Thank you.
Honourable members of the committee, good morning. Thank you for inviting me to discuss Bill C‑219.
The promotion and protection of human rights are a central priority for Canada. The laws that the bill seeks to amend play an important role in strengthening the Government of Canada's ability to respond effectively to gross violations and acts of violence committed abroad. Today, I will present some initial perspectives on potential areas for improvements to the bill.
The bill proposes amendments to the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act. We welcome the requirement to publish an annual report outlining Canada's efforts to strengthen human rights globally. Such a report would be an opportunity to meaningfully capture the breadth of our engagement in this area. However, with the bill as presently proposed, we are concerned about a number of elements.
First, we are concerned that divulging the names and details surrounding cases of individual human rights defenders, including Canadians, could put their safety at risk from the regimes that have detained them. Thus, any list that the minister could publish, even with ministerial discretion, would in reality be a short list not likely to satisfy the intent of the bill.
Second, the bill uses the term “prisoners of conscience”. It would be preferable to follow Canada's long-standing practice of using the internationally recognized term of “human rights defenders” when referring to individuals who peacefully advocate for human rights. This approach is reflected in “Voices at Risk: Canada's Guidelines on Supporting Human Rights Defenders”.
Third, we have concerns that publishing a detailed list without distinguishing between foreign nationals, Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada could have unintended negative consequences for the delivery of consular services to Canadian citizens.
The bill also proposes amendments to the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act and the Special Economic Measures Act. I will comment on some key elements of those proposed amendments.
First, the bill seeks to expand and clarify sanctions triggers, including a response to transnational repression. We consider expanding the situations in which Canadian legislation could be used to be desirable, but we would suggest that a broader expansion to allow for other situations, such as countering scam centres and cybercrime, would be preferable.
Second, the bill would issue visa restrictions for the immediate family members of sanctioned individuals, subject to limited exceptions. However, sanctioned individuals and their family members are already prohibited entry under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act administered by the Minister of Public Safety. Thus, creating an additional visa ban power would be duplicative. It also risks undermining the clear accountability of the Minister of Foreign Affairs for sanctions while diluting existing accountabilities for inadmissibility decisions and weakening parliamentary oversight. We would suggest removing it.
Third, the bill proposes rigid mandatory timelines for asset forfeiture and disposal. We consider that these timelines could undermine due process and international coordination, and we believe they should be removed.
Fourth, the bill would mandate information sharing from the RCMP and FINTRAC and would impose fixed timelines for sanctions decisions. While information sharing is essential, we believe these measures would negatively impact the handling of sensitive intelligence and decision-making flexibility. As a result, we believe they should also be removed.
Finally, the bill proposes amendments to the Broadcasting Act that would require the immediate revocation of a broadcasting licence where a broadcaster operating in Canada is found to be under the significant influence of a foreign person or entity that is subject to Canadian sanctions or has committed genocide. This legislation does not fall under Global Affairs Canada's mandate, but Canadian Heritage notes that the provision raises concerns regarding a lack of proper process, a defined role for the CRTC, and clarity around key concepts such as vulnerability to significant influence and evidentiary standards.
In conclusion, Bill C-219 engages a broad range of legislative frameworks that underpin Canada’s efforts to promote and protect human rights and to hold perpetrators of serious violations accountable. While the bill advances objectives that Canada strongly supports, several of the proposed amendments would raise important legal, operational and coordination questions, including with respect to due process, existing authorities and effective implementation across government.
As the committee considers this bill, Global Affairs Canada would encourage careful consideration of how proposed changes can best reinforce the effectiveness, coherence and credibility of Canada’s sanctions and human rights tools.
Thank you, Chair.