Evidence of meeting #65 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 individuals.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Chair, Immigration Law Section, The Canadian Bar Association
That's right. They have to go through an ombudsman—it's quite a complex process—or a focal point, depending on what kind of sanction it is at the international level. Again, it's a kind of complex endeavour.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Thank you.
We will now go to Madame Vignola.
You have five minutes. The floor is yours.
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To start with, I will address Mr. Michalchyshyn and Ms. Middlemiss.
In our view, it's important to make sure that the right people are sanctioned so that we protect the victims of certain regimes, who are also here, and not encourage those regimes.
My colleague raised a question about sections 5 and 6. These two sections redefine inadmissibility and provide for the broadening of the definition of the term “sanction”, as we understand it. A number of witnesses have already suggested that there are problems with simply talking about sanctions without defining the term.
What impact would a better definition of the term “sanction” have, and what would be the consequences of not defining it? Why is it important to define the term?
12:25 p.m.
Chair, Immigration Law Section, The Canadian Bar Association
We're trying to define the word “sanction” so that we can understand exactly what we're talking about. With respect to the Special Economic Measures Act, Bill S‑8 proposes to expand the notion of sanctions to four types of sanctions: economic sanctions, sanctions for international peace or human rights violations, and sanctions against corruption. Those who are already subject to sanctions for human rights violations are inadmissible to Canada.
It's important that the types of sanctions be defined. I agree with my colleagues Mr. Daoud and Mr. Bellissimo that sanctions need to be kept in the context of human rights violations. You have to understand that there are different types of sanctions. Economic sanctions are sometimes intended to force a country to change its behaviour. It could also be an innocent person in Canada who is opposed to the regime. They may have had their refugee claim accepted, but their name remains on a list of individuals subject to sanctions. In that case, their application for permanent residence can't be processed.
12:30 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
Thank you.
As was mentioned, we believe that sanctions are well defined in other pieces of legislation, and we'll look at the scope of those hearings that are coming up. We agree that we want to protect the victims, but the tactics that we're seeing include evasion and transferring property between family members and between shell corporations. We think the quickly evolving situation requires this kind of broader scope at the moment.
12:30 p.m.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
You said earlier that some of our allies are imposing sanctions on individuals who don't face sanctions in Canada.
Would Bill S‑8 change that? Does Canada have to follow in the footsteps of allies when it comes to sanctions imposed on certain individuals, or should we retain the independent analysis process we currently have?
My question is for Mr. Daoud and Ms. Middlemiss.
12:30 p.m.
Executive Director, The Refugee Centre
As far as expediting how we put people on the sanctions list, I don't think that's really the purpose of this bill.
In terms of how it's being done now, if you refer to Mr. Bellissimo's brief, he pointed out from security experts that Canada has a pretty big lag when it comes to our sanctions regime. For example, we've kept countries longer on the sanctions list when our partners and our allies had taken them off. The examples were Liberia and Eritrea. If, for example, we were to pass this and cast this big, wide net in terms of economic sanctions, individuals from those countries, who have had some sort of financial connection to those countries because of the way they operate, would have been deemed inadmissible.
Basing our entire Bill S-8 legislation on a sanctions regime that is not quick to act and, from your own recommendations of 2017, needs a lot of improvement, is a dangerous road to go down.
I would refer back to our recommendations. They are very minor fixes that would still achieve and ensure what my colleagues here are also worried about in terms of individuals who are moving around assets, who should be labelled and targeted. We work in collaboration with our international partners, so those individuals would probably be identified more by our allies than by us first, given how we operate. We would still be able to use those lists, because we work in concert, which is in the legislation currently under IRPA with our international partners. Even if this is the case, we would still be able to target these individuals.
Lastly, I believe that, in the Senate debates we saw when this was being discussed, the CBSA said that 25 individuals they've identified have applied to come to Canada. There were 25 who have tried, and all 25 were rejected. There is a case here that our current inadmissibility process would cover them.
12:30 p.m.
Chair, Immigration Law Section, The Canadian Bar Association
Thank you.
I think we want to align ourselves with our allies. This committee also recommended that in 2017. In the meantime, for people who may become inadmissible under this bill, which defines inadmissibility—
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
Chair, Immigration Law Section, The Canadian Bar Association
Those individuals could face very severe and longstanding sanctions. It would be very hard for them in the meantime.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you very much to all of the witnesses for being here today. This is very interesting, and I believe that we are all trying to make sure that this legislation does what we want it to do. I think everybody is on the same page—making sure that the folks we don't want coming into Canada cannot come to Canada. I think what we're trying to get down to right now is making sure that innocent people are not caught up in this.
I took your point, Mr. Daoud, when you spoke a bit about ministerial...the potential for the exceeding of their authority. We saw this weaponization of audits through CRA in the past. We've seen this as something that is a considerable risk.
Ms. Middlemiss, I took your comment as well that it is a very complex process if you want to get your name removed from those lists, if you are erroneously put on that list. I think one of the things that we heard from witnesses on Tuesday was that it is also an extremely expensive process, considering the circumstances that many refugees are in.
I'll start with you, Mr. Daoud. Can you explain in more detail the experience of a refugee who may face challenges as a result of this bill? In particular, are the recourse mechanisms costly, including judicial review? How do vulnerable refugees approach that kind of challenge?
12:35 p.m.
Executive Director, The Refugee Centre
I think the population that we're dealing with is not very aware of these mechanisms. You need to have a certain level of knowledge to know what's available to you.
