Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Feb. 26th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Welcome to the 69th meeting of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. Today is Tuesday, February 26, 2013.

Today's hearing is televised. That means the fixed cameras here can record this.

I was asked by one of our members whether we could seek unanimous consent to have one other camera take film footage from a fixed angle. Is that acceptable?

[Voices]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

All right, good. We'll do that.

Colleagues, as a subcommittee we undertook to pursue the important issue of the self-immolations that have been going on in Tibet over the past few years. This was discussed by this committee in camera, but I am giving away no secrets when I say this is a tragic series of circumstances that involve at least 100 fatalities so far. More than half of all the politically motivated self-immolations in the world relate to the situation in Tibet.

Based on that concern, we agreed to a series of hearings, and we invited the Tibetan government-in-exile, or the Central Tibetan Administration, to send representatives. They have done us the honour of sending their leader, their Sikyong, Dr. Lobsang Sangay, to be our witness today.

In the interest of time, I'm going to request that we go directly to testimony from Dr. Sangay. Upon completion of the testimony, we will turn to questions from members of the committee, following our usual format.

Dr. Sangay, I invite you to begin your testimony.

[Dr. Lobsang Sangay, Sikyong, Central Tibetan Administration]

Thank you very much to the chair and the members of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights. It's a great honour and privilege to be in your presence and to testify about the situation in Tibet on behalf of the Tibetan people.

I would like to extend deep appreciation to Canada for awarding His Holiness the Dalai Lama the honorary citizenship of Canada. His Holiness the Dalai Lama sends his good wishes. I also want to thank Prime Minister Stephen Harper for meeting with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and for being an advocate of the Tibet issue.

We also welcome the statement issued by the Honourable Foreign Minister John Baird on December 14 on self-immolation, particularly encouraging the Chinese government to enter into dialogue with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and his representatives. The Tibet administration maintains that we have to solve the issue of Tibet peacefully through dialogue. The “middle way” is the official policy that seeks genuine autonomy within the framework of the Chinese constitution.

I'd also like to extend our appreciation to the Honourable Minister Jason Kenney and the government for allowing visas to 1,000 Tibetans in the state of Arunachal Pradesh in India to migrate to Canada. There are 900 Tibetans so far, and we hope that the first phase of Tibetans will be coming to Canada. Canada has been a very generous host to 5,000 or so Tibetans. Since 1971 many Tibetans have come here and settled; they have been, by and large, law-abiding residents and citizens of Canada, for which we are very grateful.

On the topic of self-immolation, I'm sad to inform you that the number has increased and keeps increasing. Now we have 107 cases of self-immolation. Just two days ago, a few more Tibetans committed self-immolation. It all started in 2009. There was one case of self-immolation in 2009 inside Tibet. In 2011 there were 13 cases of self-immolation. Unfortunately, the majority of self-immolation took place last year. There were 28 cases of self-immolation in the month of November alone, when the Chinese Communist Party had its 18th party congress meeting in Beijing.

This year, seven self-immolations have taken place, and their universal slogan or aspiration is that His Holiness the Dalai Lama return to Tibet. Canada has witnessed His Holiness visit here, and thousands of Canadians have met him and heard him, but that right is denied to Tibetans inside Tibet. Hence, the universal aspiration of Tibetans inside Tibet is to have His Holiness the Dalai Lama return to Tibet.

The second aspiration is to have freedom for Tibetans. We fully recognize and appreciate that democracy, freedom, and rule of law are three core principles of Canada and are also enshrined in the Canadian Constitution. We would like to have that freedom that Canadians enjoy, and that seems to be—and that is—the aspiration of Tibetans inside Tibet, as reflected in the slogans of self-immolators.

As far as Tibetan Buddhism is concerned, 108 is an auspicious number. Unfortunately, if there's one more self-immolation, it will be very unfortunate and inauspicious in the history of Tibet, because this phenomenon of self-immolation is a new one, a tragic one, and a sad one.

