Foreign Affairs Committee on April 30th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Good afternoon, everyone. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 33 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

Pursuant to the order of reference of the House of Commons on Tuesday, February 24, 2026, the committee is meeting on Bill C-219, an act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act, the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), the Special Economic Measures Act and the Broadcasting Act.

Today’s meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

I would now like to welcome our witness, the sponsor of Bill C-219, James Bezan, the member of Parliament for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

Up to five minutes will be given for opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions from our colleagues.

I now invite you, Mr. Bezan, to make your statement of up to five minutes.

Welcome.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, colleagues.

I wish to give a quick overview of the life and the sacrifices made by Sergei Magnitsky, who was a proud Russian anti-corruption freedom fighter.

Sergei was a Russian lawyer, auditor, husband and father of two. He was a man who believed in the rule of law. Most importantly, Sergei was not afraid to stand up for what he believed in. Sergei uncovered the largest tax fraud in Russian history, and the proper course of action was obvious to him. He immediately decided to testify against those corrupt officials. Sadly, he was arrested, detained, tortured and eventually murdered by officials of the Russian government almost 17 years ago.

None of the individuals who were responsible for the death of Sergei Magnitsky have been brought to justice.

Shortly after the murder of Sergei, an international campaign began to hold kleptocrats and gross human rights violators to account.

In 2012, Bill Browder and Russian opposition leaders Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Kara-Murza of the People's Freedom Party travelled to Canada to call on the government to adopt Magnitsky sanctions to protect Russian human rights and pro-democracy activists by applying visa bans and asset freezes to the people who killed Sergei Magnitsky and other Russian human rights defenders.

In 2012, the United States adopted Magnitsky legislation, followed by the European Parliament in 2013.

On February 27, 2015, Boris Nemtsov was assassinated outside the Kremlin.

In March 2015, resolutions calling for the Government of Canada to adopt Magnitsky legislation were adopted by the House of Commons and the Senate. Former Senator Raynell Andreychuk tabled Bill S-226, the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), on May 4, 2016, and I tabled the equivalent legislation, Bill C-267, on May 5 in the House of Commons. On October 18, 2017, Bill S-226 received royal assent with the support of all parliamentarians. This legislation ensured that Canada will not be used as a safe haven for foreign officials responsible for corruption and gross human rights violations. It is also a tool to protect our values abroad while protecting our sovereignty here at home.

As time passes, we have seen where there are loopholes in the original legislation, and we're trying to close those shortcomings with Bill C-219 right now. Using the name of Sergei Magnitsky in all of our sanction regimes delivers a strong political message against Putin's brutal dictatorship and his equally corrupt allies around the world.

Mr. Chair, I wish to point out that in the preamble of Bill C-219, the Sergei Magnitsky international anti-corruption and human rights act, there's a call for the government to work with its allies to establish an international anti-corruption court for the purpose of arresting and prosecuting corrupt foreign officials. We know that grand corruption—the abuse of public office for private gain by the nation's leaders—thrives in many countries and has devastating consequences.

Grand corruption also has global consequences and often cannot be combatted by the countries or citizens most immediately victimized by these kleptocrats.

An international anti-corruption court is urgently needed to promote democracy and human rights, protect human life and enhance international peace and security. Canada, the Netherlands and Ecuador issued a joint statement in November 2022 to establish an international anti-corruption court in The Hague, and that work must continue.

I just want to give a quick overview of the bill, Mr. Chair.

Bill C-219 will require the Department of Foreign Affairs to publish an annual report to advance human rights internationally, including the names and status of prisoners of conscience.

It would amend the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) and the Special Economic Measures Act to, for the very first time, define transnational repression and sanction foreign nationals who commit it right here in Canada as well as elsewhere.

It would ban immediate family members of sanctioned foreign nationals, so Canada cannot be used as a safe haven.

It would require the government to table in Parliament the names of foreign nationals and entities that are added to our sanctions list.

