Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on May 13th, 2008

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

You were a senator for nine months in 2005, a senator of the Senate of Canada, and you'd never heard about this case at the time?

[Roméo Dallaire]

I started to pick up the dossier, as I've said, about a year to a year and a half ago.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I see, so after there was a change in government.

You implied how the government's position is politically motivated. Insofar as the current government's position is identical to the former government's position, would you also suggest that the former government's position was politically motivated?

[Roméo Dallaire]

I think the former government's position in regard to Khadr...they didn't want to touch it. And I think the opposition certainly didn't. The consistency is in the opposition, even though the circumstances have changed and Khadr has now been tried--correction; he has been brought in front of an illegal court, and we are aware of the charges, although he had been held illegally. At least the opposition have decided that this should be changed, although the government seems to be holding the same story it held in 2002, when we had more information.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I'm not sure that's an answer.

Thank you.

[Roméo Dallaire]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

For what it's worth, that round was exactly five minutes to the second, thereby making it the only round that was the right length. I'm not complaining, but I am alerting the committee to the fact that it's now five minutes to two and it would be difficult to engage in a second round.

I can see different ways we can proceed here. I think the most logical, if I may place a suggestion with you and see if it meets a favourable response, is simply to ask our witnesses to make any concluding remarks and then to give them our thanks, dismiss them, and move to Mr. Silva's motion. Does that seem reasonable?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

All right, let's do that.

Do our witnesses have any concluding remarks?

[Prof. David Crane]

Again, I thank you for this time, and I thank you for the ability to listen to your concerns and to your questions.

I would only ask this esteemed committee, at least from my particular points...it is the precedent this would set, and that is trying children for war crimes. I am not condoning any acts of any child. I am only submitting to you that there are many levels of justice, to include domestic justice, and that we have the capability, you have the capability, of reviewing his case at the appropriate level and dealing with it openly and fairly. And I would submit to you that the case of Omar Khadr should be reviewed here in Canada, as opposed to in Guantanamo.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Professor Crane.

[Roméo Dallaire]

My comment is that in this era of complex and ambiguous conflict scenarios and threats, it is absolutely essential that we use all legal means possible to prevent us from being used or abused in the international community by those who are not at all operating under the rules. In so doing, it is essential, in the case of Canadians who are being held internationally, that we do respond by the proper rules. In the case of a child soldier who is Canadian, then the rules are clear that he is a child soldier and should be repatriated to the country in order to be in a proper judicial system, because the one in the United States has not recognized the fact that he is a child soldier. Any movement we do beyond those fundamental principles that we have as laws, in order to attenuate what we think might be a threat, are manipulative and ultimately will bring us down.

We must work within those rules and apply them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you very much to both of our witnesses. We do appreciate you coming here. Essentially, you are dismissed while we turn to other business. So thanks again.

The other business that is before us is a motion that Mr. Silva placed before the committee. We did get unanimous consent to proceed with this, even though there wasn't the normal notice period.

Perhaps, Mr. Silva, I can turn the floor over to you.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Sorry. I see there is a point of order here.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

So that people don't bolt after we're finished with Mr. Silva's motion, I have one for which I would like to ask unanimous consent to waive the 48-hour notice, in order that we can deal with something, because we're not going to be meeting again until after the break.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Okay. While Mr. Silva is dealing with his comments, we'll have the clerk distribute it.

Thank you.

Mr. Silva, please.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think all of us have agreed that the situation in Burma is quite appalling and horrific, and what's taking place there is beyond imagination.

I just wanted to make sure this committee had a statement that in fact we are very much worried and concerned, and that we condemn the actions of the military junta in Burma.

I put the motion forward; it's in both English and French. I have heard there might be some issues of concern about how the motion is worded. I think “whereas” might not be the norm, but I'm not sure if that's an issue.

If there are any other points that need to be changed in terms of the English to French translation, I'm quite willing to accept whatever they are—I think the Bloc might have some issues. I think they would constitute a friendly amendment, and I don't see any problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

You have the floor, Mrs. Barbot.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to talk about the expression "whereas". Perhaps we will decide that it is not part of the motion, but, in general, we do not accept them. As well, the third and fourth paragraphs say substantially the same thing. When the redrafting is done, I would like one of them to be removed.

In addition, at the bottom of the text, it says this, and I quote: "...that the subcommittee condemn the resistance of the military junta...to international aid..." I propose that, instead, we say "condemn the refusal". in our opinion, it is much more than a resistance.

Those two items aside, we would agree to pass the motion. I will get you the French copy, of course.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Yes, Mr. Kenney.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I just want to be sure. Did you get consent to extend time for a few minutes, or do you need a motion? I just wanted to be clear.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Actually, I had asked beforehand if we could go for 10 minutes, yes.

I have a sense that if we get into debate, our 10 minutes won't be enough, so let me ask two questions. One is to Madame Barbot and one is to Mr. Silva.

I'll ask Mr. Silva first. Mr. Silva, would you be willing to regard these as friendly amendments, allowing us not to have to debate them?

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Yes, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

The second thing, Madame Barbot, is that I have a sense we might not have been able to capture all of them, unless our clerk has been very fast.