The Tibetan administration and I have made repeated calls to Tibetans inside Tibet not to resort to self-immolation. We categorically discourage drastic actions, including self-immolation, because as human beings we really don't want to see anyone die the way Tibetans are doing inside Tibet. As a Buddhist or a person of faith, or non-faith, we pray for all those who have died, including self-immolators, and as Tibetans, we support the aspirations of Tibetan people inside Tibet, including self-immolators.

On their behalf I am here today in this august body to highlight and share with you the sufferings and aspirations of the Tibetan people so that your committee and through your committee the Canadian Parliament, which has stood with us for all these years, will continue to stand with us.

Unfortunately, instead of finding solutions, the Chinese government is resorting to the blame game. They are blaming us as the instigators. If you look at the blame they have laid out before us, first they say the self-immolators are crazy; they've lost their minds. When that did not work, they started to stay it was the jobless, hopeless people who were resorting to self-immolation. Then when self-immolation escalated, they said this was instigated from outside, by us, and there is not even a shred of evidence to support that allegation. We welcome Beijing or the Government of China to come to Dharamsala to see our files and look for evidence. I can categorically say that the allegation made by the Chinese government is baseless, and they are welcome to come to Dharamsala and find out if there is any evidence.

The blame and the solution lie with Beijing. The causes of the self-immolations are the occupation of Tibet and the repression of Tibetans. Tibetans are saying occupation is unacceptable and repression is unbearable. Political oppression, economic marginalization, environmental destruction, cultural assimilation, and denial of religious freedom are the reasons why Tibetans are forced to resort to self-immolation. There is no space for any form of protest; there is no freedom of speech for Tibetans. Hence, tragically and sadly, they are resorting to self-immolation.

Having said all that, we do believe, as I stated at the beginning of my statement, that we have to find the solution through peaceful means. Tibetans have subscribed to non-violence and democracy for these many decades. We will continue to subscribe to these principles. We believe in them, and we seek the support of friends like you who believe in democracy and non-violence, who believe that the Chinese government ought to enter into dialogue to solve the issue of Tibet peacefully. This is what we believe, and with your support we will continue to speak out for Tibetans inside Tibet.

I really appreciate the members of Parliament, members of the committee who are here, who have been long-term friends of Tibet and the Tibetan people, and I urge you at this critical time of Tibet to be with us and know that you are on the right side of the cause. As we see around the world, justice ultimately prevails; it will prevail in Tibet as well, and that will be partly because of your effort and support.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Dr. Sangay.

We have enough time to have seven-minute rounds for questions and answers.

We begin with David Sweet.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Dr. Sangay, it's good to see you, the Sikyong of the Tibetan people. Thank you very much for your testimony.

You mentioned that the solution rests with Beijing. These 107 self-immolations...that's an extraordinary number, and it's hard to fathom people lighting themselves in protest, and what they must have gone through to have that kind of motivation.

What has been the response of the People's Republic of China so far? Have they begun to soften their position? Do they have some kind of empathy towards what's going on?

[Dr. Lobsang Sangay]

Unfortunately, the Chinese government so far has resorted to the same old hardline policies. In fact, they passed a law criminalizing self-immolation, and with that law, they are punishing not just the self-immolators, but their family members and friends. Even those Tibetans who witness self-immolation, and who try to rescue the bodies of self-immolators, have been met with long-term imprisonment, up to 12 years. It's unfortunate that not only are they resorting to the blame game, but now they're criminalizing it. The courts are prosecuting not just the self-immolators but the family members and their friends, and even the witnesses who might want as a human gesture to rescue the body so that person can have a decent funeral. It's really sad that they have resorted to more hardline policies, rather than finding a peaceful, more reform-oriented policy to solve the issue of Tibet.

I would just like to add that if you look at the genesis of self-immolation, you might get an indication as to why Tibetans are resorting to such tragic acts. From 1987 to 1989, there was a series of protests in and around Lhasa, the capital city of Tibet. Sporadic protests happen on a regular basis everywhere in Tibet. Most of the protesters were arrested. If you shout “human rights” in the streets of Tibet, you get arrested, you go to prison, you are often tortured, and sometimes you disappear.