It would require the RCMP and FINTRAC to report to the minister on the making, administering and enforcing of all our sanctions.

It would allow us, as parliamentary committees, to recommend names and entities to be sanctioned and require the minister to report back on their decision to the House and/or in the Senate.

It would establish timelines for the forfeiture of frozen assets.

It would amend the Broadcasting Act to immediately revoke licences for media outlets that are operated by sanctioned entities and individuals or by the states that the House or Senate has recognized for committing genocide.

Finally, passing Bill C-219, the Sergei Magnitsky international anti-corruption and human rights act, is needed to protect Canadian values, members of our diaspora communities and the victims of kleptocracy and aggression by corrupt foreign states and their proxies.

I am open to working with all parliamentarians to make reasonable amendments that will strengthen this bill.

I'm happy to take your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much, MP Bezan, for your opening statement.

We will now go to questions from members, beginning with MP Ziad Aboultaif.

You have six minutes.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Bezan, congratulations on your bill. Thank you for advocating human rights and the safety of Canada and Canadians through your continual efforts up until now.

One of the major concerns for Canada's national security is foreign interference. This includes the work of foreign adversaries influencing our system of government and intimidating people on Canadian soil, and even the threat of sleeper cells, which may have infiltrated communities across the country in preparation for committing violence, intimidation or other crimes. Many of our adversaries, including China and Iran, among others, may seek to do harm to Canada.

What role do you foresee for this important legislation you have introduced in addressing these concerns?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to my colleague for his great question.

This bill is about making sure we can close some of these loopholes. Think about the definition in the bill for transnational repression. It is about ensuring that our communities here.... Over the years, we've heard from members of the Persian, Taiwanese and Hong Kong communities, as well as from the Falun Dafa and the Uyghurs, about how they have been targeted by other states that have come here and essentially tried to coerce them, or worse, with physical intimidation.

We need to make sure that.... There are individuals doing that on the ground here, as we saw with the Chinese police stations, which the Communist Party of China used to intimidate their nationals here who are now Canadian citizens. In the case of Michael Chong, one of our colleagues, his family in Hong Kong was potentially targeted, as discovered by CSIS and the RCMP.

We must strengthen the regime we have to ensure that we can protect Canadians who are here by birth or who have chosen to become Canadians. These individuals deserve our utmost protection, so let's hold to account those individuals going after foreign nationals here in Canada.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Thank you.

Your bill also proposed amendments to the Broadcasting Act. Simply speaking, it would make it more difficult for foreign nations to spread their propaganda products on Canadian airwaves. How do you propose to license them and to identify those who disseminate the message for foreign adversary regimes?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

We're suggesting in Bill C-219 that we take immediate action when the House and/or the Senate declares that a country has committed genocide or declares that it is being sanctioned by the federal government because of its activities in a country or, for example, as we've witnessed with Russia and its aggression against Ukraine.

The nexus for adding this to the bill and for making the amendment to the Broadcasting Act is that it took forever to get Russia Today—RT TV—taken off the airwaves in Canada. This shouldn't take months. In this case, it took over a year to have it removed from the airwaves in Canada.

We need to act more quickly. As we see more nations committing atrocities or being more aggressive with their neighbours in their regions, we have to be prepared to immediately remove the state-owned or oligarch-owned media that is being used to transmit their propaganda across the airwaves and into Canada.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Can you speak to the importance of consultation and collaboration with the diaspora communities, law enforcement and relevant regulatory bodies, such as the CRTC, in this fashion?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

We've done lots of consulting with diaspora communities. We have received support from the Persians, the Belarusians and, of course, the Ukrainian community, and from members of the Russian community who want a free and democratic Russia. We've heard from the Falun Dafa, the Uyghurs, the Hong Kongers and the Taiwanese, among others, who are all in favour of this. They want the opportunity to appear at committees and bring forward evidence to show where there have been human rights abuses against their people in their homelands.

What we're witnessing with the ongoing forced labour and reprogramming of Uyghurs in China is a case in point. They would love to come here and talk about that, especially with the new report that was recently tabled and released by the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China. IPAC has supported this, as have international integrity initiatives, which are also calling for an anti-corruption court to hold to account those who are committing gross human rights violations.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

This is a quick question. Some diaspora communities face the regime back home based on repression, which seeks to intimidate, harass and all kinds of stuff. How can Bill C-219 prevent these agents from operating within our country? What mechanism exists to hold sponsors of these acts accountable through sanctions or other means?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I think that, with the new definition for transnational repression and with the increased penalties that are going to be available aside from the sanctioning, also going after frozen assets and putting a timeline on the forfeiture of those assets to the benefit of the victims could go a long way in curbing the activities of these corrupt regimes or individuals who are abusing their positions as public authorities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much. You are right on time.

We'll go next to MP Rob Oliphant.

You have six minutes.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Thank you.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To begin, I want to make sure that we welcome our new members to the committee. You'll find this is a highly functional and collaborative committee compared to maybe where you've been, so welcome.

I also want to thank Mr. Bezan for this work and for his engagement.

I also want to thank you for mentioning Senator Andreychuk. I think I probably learned more about the world, diplomacy, Africa, Magnitsky and everything from former Senator Raynell Andreychuk than from any other human being. I know you'd like to change the name to the Magnitsky law. I might propose the Andreychuk law because of Raynell's work, not only in Canada but with establishing the statute of Rome and the International Criminal Court. Her work is profound in the world. I hope she's listening in her retirement. Maybe she's doing something better, but I don't know.

Thank you also for honouring the work that you and she did in 2016 on this.

The world's obviously changed since 2016. We have had some organic changes to IRPA and some organic changes through the way we do our regimes, the three regimes that we do sanctions under.

I know that Bill C-281 in the previous Parliament is probably the basis for Bill C-219. What is the process you used out of Bill C-281 from the last Parliament to this one? What consultations did you do, and how have you changed your ideas or thinking to present this bill?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I appreciate that, and I appreciate the collaboration, Mr. Oliphant, that you and I have had on this bill and the work that we continue to do together on advancing human rights around the world.

I'm glad you mentioned our friend Raynell Andreychuk. She is a true Canadian hero. What a life she's had, not just as a senator but as a jurist on the bench for many years, a human rights activist and, of course, an ambassador. She is one of my mentors and somebody I look up to. I will always treasure the times that we had to work together. I should have reached out to let her know that this was moving forward today, so I'll do that after. The beauty with CPAC is that it's always online. You can see it anytime.

You know, with this bill, we looked at Mr. Phil Lawrence's previous legislation, which did make it through committee and third reading in the House and went over to the Senate. We did pick some of the definitions out of there. The first couple of clauses come right out of Mr. Lawrence's bill.

On the previous bill I tabled on a Magnitsky update, we had further consultations as things continued to evolve with the aggression that we've seen over the last three years. In our conversations with the diaspora communities and with the diplomatic corps and colleagues, it was decided that this is the proper course of action. Our work with academics and human rights activists like Marcus Kolga, Irwin Cotler, Bill Browder and Vladimir Kara-Murza was all brought to bear in what you see as the final piece of legislation that's here at committee today.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you.

I think you're aware that the government is broadly supportive of the intentions of the bill and broadly supportive of updating these acts to ensure that they're not stuck in a previous time that's almost a generation ago now in the way parliaments are so quickly adapting.

We will, however, be proposing some amendments to make sure that it fits the machinery of government, that we don't have duplication and that we don't cause conflict between bills. We want to make sure that there's not undue red tape because, if we have our officials only reporting and doing stuff, they can't do their work, which we need them to do. We'll want to make sure that, at its core, the people whom this bill is meant to protect, human rights defenders, are protected and not put at risk. That will be the substance of our changes.

In the bill, you use the term “prisoner of conscience”. We tend to use the term “human rights defender”, because prisoners of conscience may or may not be human rights defenders. Could you explain how you maybe see those two terms as different?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I want to make sure I'm on the right tab here regarding prisoners of conscience. Just so you know, BillC-281, which passed right through the House of Commons, including this committee, in the 44th Parliament, actually had the definition of prisoner of conscience, and it was supported by all parliamentarians.

When you look at that definition, which we lifted from the bill and brought back here—it was clause 6 in the old one—that goes a long way. Amnesty International was also first to coin the term prisoner of conscience. That is by far the better definition for the people for whom we're advocating.

With regard to human rights defenders, yes, most prisoners of conscience and political prisoners are human rights defenders. However, it sometimes goes beyond that, and I don't think we should try to pigeonhole ourselves into just standing up for human rights defenders, when we're also going to be supporting political prisoners and prisoners of conscience who are standing up against government corruption. We're talking about those who are standing up against what we're witnessing right now in Russia. People in the streets who stood up against Vladimir Putin for his invasion of Ukraine, were thrown in jail. They may not necessarily fit into the definition of just being human rights defenders.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You know the Bloc Québécois supports the bill. However, I'd like to make a few comments that are really meant to be constructive. We've raised a couple of issues.

I noticed in Bill C‑219's clause on the Broadcasting Act, the text in the English version is identical to the one found in Bill C‑281. I don't know if it's a translation error, but the French version is slightly different. As I read it, the choice of words could influence a court's interpretation.

I raise this issue because I'd like to avoid any discrepancy between the English and French versions. I don't know if you'd be willing to make an adjustment, if need be. I find it hard to understand why the text is identical in English but not in French. That's all. I can send you both versions; it's quite easy to see.

Would you be agreeable to making sure the French versions of Bill C‑219 and Bill C‑281 are identical, as is they are in English? I'm just talking about the broadcasting part.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I wasn't aware there was a problem between the English and French and between Bill C-281 and Bill C-219. We're definitely willing to work with the legislative clerk to ensure there is consistency and that nothing is different in the French version versus the English version. I appreciate your bringing that to my attention.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

That's perfect. Actually, someone could use the French version in court and say that it doesn't match the English version.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

This is the time to fix it.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

That's correct. That's what committees are for, even when the governing party holds a majority. I've never seen anything like this.

There's something else. I raised it during my 10‑minute remarks on the bill. The bill says the Minister of Foreign Affairs must table an annual report in the House on the measures the government has taken to advance human rights internationally. That report would include the names and status of political prisoners and prisoners of conscience around the world and what the Canadian government is doing to support them. The report would also include—and this is where it's important, so I'll read this section to make sure it's clear—“a description of the Government of Canada’s communications with the families of prisoners of conscience and its consultations with civil society on matters of human rights.”

I have some concerns about that. I'd like us to work together to clarify things. Can you explain to me the intent behind this part of the bill?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

We know there are some Canadians, as well as those who have ties to Canada, who are being held as political prisoners of conscience.

You know, I did discuss this with Michael Kovrig and how it applied to his case. He believed that when we shine the spotlight on people who are being imprisoned.... His case was one of hostage diplomacy, but he was still a political prisoner. When you base it upon people like Jimmy Lai, someone who fought for democracy, freedom of speech and freedom of the press.... Jimmy Lai is not a Canadian, but he has family here. He has investments in Canada. This is someone with whom we're all very familiar. When we can raise the profile of these individuals, yes, I think it's in Canada's interest—and in the best interests of those wrongfully held by foreign states—that we publish their names, so people understand what's being done to help them.

I take your concerns seriously. They're similar to what I've heard from the government. We need to make sure we aren't compromising things like privacy or, potentially, any state secrets, but at the same time, we should know what efforts are being made to free these individuals.