Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on April 2nd, 2019

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Has technology improved the ability to communicate with those in need?

[Sara Hossain]

I think it has very significantly. We have very extensive mobile phone penetration in Bangladesh and we're using mobile technology now to provide advice and information, particularly, for example, to workers around their rights in the workplace. We're now developing new apps on how to do that for our poor clients, around rights in the family issues, around domestic violence, for example, and child marriage, and also sexual violence.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Ms. Hossain, let me ask the same question, except this time in the context of rural areas outside of the cities.

[Sara Hossain]

I think the issue of distance is much greater, in terms of getting in to places where there is actual service provision, but in rural areas we have had many development organizations working. One of the world's largest development organizations, BRAC, with whom we work also, is right across the country.

In many ways we have front-line workers available in rural areas. Even though people living in rural areas may not be able to come to the formal institutions of justice, such as the courts and police stations, there are many informal processes available. For example, mediation run by NGOs is also available for dispute resolution, not, of course, for serious crimes, as we are suggesting.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

How can a country such as Canada help the successful stories that come from either urban or rural areas about connecting and allowing people to come to you with a great deal of comfort?

[Sara Hossain]

I think there are already lessons from Canada concerning the ways women-friendly services have been run. There are also many lessons not only in terms of practice but particularly in terms of jurisprudence. The Supreme Court of Canada has set down a number of landmark decisions that have really been instrumental in terms of how we overhauled the way we see and understand rights.

Working with our judiciary, working with some of the formal institutions, but also working on the ways women have been empowered to seek and claim rights would be some of the ways you could work effectively with Bangladeshi counterparts.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Nasir, my questions for you.... Well, there are many, and feel free to weigh in on what was just mentioned, if you wish, but I'm interested in your views also as a parliamentarian for, was it 14 years, 15 years?

[Asiya Nasir]

It's 16 years.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

My apologies. I'm closing in on 16 years myself.

I want to ask you about the system. Has your system changed on a national level, or a regional level, for that matter, such that there are more minorities represented in your Parliament? Were there functional changes in your governance?

[Asiya Nasir]

Yes, over the years we have seen quite a number of changes. Past governments have taken a lot of initiatives to mainstream the minorities. We have been provided with representation in the upper house, the Senate, because there was no representation at the Senate for the minorities.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Is there a seat that's for you, then? How does that work?

[Asiya Nasir]

There are four seats reserved for the minorities from each province, because at the Senate we have equal representation from all the provinces. There's one seat reserved for the faith-based minorities from each province. Besides that, we have 10 seats reserved for the minorities at the National Assembly of Pakistan, but in addition to those 10 reserved seats, a minority can contest any general seat from any constituency of Pakistan.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Sure, but you still get the amount of representation within the house based on just the minority, not on geography.

[Asiya Nasir]

No, it's based just on the minority, not geographically, because I think democracy still has not flourished and has not developed in Pakistan to the point that a majority would go to vote for minorities. Still, there are some precedents, because recently a Hindu member was elected to a general seat for the Pakistan Peoples Party from the province of Sindh.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

To you is that a promising sign of things changing?

[Asiya Nasir]

I think it is, because if political parties review their manifestos and support the minorities at general elections, definitely minorities can gain seats in the general elections.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Do you think that this type of change represents change to all society as well? If I'm a person who is in a terrible situation no matter where it is in Pakistan, would I feel free to approach the government if I had a particular problem, such as, let's say, a problem of forced marriage?

[Asiya Nasir]

Yes, there are changes. The government is taking a lot of initiatives. Recently, regarding forced conversions that have taken place, the government is very much concerned, because a lot of pressure is exerted not from inside but from outside the country also.

The government is looking into it seriously. There's a ministry for human rights that is taking up this matter. Recently I heard they are deciding to bring forward some legislation to prevent forced marriages from happening in Pakistan.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

Thank you very much. That's your time.

We'll go to Ms. Hardcastle for the final round of questions.

You have seven minutes.

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you.

I'll ask my question of both of you. Perhaps we'll start with you, Ms. Nasir, because you're here, for probably about three minutes, and then the other three minutes will go to you, Ms. Hossain.