If you are caught with a picture of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, that's illegal. You're not supposed to have a picture of His Holiness the Dalai Lama; rather, you are supposed to insult the picture of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. You will be in deep trouble.

In 2006-2008, there was a series of protests, but most importantly in 2008, in a hundred different counties and all over Tibet, there were major uprisings and protests. The Chinese government again clamped down and arrested hundreds and thousands, put many of them behind bars; many were tortured and suffered for a long, long time. If you look at the genesis of protests and protestors, it seems Tibetans inside Tibet have concluded that if you are a protestor and you are caught...given the likelihood of being in prison for a long time and being tortured, given that the suffering will be enormous and it will last so long, it's better—and it's a sad conclusion—to self-immolate, because the chances of you not falling into the hands of Chinese authorities are higher. This is a fact, because some of the self-immolators have left their last wishes and a message with their friends, clearly saying, “I'm going to self-immolate, so make sure I don't fall into the hands of Chinese authorities.” Their fear of falling into the hands of Chinese authorities is so high, it's so scary, that they feel if they self-immolate they have to die.

If you look at the genesis of protests and the protestors, you understand why Tibetans are resorting to self-immolation, which is a tragic form of protest inside Tibet.

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

I asked you about the response of the People's Republic of China to these self-immolations. What has been the response of Tibetans inside Tibet to their brothers and sisters self-immolating? What is the feeling among Tibetans now?

[Dr. Lobsang Sangay]

From inside Tibet it's very difficult to know, because essentially Tibet has been shut down for foreign journalists, foreign tourists, and even Chinese tourism is discouraged. Having said that, you do get some hints and some information, where they say they understand the stance of the Tibet administration, that we discourage self-immolation. They also know it brings tears and sadness to His Holiness the Dalai Lama to have Tibetans self-immolate. They understand all that, but they say, what else can we do? They insist that with 107 self-immolators so far, not even a single Chinese person has been harmed; not even a single Chinese restaurant, hotel, or anything Chinese has been harmed or hurt. That's what they say: We are Buddhists; we cannot harm anybody, but the last resort we are left with is harming ourselves.

If you read the article in The New York Times, it says Tibetans travel from village to village in groups on their motorbikes, wherever the self-immolations are taking place, and they pray; they join the prayers. In that sense, the people seem to pray for the self-immolators and those who have died. It is generally known in Tibet about self-immolators, and the support, from a humanitarian point of view, is extended to the family members who are left behind.

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

Thank you, Dr. Sangay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Mr. Marston, please.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Dr. Sangay. It's great to have you here again.

I read recently an article where you were quoted as saying that it would be good if Mr. Harper's government sent the new ambassador for religious freedoms to China to investigate human rights abuses and abuses of religious freedoms. You also were quoted as saying that the growing business connections between Canada and China should not silence Canada’s concern with human rights.

I just want it to be on record that I very much agree with that sentiment. It is a concern here. You'll know that recently our government gave the go-ahead for the Chinese company CNOOC to purchase into the Canadian oil and gas company Nexen. That particular company is like an extension of the Communist Chinese regime. It's basically operated by them.

I just returned from Burma last week. While there, I was told of situations of alleged human rights violations by the Chinese against the Burmese. I also understand, from speaking to you and others earlier, that similar abuses have taken place in Tibet.

Would you like to expand on that, Dr. Sangay?

[Dr. Lobsang Sangay]

We do believe that economic rights and trade are important, but human rights should be equally important. This is a request and also a hope, because Canada, as its Constitution says, regards democracy, freedom, and the rule of law as the core principles, the bedrock, of the Canadian Constitution and ethos. In that sense, trade is very important, but human rights should be equally important.

Speaking out about human rights is important, because if you look at the Tibet issue, from one perspective it is not a constitutional challenge, an institutional challenge, or a lack of political will on the part of the Chinese government. For example, we seek genuine autonomy within the framework of the Chinese constitution. But constitutionally, as per article 31, “one country, two systems” was established, and it was granted to Hong Kong and Macau. So constitutionally and institutionally, there is a system to address separate systems.

