Evidence of meeting #130 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was tools.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga Centre, ON
Yes. Therein lies the dilemma. Again, I worry about the expectation this bill would introduce for people around the world that the Canadian government would have a role in their situation.
Did you want to say something, Ms. Teich?
Co-Founder and President, Human Rights Action Group
Yes.
In terms of your point on expectations, this is what this process is so good for. It fleshes out the details. The clause-by-clause in particular will do much more of that next week.
I'm not a legislator, but it strikes me that, if this bill becomes law, it will be accompanied by a press release and backgrounders online, and it would become clear who it applies to. I think the piece on managing expectations can be tackled whatever the answers to those questions are.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga Centre, ON
I think it's much more complicated than that.
There's another point I want to raise. We heard Mr. McSorley talk about arbitrary detention. He used examples of arbitrary detention that I think people would argue about. Were they arbitrary detentions or were they other types of detentions? That's also a challenge with this bill. It raises expectations, once again, for any family with a person who's been unfairly detained in another country. All of a sudden, the Canadian government must utilize these tools. There are, unfortunately, plenty of Canadians who sometimes find themselves in a difficult situation.
Co-Founder and President, Human Rights Action Group
When it comes to the point about what is arbitrary detention, I'll say in response that the definition this bill uses for “arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations” is drawn word for word from the multilateral declaration. Likewise, the definition of “hostage taking” is drawn from the Criminal Code.
This bill is not meant to capture arbitrary detention. This bill is meant to capture hostage-taking and arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations, which is a different term.
You're right. It wouldn't cover everything. It is quite narrowly focused in that way.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga Centre, ON
If legislators are unable to make a differentiation and experts are unable to make a differentiation, you can imagine how a distraught family that has a loved one in a difficult situation would feel about the application of this bill.
I think I have run out of time.
Co-Founder and President, Human Rights Action Group
Can I respond for just a few seconds to that?
Co-Founder and President, Human Rights Action Group
That's fair enough. I imagine that there were similar concerns with the multilateral declaration. That declaration also used the term “arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations” and not “arbitrary detention”.
Liberal
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Fowler, you said it may not be advisable for the government to reveal everything it can, wants or wishes to do.
Don't you think, then, that laying everything out in a piece of legislation goes against what you said, specifically that the government needs room to manoeuvre in terms of actions it does not discuss publicly?
Retired Public Servant, As an Individual
Mr. Bergeron, I like this bill because it collects the tools that I saw could have been extremely useful in the situation I found myself in in Mali and Niger 15 years ago. All of the elements of this bill would have applied to that situation, that is, the Government of Mali could well have been subject to the threat of sanctions of some form or another. Individuals certainly could have been encouraged to be co-operative by paying them and possibly could have been encouraged to be helpful knowing that they might be received in Canada. All of those things I consider to be very useful tools.
I'm not a legislative expert and I didn't mean to suggest that those were the only tools. I certainly did mean to suggest that there were other tools that I didn't think government should talk about, and I still believe that strongly.
I don't look at this bill as being exclusive. I don't look at this bill as suggesting in any way that that's it; that's enough. It's not. Other things are needed.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
You did a CBC interview in 2011, if I'm not mistaken, and you said you were sure that the UN had paid a ransom for your release.
Retired Public Servant, As an Individual
A number of media reports suggested that a ransom had been paid.
Retired Public Servant, As an Individual
In my book, I was very clear that former prime minister Stephen Harper said outright that Canada had not paid any ransom and had not secured the release of any prisoner.
I think I added something about the fact that I had no reason not to believe the former prime minister.
That said, I'm not sitting here today because of my irresistible blue eyes. My kidnappers decapitated a British hostage six weeks after he and I were released. Six weeks later, a British colleague was released. I'm sure the same thing would have happened to us, but I'm happy it didn't.
Was a ransom paid? If so, I do not know who paid it. There are a number of possibilities, and I'm delighted to tell you that I don't know the answer.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Do you think that, in some cases, Canada may have let other countries pay a ransom in exchange for the release of its own nationals?