I would like to ask you about the politicization of the judiciary—the court cases and the court decisions that are made—and then about other things that are happening politically, such as supporting or closing down organizations that advance women's human rights. Is there a connection there? What can Canada's role be in helping to advance it, if we're using the United Nations or the high commission? Should we be directly supporting bilateral relationships at a more regional or local level? Should we be concentrating politically, or is the judiciary also an issue that needs to be looked at?

[Asiya Nasir]

I don't think the judiciary is politicized at this moment in Pakistan or has anything to do with human rights organizations at all. I think it's more regarding governmental policies, because recently governmental policies have not been very friendly towards the organizations working in the human rights sector.

We have seen a number of organizations be asked to leave Pakistan. This raises many questions and inquiries among the people and the civil society of Pakistan, because we think a lot of work needs to be done in the human rights sector. Still the situation of human rights in Pakistan is not that acceptable.

We need to see the Canadian government and the Canadian high commission in Pakistan working more on the political side, with political representations to review governmental policies regarding the INGOs working in the human rights sector. We have seen recently that all those organizations and people who are speaking in support of human rights have been silenced and have been asked to leave Pakistan. That is not a very good sign for a government or for a country.

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Ms. Hossain.

[Sara Hossain]

Thank you very much for raising that point. I think that the issue of closing space in our context is really critical for all human rights defenders of all genders.

The issue of the judiciary is quite difficult for me to answer because we have rather stringent contempt laws. Bearing that in mind, I would say that we still get a measure of justice. Obviously, we work primarily on providing legal services, but I think that in certain so-called sensitive cases where powerful parties are involved and there are political interests involved, it's increasingly enormously challenging to ensure any kind of remedy.

If you look at the kinds of interpretations of recent legislation.... For example, the Digital Security Act has recently come into place. In addition to providing some protections and also providing, for example, for data protection, it has incredibly problematic provisions that allow a front-line police officer to arrest someone without warrant simply for hurting religious sentiment or for defamation or for hurting the image of the nation. This is a particularly problematic provision under which we recently saw a woman football coach, one of our new members on FIFA, being imprisoned for three days based on a third party complaint alleging that she had made a comment about a high official.

We also see laws such as those that restrict the receipt of foreign donations by non-governmental organizations. That particular law says that any derogatory comment about the constitution or any constitutional body, including Parliament, can lead to very severe reprisals against the organization.

You were asking what Canada could do and how it could best respond. Canada has been a great friend to Bangladesh in the last two years on the issue of the Rohingya crisis, but I think we would really welcome your engagement with us on the situation of Bangladeshis in Bangladesh itself and actually on the concerns we have around democratic and civil space.

I wish I could be making this comment to my Parliament, but we haven't, unfortunately, had this kind of hearing suggested. We've had hearings around the legislation I just mentioned, but sadly not many of the recommendations made by civil society were paid much attention. I think these are exactly the kinds of things that can be done.

We talked earlier about the importance of civility, tolerance and respect—much in need all over the world. Again in our context, I think that dialogue across our countries focusing on the kinds of practices that can be put in place, not demonizing people who speak up for rights, not automatically identifying someone who speaks up for rights as being anti-national or somehow against independence or against history is very important, but understanding that we all are very proud of our own country and want to make change and development happen. We want, though, to do it with freedom of expression intact, being able to disagree with each other about the way we move forward towards joint goals.

I think that Canada could be part of that dialogue, could help strengthen it and could do so through engaging in strengthening existing institutions. One of our greatest fears, I think, as women and male human rights defenders is that we don't have.... The right institutions really are under threat in every respect, whether it's Parliament, the judiciary or other constitutional or statutory bodies. That's really where we need to focus, because we need to create greater space both for speech and for action and association.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank both of you for your very insightful testimony and the courage of the work that you do.

We only have three minutes left, which is just the right amount of time to now view the video that Ms. Nasir has provided for us.

[Video presentation]

Thank you very much.

On that hopeful note, we can adjourn this particular session of our committee.

Thank you, both of you, for being here.