With regard to political will, the Chinese government has said again and again that they have.... I mean, at one time, the Chinese government was, and claimed to be, Marxist and Communist, and it has kind of shifted to a capitalist system. Now it's socialist with Chinese characteristics.

Similarly, on the issue of Tibet, they've also shown a willingness to address...and not just Tibet but Taiwan. They've shown a willingness to deal with Taiwan and recognize that the status quo is possible, meaning that China's government has shown political will whenever they want to address an issue.

Historically speaking, China had more differences with the British and Japanese than with Tibetans, yet they have normalized relations with Japan and Great Britain. They have shown that constitutionally and institutionally, they have the political will to address problems where they have to—and they have.

In that sense, Tibet is not yet addressed. The disturbing question is why not? Maybe from the Chinese government's point of view, the people of Hong Kong are Han Chinese, the people of Macau are Han Chinese, and the people of Taiwan.... But maybe people in Taiwan wouldn't agree; they call themselves Taiwanese.

So they might see them as Chinese, and as long as it's a “Chinese” problem, they will address it. When it becomes Tibetan, essentially the Chinese government seems to be saying, “You're not Chinese, hence we are not addressing your problem.”

In that sense, it is all the more important that the human rights of Tibetan people be respected, because the Chinese government has shown in other areas, in other communities, the willingness to address this.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I'd like to go back to a meeting that you and I had a few weeks ago. You talked to me about why the self-immolations were happening, the kinds of pressures leading to a new....

You spoke to me at that time about the Chinese policy of cultural annihilation within Tibet by moving waves of Chinese people into Tibetans' autonomous region. Would you like to comment a bit further on that today for the benefit of the committee?

[Dr. Lobsang Sangay]

As far as cultural assimilation is concerned, if you take the example of the Tibetan language, at the university level, let's say in Tibet University in Lhasa, the capital city, the medium of instruction is Chinese, not Tibetan. At the high school and middle school level, the medium of instruction is Chinese, not Tibetan. Now even at the primary school level they're introducing Chinese as the medium of instruction.

In some areas of Tibet, even students are coming into the street and protesting and saying they want their language to be used in the classroom, because they are Tibetan after all and their language is very important. It's part of their identity, and to preserve their identity, language is very important. It's not just as the official language in offices, but even at school the Tibetan language is discouraged, and, for all practical purposes, even in government offices.

I have some friends who worked in the Chinese government in the Tibet Autonomous Region. If there are 20 staff members in one office, and if two of them are Chinese and 18 are Tibetans, when they convene their meeting they have to converse in Chinese. If a postman, let's say a nomad, wants to send a letter to his relatives in another village, he would have to write in Chinese, not in Tibetan.

When you impose that kind of system, discouraging your own identity, even language, you can clearly see the assimilation drive to essentially first dilute and then destroy the Tibetan culture is very much a part of the practice of the Chinese government.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

That's why the cry for self-immolation is coming out of this country.

For the record, I believe Canada was on the right side of history when we chose to support His Holiness the Dalai Lama. When we decided to have that individual made a Canadian citizen, I was very proud.

I want to thank you for being here.

I suspect I'm nearly out of time, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Twelve seconds.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Twelve seconds? I think I'm out of time.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Mr. Marston.

We go now to Ms. Grewal, please.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

And thank you, Dr. Sangay, for your time and your presentation.

It has been recommended that the international community initiate a dialogue with the Chinese authorities; however, to have a constructive conversation, active participation by all members at the table is very necessary.

In your opinion, is a conversation with the Chinese authorities possible? Have they expressed any willingness to discuss their plans and motives in developing Tibet?

[Dr. Lobsang Sangay]

Until recently, a dialogue between the Chinese government and representatives of His Holiness the Dalai Lama had been going back and forth since the late seventies. Between 2002 and January of 2010, there were nine meetings between envoys of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and his Chinese counterpart, mainly the United Front, which is an extension of the Communist Party of China. So there were nine formal meetings, and they discussed all aspects of Tibet and how to address the issue.

