees.

[Gillian Triggs]

Thank you.

You raise a critically important question. I mentioned that there are 47 million internally displaced people. Internally displaced people are not refugees. There are two completely different regimes. One is under the refugee convention for those who have fled their countries. They are outside their countries of origin and in need of protection. The overwhelming majority of people now—persons of concern to UNHCR—are in fact the very group you're describing. They're internally displaced within their own countries, where of course they're the responsibility primarily of their own states.

Because there isn't much time, I'd like to perhaps respond in writing to you on this question to make the point of the distinction. They are part of the UNHCR mandate, not because they're refugees, but because they are internally displaced. We have a strong responsibility, of course, to protect them.

I will, if I may, get back to you in writing shortly.

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

Thank you.

I would welcome further information in writing, but I do want to clarify that my question was not just about internally displaced people. It included internally displaced people, but I also mentioned the case, for instance, of Pakistani minority communities, like the Ahmadiyya Muslims and Christians in Thailand who struggle to access the certification process, at least based on the testimony I've heard from many people in those communities. I'm sure best efforts are being made.

It's not just internally displaced people. From what we hear, it's also people who are refugees and who, in certain contexts—either because of the policies of states, challenges with UNHCR or questions of safety in camps—have trouble accessing that certification process. That has implications for us, because if some of our refugee systems require people to be certified by the UNHCR, then they can't access those refugee systems and it creates a greater pressure for us to not rely on the UNHCR certification process.

I've almost eaten all of my time, but I'd welcome further comments in writing. We probably have about 15 seconds, if there's anything you want to say verbally now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Briefly, Ms. Triggs, you may make an additional comment if you'd like.

[Gillian Triggs]

We will certainly come back to you on the particular question that you've raised in relation to Thailand and we'll come back to you more clearly on exactly what the limits are on access to the refugee status determination process.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Mr. Genuis. Thank you, Ms. Triggs.

The next round goes to Mr. Fonseca for five minutes, please.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Hicks and Ms. Triggs.

Ms. Hicks, the Office of the High Commissioner released COVID-19 policy guidance for governments in April 2020, stating, “Some safeguards must be put in place including the respect of some fundamental rights that cannot be suspended under any circumstances.”

Ms. Hicks, would you be able to detail for us what some of those fundamental rights are?

[Peggy Hicks]

Certainly. Thank you very much.

Yes, you're referring to a guidance note that we did that looks at emergency measures and their impact. There are two different ways that states can derogate from human rights. There's the formal way—which is what you were referring to—under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which allows certain rights to be derogated when there is a state of emergency in place that has been notified under the convention.

Most places that declared emergencies did not actually go to that limit and did not try to officially declare a state of emergency and move towards derogation. The types of rights that can't be derogated, for example, include the right against torture—things that, under most circumstances, there couldn't be a justification for.

Most states instead relied on the provisions of human rights law that do allow for restrictions that are necessary for public health. It is the case that restrictions exist for security and health under existing law. You just have to be transparent, non-discriminatory and put in place measures to ensure that those steps do not overreach the necessity of the public health emergency.

It's that type of guidance that we've tried to provide, to make sure that states do not move in a direction that over-utilizes or is overly broad in the ways in which they restrict rights. We've obviously seen that many of us have had our rights restricted by lockdown measures and other things that are consistent with human rights law. We've also seen, as I mentioned earlier, that there have been instances where states have used such measures to disadvantage opposition groups, civil society and others in ways that were not necessary.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Have you seen that happening during this pandemic?

[Peggy Hicks]

Yes, our office has documented instances where there were arrests and roundups of people pretextually. I could get back to you with additional information. We've issued statements on those issues.

Thank you.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you.

Ms. Triggs, in a news release on November 19, the UNHCR warned that 2020 will be a record low for refugee resettlement. You mentioned that current rates point to one of the lowest levels of resettlement witnessed in almost two decades, which is a blow for refugee protection.

In which areas of the world are you seeing the greatest challenges with regard to resettlement, and what do you believe Canada's role in aiding these resettlement efforts should be?

[Gillian Triggs]

You're quite right. This is one of the lowest years we've had in more than 20 years, obviously in part because of COVID. One of the significant problems is that the resettlement countries are very few. We have to broaden the base. We need more countries. We have something like 25 countries that currently allow resettlement, but the numbers are declining, although we have high expectations in some jurisdictions. I think it would be fair to say that overwhelmingly we do not have resettlement through much of the world; we have about 25 countries. One of the challenges for the future is to expand that.

What is Canada's role? Again, I think it's very much one of advocacy. If Canada were able to talk to those countries with resources and capacity to encourage them to set up resettlement programs or complementary pathways through education, labour, mobility, family resettlement, reunion and so on, then we would see that as really a key function that Canada could play.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

You have about 45 seconds.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Ms. Hicks, could you tell us a little bit about how marginalized groups and individuals are disproportionately affected by COVID-19? What's being done to tackle these inequalities?