Evidence of meeting #25 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was burundian.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
You talked a bit earlier about the fact that we're heading towards probably a one party state or government. I noticed on the vote to pull out of the ICC, that I think there were only two MPs who had the courage to vote against the government, and none of the senators, so it was unanimous in the senate.
Do you know the two MPs who had the courage to vote against that? I'm wondering if you have any idea of what their fate might be for having done that.
As an Individual
Thank you very much. I don't personally know the two parliamentarians who voted against the withdrawal, but since they're politicians, I've familiarized myself with their positions. As I mentioned, I've been in Canada for some time. The only election that took place in Burundi while I was there was held in 2005. I think it was the only transparent election.
The members who voted against it are with the opposition. The others—those who abstained—wanted to say what they thought without voting no. They didn't want to go along with the presidential party. The saying is that "silence is consent." That should send an eloquent message to the international community that even though the assembly's functioning has been stymied, voices can still be raised to say that what's happening isn't right.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Are they big enough personalities that they will be able to survive this?
As an Individual
I am not sure of what will happen tomorrow.
What I know is that one of them who came out warning them about the move they were making...the president of the assembly was mocking him. He taunted him widely and openly that what he had declared was suicidal.
He told him it was suicidal. You understand. When that kind of thing is said by someone so senior—the second most senior person in the state's apparatus—it should serve as a warning for the international community. A person is told that if he died tomorrow, it would be considered a suicide. I don't know what's going to happen. I am not a prophet of doom, but they are not in a good situation.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
This would be a good place for us to keep an eye on our colleague, then.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
I have another question for you.
The African Union tried to move in last year. The commission made some decisions that the member states didn't want to honour, and basically they had to back down.
What do you see as the role of the African Union in resolving this situation? Do they have the credibility or the unity to be able to move ahead here, or are they going to be stuck on the sidelines, as they have been recently?
As an Individual
Thank you very much for the question.
Last year, the African Union decided to send 5,000 soldiers to Burundi. However, that decision was never brought into effect, firstly, because Burundi opposed it, but also, in my view, because the country got support from a presidents' club. These presidents came to support the Burundian government's position, and as a result, the measure was never implemented.
To be honest, yes, the African Union exists, and can help, but I don't see how it can succeed without a push from the other members of the international community, led by the UN Security Council, and the other countries, speaking out. After all, as I said earlier, the world has become a global village; it's become so small that information gets around very quickly. This means that if there's a way to do something good and speak out, the message can be heard by receptive ears somewhere, and can bring about change.
To answer your question, the African Union has dragged its feet for too long. I don't know if it will ever manage to get something done. Moreover, for a year and a half, the president of Burundi has not attended any meetings outside the country. How do you think the African Union will arrive at a decision in the president's absence? It's a boycott. I think the negative solidarity will keep the African Union bogged down. In the meantime, human lives will continue to be snuffed out, with no end in sight.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Your solutions were primarily geared towards dealing with the refugees who were already in the camps outside the country. You did make one suggestion about the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Do you see the final answer to this being things like trade restrictions, economic sanctions, and those kinds of punishments that can be placed from outside, or is it going to come down to military force and having to deal directly with the present Government of Burundi in that way?
As an Individual
Thank you very much for that question.
When I specified what I was expecting from Canada, those were not my personal ideas. I needed to consult Canada's Burundian community, because this is a very serious matter. It's the first time that Canadians of Burundian origin have had the opportunity to speak with parliamentarians about an important issue in Burundi. I consulted the community, and what I said is from the community.
I spoke about two levels of intervention.
The first concerns Canada. I spoke about the situation of refugees, and of people in Canada who seek refugee protection. I spoke about the refugees outside Burundi and Canada, but also about refugee claimants in Canada who are threatened with expulsion.
I acknowledge that in December 2015, the Canadian government decided to stay the removal of some Burundians. But that makes no difference, because once the diplomatic machine is put in place, and says that things are getting better and better, the 650-plus refugees in Canada will be boarded on the first available plane.
So the first level of intervention concerns Canada. The situation of refugee claimants who are in Canada, and are about to be removed, must be made easier, because they have nowhere to go. Their country is now scorched earth.