Retired Public Servant, As an Individual
In theory, it could have, but I have no idea. Was it another country or another organization? Who knows? I do know, though, that had that not been the case, I would definitely be dead.
A government's number one responsibility is to protect its citizens. That is much more important than adhering to great principles.
I mentioned what happened in the Philippines, and it cost Mr. Ridsdel and Mr. Hall their lives. They were killed, and the Norwegian was not. Few countries have a better reputation than Norway. It has a reputation of doing what it says, and is seen as a reasonable, respectable and generous country that honours its commitments. I agree, for that matter.
Liberal
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of the witnesses today for your testimony. It's been very interesting and informative. I deeply appreciate that.
I'm going to start by asking Mr. McSorley some questions about arbitrary detention.
In your testimony, you talked about Huseyin Celil and those coming from northeast Syria. I want to get your perspective on this, because on Tuesday, I asked MP Lantsman if she believed this bill would apply to Canadians, and she confirmed that she believed it would. Given your testimony and given your experience advocating for Canadians in complicated cases, I would like to know your thoughts on that.
How have you assessed the bill in this regard? I think you mentioned it a bit, but could it assist Canadians who are arbitrarily detained and their families, or does this still remain a challenge, particularly in cases where the Canadian government of the day does not have the political will to push for resolutions to these cases or an interest in that?
National Coordinator, International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
I noted at the last meeting that MP Lantsman believed this bill would apply to the cases of people like Maher Arar. I think I agree more with Ms. Teich's interpretation that the definition of “arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations” in this bill would not apply to his particular case. There can be an argument made about whether or not this bill is intended to be broad or narrow in its focus, but we believe that if we're going to seriously tackle issues of arbitrary detention internationally, these types of cases need to be included.
I take MP Alghabra's question about whether this would apply and whether we should be addressing every case where an individual believes there's been an unfair detention, but if I can take the case of Canadians in northeast Syria, they are being detained indefinitely without charges. I can't think of a different definition of what would be considered arbitrary detention other than cases where people are being detained without charges and with no access to justice. The fact that they're being held in such a way—not in order to influence the Canadian government, but because of unfounded accusations that have not led to legal charges—means they would be excluded from this bill.
I believe it wasn't the intention of this bill to capture those kinds of cases necessarily, but if we want to tackle these issues internationally, these types of cases must be included in discussions and, ideally, in any overall policy approach, whether it's about legislation, modifying consular services or making new policies at Global Affairs Canada.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you for that.
I would like to talk a bit about how we could improve this bill. We know that it outlines sanctions against those who engage in arbitrary detention. How would this be operationalized for cases where the Canadian government has been unable to or, as we've seen in Syria, unwilling to take action on behalf of Canadian citizens in a timely manner?
What additional measures do you recommend be added to this bill to ensure that Canada has a more robust, consistent approach to supporting individuals in these complex cases? MP Lantsman said very clearly there was a lot of ministerial discretion within this bill. What are some of the things we could do to ensure that it is actually robust and consistent?
National Coordinator, International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
First of all, including the definition of “arbitrary detention” would include those individuals.
Going back to the 2018 report on consular services from this committee, there are questions around how consular services approach the allegations of torture and mistreatment of those being detained and the turnaround time. Action and policy should be put in place to ensure that each case is treated fairly, independently and without bias.
Looking towards that, maybe not all those things would actually fit in this kind of legislation, but those are the kinds of solutions we need to be looking at.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Wonderful. Thank you.
Many of the crimes this bill targets, such as violations of sanctions and human rights abuses, are already covered under Canada's Criminal Code and international legal framework. Obviously for many the concern is that these crimes are not being prioritized by the RCMP and other enforcement agencies because they don't necessarily have the resources to do that work. This has led to a situation where people who violate sanctions or engage in human rights violations largely, or often, go uninvestigated and unprosecuted.
How should Canada ensure that existing crimes, including those related to sanctions violations, are prioritized and that there are concrete measures in place to make sure that these crimes are actually investigated and prosecuted? Do you think there is room in this bill to address that?