The Tibetan side put forward the definition and explanation of what we mean by “genuine autonomy”. A document called “Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy” is available, where you can see we have clearly illustrated what we mean by “genuine autonomy” and its correspondence to provisions in the Chinese constitution. Essentially what we're saying is if the Chinese government implements their own laws, we could take that as genuine autonomy. Unfortunately, the Chinese government refuses to address that document; in fact, through a press conference, they rejected it.

Since January 2010, there have been no meetings between the envoys of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and his Chinese counterpart. In June 2012, after two and a half years, two envoys submitted their resignation out of utter frustration because of lack of progress in the dialogue. Regretfully, I accepted their resignation. But at the same time, we issued a statement, whereby we made it very clear that we are ready to enter into dialogue any time, anywhere.

Also, most importantly, we have specified that we consider substance to be primary and process to be secondary. In that sense, if the Chinese government finds some technicalities or political issues as part of the complexities, we are willing to consider that. For us, what is most important is the substantive dialogue to solve the issue of Tibet. In that sense we are willing to consider options to the process so we can have substantive dialogue. Unfortunately, as of now, we have yet to have reciprocity from the Chinese government to enter into formal dialogue, and this is the state we are in.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Although self-immolation is the ultimate form of non-violent protest, do you think there are other effective means by which Tibetans can spread awareness about their current frustrating situation?

Furthermore, how can the Canadian government support Tibet in the pursuit of meaningful, peaceful dialogue with the Chinese authorities?

[Dr. Lobsang Sangay]

I really appreciate the question.

Continuing along the line of what I said earlier, we believe that dialogue is the best way to solve the issue of Tibet. The Canadian government, including the honourable foreign minister, is on the record urging the Chinese government to enter into dialogue. We request that his statement be consistently and persistently followed up with the Chinese government through the embassy in Beijing, so that the Chinese government is made aware that entering into dialogue is the best way to solve the issue.

We also welcome the establishment of the Office of Religious Freedom and the appointment of Ambassador Andrew Bennett. It would be a sound and a positive gesture on the part of the Canadian government to urge the Chinese government to allow Honourable Ambassador Andrew Bennett to visit Tibet and assess the situation, as far as religious freedom is concerned, because many of the latest self-immolators were monks and nuns. Religious freedom is one of the core issues that is forcing Tibetans to self-immolation. If Honourable Ambassador Andrew Bennett could visit Tibet and then investigate the situation and report to the Chinese government as to the realities, and also to the whole world and the Canadian population, we might find a way to address the issue of Tibet.

Also, perhaps Canadian Ambassador Guy Saint-Jacques could, like U.S. Ambassador Gary Locke, who visited some of the areas, also visit the Tibetan areas and assess the situation and inform the Chinese government as to the realities. I know that efforts are being made by the Canadian embassy to visit Tibetan areas, and this we appreciate, but I think that if persistently pushed, it could be followed up.

Also, UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay issued a very strong and unprecedented statement on self-immolations, but in particular the situation in Tibet. In that statement it has been made very clear that the United Nations and its agencies have made a dozen requests to visit Tibetan areas, and they have also made several recommendations on how to improve human rights conditions in Tibet.

I think China, as a member of the United Nations, should allow the UN human rights commissioner to visit Tibet, because China wants to be a member of the Human Rights Council and is applying for membership of that council. If you are a UN member and you want to be a member of the Human Rights Council, you are expected to follow and implement the directives or the conditions of the United Nations. Accepting a visit by the United Nations human rights commissioner and a special rapporteur on religious freedom should be insisted upon, because China is bound by certain obligations as part of being a UN member.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

We go to the next questioner.

Professor Cotler, please.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to express our appreciation for your presence here today, Mr. Sangay, and also for your very eloquent and effective testimony before us.

You mentioned the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. She has expressed concern about the detentions and disappearances of Tibetans.

Do you have any appreciation of the number of those who have been arrested and detained since the protests of 2008 and of the extent of the repression at this point in Tibet?