The suffering of refugees who live in camps must be alleviated as well. I gave a few examples, but could give at least 20. This isn't something I've made up. It's from the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada website, so it's in the public domain.
At the international level, I said that Canada can join voices with other countries. Yes, economic sanctions can be effective: more than 60% of Burundi's budget depends on outside assistance. In other countries, it has always produced effects.
It's true that when economic sanctions are taken against the government, it's the people who ultimately suffer. That needs to be clear. However, when the government is deprived of its livelihood, and the major lenders and donors speak out, I'm sure it can make a difference.
I'm very happy that the European Union has already taken a measure in that regard. Instead of supporting the soldiers who are taking part in various peacekeeping missions, and instead of the money flowing through government accounts, the money goes there directly. I think that measure will be effective. I think it would be good if Canada did the same thing.
I need to add one thing.
I've learned that Canada is one of the main backers of the inter-Burundian talks. Canada can use its voice to compel Burundi's government to talk with the opposition and everyone affected by the Burundi question. The government has, in effect, adopted an empty chair policy, but lenders and donors always have a say.
October 18th, 2016 / 1:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nicola Di Iorio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Nsabiyumva, thank you for the quality of your presentation, and for your efforts to raise the committee's awareness, and Canadian citizens' awareness, of this issue.
I'd like to mention a fact. According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, some 1,400 Burundians have permanent resident status, and had access, in 2015-2016, to settlement services—that is to say, occupational or language training.
Could you tell us whether there are other services Burundians need when they arrive in Canada?
As an Individual
Thank you very much.
It is my pleasure to answer that question.
Before I do so, I'd like to let you know about the different categories of refugees we have here in Canada. This will help you understand their specificities.
Let's start by what we call the
“refugee claimant”. A refugee claimant is a person who has made the claim for protection as a refugee. This term is more or less equivalent to an asylum seeker, and is standard in Canada, while “asylum seeker” is the term more often used internationally.
This category of refugee claimant is not entitled to go to school.
The only thing they can do is to benefit from English courses and settlement services, with certain restrictions as to funding. I'm an employment advisor and a job developer. I know the limitations we have in relation to refugees or refugee claimants. We are told that everything concerning
what we call “incentives” for employers. When a new employee is hired, we take him as being in a kind of training. This is bringing a kind of loss to the employer who is hiring, and the government, especially the provincial government, has set up a kind of incentive to offset any kind of loss that the employer would be facing during the training.
Refugees, and refugee claimants, are not entitled to these services.
The second category involves
protected persons. According to Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, these are persons who have been determined by Canada to be either convention refugees or persons in need of protection.
It takes six to thirteen months to become a permanent resident. In more specific terms, the person will always be considered a temporary resident because his social insurance number will always start with a 9. Each time the number is seen, the thing that comes to mind is that there are services to which he will not be entitled.
And then there is the third category of refugees, the
refugees landed in Canada.
Those people are Convention refugees.
They are the persons who meet the “refugee” definition in the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees. These definitions are used in Canadian law and are widely accepted internationally.
I will stop there. I don't want to get into the definitions further.
I will come back to your question about the needs of Burundian refugees.
First of all, they need permanent status. That's the first thing. Secondly, they need the settlement services that are there. I can tell you that the English I speak was learned at an English school. I thank the Canadian government for it.
In short, the refugees need material and financial support.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Levitt
We have literally 30 seconds left. I want to be able to thank you, and we have to get back into the House for question period, so if you could just wrap up the final point, that would be fantastic.
As an Individual
The refugees need permanent status. They need financial support. They also need moral support so they can feel like everyone else.
We have to acknowledge that refugees go through different phases. They start with denial, which leads to depression, and eventually acceptance of their status. It's axiomatic that changing countries is a challenge in itself, but being a refugee is an additional challenge.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Levitt
Thank you very much.
I want to thank you for your courage in speaking out. We get a sense of the kind of risk that you and other members of the Burundian community here in Canada and around the world face for speaking out, so it's of critical importance for us to hear from you directly. I also thank you for all the work you do in your community in Windsor in helping Burundians and other immigrants and refugees. We really appreciate having you here today to speak to us.