Let's take the example of a Venezuelan or Iranian person who, as a foreign national, has come to Canada, claimed asylum and gone through the entire process. They've been found to be a protected person. However, in the process of applying for permanent residency, due to some sort of economic connection to the state.... For example, in the case of an Iranian individual, they may have been forced into a religious school. A lot of those religious schools are considered entities that we would sometimes include under these lists, so, through no fault of their own, that individual could be identified, banned and denied permanent residency.
The legal avenue for them to do anything about it, such as a judicial review, which is.... We have a legal clinic. We have a couple of lawyers, and we try to take on as many cases as we can. A lot of the time we work pro bono, if not almost exclusively pro bono. A $500 or $600 stipend for a lawyer to do 120 hours' worth of work is not reasonable. I don't think it's a reality they can afford. I'll leave those legal questions to my colleagues.
Getting their name off the sanctions list is also a very complicated process. Add to that the fact that our sanctions regime isn't always up to date and always lags behind. I believe we left Eritrea on that list, for example. If they were to try to take their name off the sanctions list, although all of our allies have agreed to take them off the sanctions list.... If we kept them on, they wouldn't be able to do so.
We have a lot of working mechanisms here that aren't up to date. While we include these challenges, relying upon mechanisms that aren't up to date could cause a lot of problems.
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you.
I don't want to forget our colleagues who are online.
Mr. Kolga, I will ask the next question of you. I just wanted to express once again my sympathies for your friend, Mr. Kara-Murza, and his family, on the horrendous decision to sentence him to 25 years for a crime he did not commit.
Mr. Kolga, can you tell us more about the need for greater engagement and communication with Canadian civil society groups that are involved with human rights and democracy advocacy, including those who can best identify the foreign entities that should be placed on Canada's lists? Are there any amendments you would want to see in this bill that would facilitate that?
12:35 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
Yes, I believe the government could engage more closely with human rights organizations and civil society groups that are tracking human rights violations around the world, and work internationally to harmonize our sanctions with our allies, some of whom have close relationships with those civil society organizations. These people know best who should be targeted by those sanctions, so, again, closer coordination would be greatly welcomed.
I think that specific amendments.... This point doesn't speak necessarily to BillS-8 but to our broader sanctions regime...but ensuring some form of transparency and accountability....
In the United States, for example, the U.S. sanctions legislation, their Global Magnitsky Act, requires the U.S. government, the executive, to produce an annual report to demonstrate how U.S. sanctions have been used, who they've been targeting and why they've been targeting specific individuals and entities.
I think this is something that would be extremely useful in Canada as well, to help guide our sanctions and to make them more efficient in the long run.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
We will look at that during the sanctions study.
Thank you very much.
12:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Thank you.
We now move to the second round. During the second round, each member will be provided four minutes.
We start with Madam Kramp-Neuman.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Shelby Kramp-Neuman Conservative Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
That's perfect. Thank you, and thank you to the witnesses.
I'd like to begin with my questions for Mr. Kolga. I sit on national defence, as well, and you're a familiar face at that committee.
Over the last couple of days, as a member of national defence, I've also met with delegates from numerous eastern European nations, including Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Moldova. All of them have reiterated the importance of a strong military in the face of Russian aggression.
In your opinion, how important is it for a country to also have a strongly defined sanctions regime to help hold the aggressor nations accountable and our country safe?
12:40 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
It's extremely important that we have a strong sanctions regime. I think, quite frankly, over the past 15 months, during Russia's barbaric invasion of Ukraine, that Canada has demonstrated international leadership in terms of sanctions and applying those sanctions on members of the Putin regime and, more broadly, on the Russian government.
I believe—and I think a lot of other experts believe—the sanctions have been effective. They've certainly deterred, as far as sanctions on the export of dual-use technologies and such are concerned. They have hampered Vladimir Putin's ability to repair the weapons that have been damaged over the course of this war and to upgrade and build new weapons. This has certainly given Ukraine an upper hand over the past 15 months.
As far as deterrence is concerned, I think we're seeing the effects of the sanctions. We're seeing cracks appearing inside the Kremlin. There have been numerous reports of oligarchs who are close to Vladimir Putin questioning the logic and his decision to go to war and invade Ukraine.
I think sanctions were seen at the beginning of the conflict as some sort of a silver bullet that might stop the conflict, but they're not. They're a form a medicine. We need to sustain these sanctions. We need to continue applying them, because it's a strong form of pressure and, like I said, the pressure is showing in certain areas and certain parts of the Kremlin.
Like I said, we see some of these cracks appearing, so we need to keep the pressure up, work with our allies, further coordinate those sanctions and make sure that the loopholes that exist within our sanctions regime are closed. With the ones I mentioned in my opening remarks, specifically with regard to Russian state media, for example, we need to make sure those loopholes are closed.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Shelby Kramp-Neuman Conservative Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
That's excellent. Thank you.
My next question is for the gentlemen from the Ukrainian Canadian Congress.
It's obvious that the legislation is extremely topical, given Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, and I assume that this has played a role in the development of the bill. However, here we are a year later, after the bill has passed in the Senate.
Do you feel the developments in the conflict have warranted, perhaps, the strengthening of the legislation? Is there a way we could strengthen it?
May 11th, 2023 / 12:45 p.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
I don't have any specific recommendations on strengthening this particular legislation.
We have several recommendations on how we could strengthen our sanctions regime, which we look forward to giving to the committee. I can talk about it now, but I think we're—
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Shelby Kramp-Neuman Conservative Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
No, perhaps you could just provide that to the committee, and then, if I have a moment for a brief question, I'll move on to Ms. Middlemiss.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
You're out of time, but yes, make sure the question and the answer are very brief.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Shelby Kramp-Neuman Conservative Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
It's not very brief, so I'll leave it to the next round.
Thank you.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal