Foreign Affairs Committee on April 30th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Be very quick.

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

Parliament has recognized the Uyghur genocide. However, on various radio and television stations, we hear people who disagree. In that case, what do we do? Even the Prime Minister refused to call what is being done to the Uyghurs in China a genocide, even though Parliament has recognized it.

In that case, what should we do about Bill C‑219?

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

I'll just say this. If it's genocide and we have called it “genocide”, I believe there are grounds to ban the Chinese Communist Party from being able to use our airwaves, either directly or through their proxies, to say that Canada has got it all wrong and that there's been no genocide, when all of the facts point to the Uyghurs being....

You and I are members of Hong Kong Watch and the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China. We recently received reports from an insider who was part of the Chinese militia and police, who has escaped and is now spreading all of the information on how China has gone from overtly using forced labour of Uyghurs, as well as reprogramming and brainwashing, to now covertly doing it by moving people quietly across the country into other areas where they are still subject to forced labour.

Why would we allow people who are practising slavery to use our airways to promote what they're doing in China as not a human rights violation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

We go next to MP Grant Jackson. You have five minutes.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate your having me here today. It's always a pleasure to question a fellow Manitoban.

Congratulations, MP Bezan, on your legislation making it to this stage. Having worked with you for the last year, I know this is something you're extremely passionate about and an expert in. We appreciate your leadership within our team and across Parliament on this issue.

I'm curious about some of the more financial pieces of this legislation. I understand there are some components of the bill that deal with agencies working together, like the RCMP and FINTRAC, etc.

Could you go into a bit more detail about how this legislation will improve Canada's ability to identify and act against the financial resources of bad actors?

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

We want to make sure that when we do move forward with actually applying sanctions against an individual, entity or state, the legislation has teeth. There was a report published in March of last year by Global Affairs Canada on the evaluation of their sanctions operations. It pointed out that the sanctions bureau was understaffed. They didn't have the resources to go out there and ensure that our sanctions regime is working. Compare that to the Brits, the Americans, the Aussies and the European Union, where they have a much more robust desk to actually ensure that sanctions are being carried out. We want to ensure they're having a financial impact on those we are targeting to ensure they're not using our secure financial system, our relatively stable real estate market and our rather easy citizenship requirements to come here and hide their wealth, hide their families—in some cases their girlfriends or boyfriends—and shelter here when they should be facing the music back in the regimes where they are carrying out their kleptocracy and/or atrocities.

If we're going to stand up against those corrupt individuals, then we have to make sure we increase the powers of the RCMP as well as FINTRAC and provide proper reporting on all these transactions of over $10,000. We need to make sure that reporting is being coordinated on those sanctioned individuals back into the Global Affairs Canada sanctions desk. That's the only way we're going to have teeth.

I realize that Global Affairs Canada is looking at how they can make those improvements now, but if we legislate those changes and provide the increase in the reporting and tracking of individuals and money—you know what they always say, follow the money—you'll find out exactly how they are getting around the system.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

On that note, the bill requires forfeiture proceedings within 12 months, I believe.

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

That's on the frozen assets.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

That's on the frozen assets side. Do you think the government currently has the legal and/or administrative capacity to meet that timeline?

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

Yes, definitely on the frozen assets. There were updates to SEMA in 2022 by the government on frozen assets and making sure that we can freeze the assets of different governments, oligarchs and others who have been sanctioned on the list.

We know that there is through the.... What's the name of that one bill? I'll have to get back to you. There's another piece of legislation that deals with the issue around forfeiture of assets. That is something else that is already in place.

However, all you have to do is look at the great big Antonov sitting at the end of the Pearson airport. That's a Russian frozen asset that's been sitting in limbo for the last three years. There is $23 billion of Russian cash in Canadian dollar accounts that have been frozen, again, for three years. What we're saying is that we shouldn't be sitting on these things for that length of time. Let's actually forfeit those assets and get them in the hands of the victims.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

What does that look like to you? I come from the provincial level, where we have a criminal property forfeiture fund. Police services and also victim services organizations can apply annually for funding, to have their operations funded through those resources. What would that look like if this bill were implemented at the federal level?

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

The changes that were made by the government in 2023-24 actually provide a framework for how they go about forfeiting those assets to go to the benefit of the victims. Whether that's going to rebuilding in Ukraine or compensating families that had their houses blown up by Russia, as an example, they would make that determination. They can't use more than what assets were forfeited for. If those assets are worth $23 billion, they can then use $23 billion. All this bill does, since that framework is already in place, is say let's get this thing done in 12 months.

[Grant Jackson, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

We go next to Braedon Clark.

You have five minutes.

[Braedon Clark, Liberal, Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you, everybody, for welcoming us all to the committee. It's great to be here.

Mr. Bezan, thank you for your work. It's really important and timely, as many other members have said. I remember about 10 years ago reading Red Notice, which is Bill Browder's excellent book that I would recommend to everybody. It's about Sergei Magnitsky and the whole case. It's really good work that you're doing.

I wanted to touch on something that Mr. Jackson was just raising around property and asset seizures, which are of course an important part of any kind of sanctions regime. As was mentioned, there are timelines on the government without any exceptions for things like judicial reviews or appeals, which obviously are not uncommon when assets are seized. I'm wondering if, in your view, there is any room for exceptions or exemptions to allow for those judicial processes, which could certainly come forth, while also respecting the fact that asset seizure needs to be a part of a robust sanctions regime.

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

I believe the current regime on frozen assets under SEMA actually provides for that judicial balance. Individuals who say, “Hey, look, you guys may have sanctioned XYZ, but I'm actually AB over here, and there's a mix-up in names, or it's a family member that I'm estranged from,” can still make those cases.

There's definitely an issue, as we witnessed on the Iranian assets that are currently being seized here in Canada. It's still not completely resolved. We have the Iranian embassy here, as well as the Iranian consulate in Toronto, and their diplomatic residences in Toronto and Vancouver and also here in Ottawa.

We know there was a court order from the Ontario Superior Court that the downing of Ukrainian airlines flight PS752 was an act of terrorism. It awarded damages to the families of those victims. As we know, over 80 Canadians and permanent residents killed on that flight were from Canada. Those families sued and were awarded compensation. Unfortunately, those assets haven't been forfeited to pay the families of those victims.

I know there's some diplomatic red tape and the Department of Justice is actually fighting this in court on behalf of the regime in Iran. Let's remove some of those blockades. That's why the 12-month timeline again comes into play. We shouldn't allow foreign states that have been sanctioned to wiggle out of their responsibilities by playing diplomatic games and using our court system to hang on to their own assets when we have people and families who lost loved ones in such a terrible terrorist attack.

[Braedon Clark, Liberal, Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS]

Mr. Bezan, your bill obviously lays out a certain number of criteria that would trigger sanctions on that list. Global Affairs Canada deals with a huge number of consular cases as well—more ordinary cases, I guess I would say—with over 7,000 as of March 2024.

In your view, what would be the mechanism to switch between those two worlds, so that we make sure for Canadians abroad, who deal with difficult situations all the time—and there are thousands of those—that those services are provided in a timely and efficient manner, while also recognizing that there's another system here that you're proposing and that also needs to work effectively. How do we make them complementary rather than perhaps overlapping at times?

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

First and foremost, I appreciate the amazing work that consular services do in helping Canadians in need, often including those who are temporarily incarcerated.

I think that ultimately, in the regulations that will come into play in this and the discussions we're going to have between Parliament and government, we can find a balance there to ensure we are going after those who are prisoners of conscience. They weren't given legal process. They aren't there because of actual violations of laws that also would be violations of laws here in Canada. I think there are ways in which we can measure it off, but we want to stop things like hostage diplomacy. We want to stop those who, like Jimmy Lai, are thrown in jail because they believe in democracy and the freedom of the press. That's where I think we draw the line and say, “Okay, these people are being held because of their beliefs, their strong defence of democracy and human rights or their political views, and they shouldn't be in jail.”

We are coming up on Iranian accountability week, where we will highlight political prisoners who are being held in Iran. Often, those political prisoners have family ties here in Canada. Sometimes we're successful as parliamentarians in getting people released, and other times we're not, but I think we need to continue to hold these corrupt regimes to account for the inhumane activities they're carrying out, and this is a good way to do it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

That concludes your appearance, Mr. Bezan. Thank you very much for appearing before the committee, answering all those questions and making your statement.

We will now briefly suspend to go in camera.

Thank you.

[Proceedings continue in camera]