Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on May 5th, 2016

[Chris Lewa]

Yes. First of all, I mentioned this group of ambassadors in Yangon, which is called the head of mission group. It includes ambassadors from a number of countries. The group includes also a couple of NGOs, such as Save the Children and the Danish Refugee Council. It seems to me it would be a good idea for the international community that's there to actually try to have a concerted and coordinated response, and act as a messenger to [Inaudible—Editor] the government. That's what I wanted to say.

In terms of recommendations specifically for the Canadian government, it would be really difficult for me to say exactly, but I definitely would recommend that the Canadian government continue to closely monitor the human rights situation, the humanitarian situation, the political situation in Rakhine State, and to engage proactively and consistently with the Myanmar government in addressing issues.

I also think that the Canadian government should condemn in a public statement when there are incidents of violence against religious and ethnic minorities, including the Rohingya. Obviously, I think that in terms of support and funding, I know that the Canadian government already participated in the humanitarian effort, but I'm sure there are ways to step it up as well, and at least continue it.

Another issue, too, is in terms of refugees. Canada was the first country to actually do resettlement for Rohingya, initially from the Bangladesh refugee camp. As you know, Bangladesh has now closed totally the resettlement program from the camp, but Malaysia is still doing resettlement, and actually has increased the quota of resettlement of Rohingyan refugees, mostly to the United States. Perhaps Canada could also contribute to these efforts and provide a more durable solution, and resettlement would be one of them, to people who are already in exile, and especially vulnerable people. That's also a reason why Rohingya are moving sometimes from refugee camp to refugee camp, from one country to another; they are frustrated and are trying to find a solution.

I haven't had the time to talk much about the refugee situation in the region, but as you know, none of the countries there have signed the refugee convention, and basically see them as illegal migrants. For the Rohingya who are stateless, I think there's almost no hope of returning to Myanmar one day. They are hopeful, but in talking already about the trouble inside the country, expecting that the refugees will be able to return in the short term, I think, is totally unrealistic. Children are born in exile to families year after year, so I would suggest that Canada review the resettlement of Rohingya refugees as well.

Those are some of the main recommendations I can think of. Those were in my original list that I was unable to put in my statement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Levitt]

Thank you very much, Ms. Lewa.

We're now going to move to Mr. Saini, for five minutes, please.

[Raj Saini, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Ms. Lewa, I want to talk to you a little bit about the constitution, because I think the citizenship act of 1982 seems to be causing a problem. On March 31, 2015, I'm sure you're aware that the white cards were cancelled for the Rohingya people, and so now they are not only stateless, but there's difficulty in receiving services.

If we go back to that position and look at the constitution, what would your recommendation be to the government, to change whatever the requirements are to at least give identification to the Rohingya people, that would be a beginning, a first step, in recognizing them and making sure they get the delivery of services, especially health care services?

[Chris Lewa]

Yes, and it's not only the constitution itself. Actually the constitution basically made no reference to people who are not recognized as citizens in the country. I think there is an absolute need for legislative reform and to review all the laws that are discriminatory and bring them in line with international human rights. One of these would be the 1982 citizenship law. As you know, it puts people into three categories. Also there is the fact that the Rohingya are not recognized as an ethnic group and because of their ethnicity they have no access to citizenship. Actually, the law does provide some access but it's very limited. For example, section 6 claims that everyone who was recognized as a citizen before the law came into effect would remain a citizen. The other issue related to that law is basically how it is used in practice. That is, of course, the main problem, because the government nowadays does not even accept that the Rohingya did at one point at least receive the same [Inaudible—Editor] as other citizens in Myanmar.

On top of this, of course, they try to promote naturalized citizenship as one avenue, but they have opposed that in a way because first of all it offers fewer rights, with respect to elections for example, but mainly to apply for that citizenship, the Rohingya need to speak fluently....

For example, there are several requirements and criteria for fluency in the national language, and obviously since the Rohingya are not recognized as an ethnic group, neither is their language recognized as a national language which means that [Inaudible—Editor] exercise I mentioned led to 1,000 receiving citizenship. These are people in different situations [Inaudible—Editor] in northern Rakhine [Inaudible—Editor] people that have been living a long time. They are a very small minority but they must speak Rakhine, which is the national language. In northern Rakhine, 80% of the Rohingya do not speak it, so they would automatically be rejected from naturalized citizenship.

I think the solution in terms of citizenship is to find a way—I'm not a lawyer myself—to provide equal access to everyone on a group basis to citizenship rights.

I know the Rohingya are very strongly advocating to have the name “Rohingya” recognized. I understand why they want that, because in Myanmar if you are not a member of an ethnic group, and with the constitution and legislative system as well, there's no way you can access people's rights. At the same time [Inaudible—Editor] about the Rakhine especially who see that as a demand also for future territorial claim.

Perhaps to me the most important thing is that the Rohingya have access to citizenship of Myanmar [Inaudible—Editor] for the time being whether it will be a demand for recognition on an ethnic basis. Based on their long-standing history of staying in Myanmar, they should have access somehow to citizenship. How that actually would be applied in practice I don't have a ready-made solution, unfortunately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Levitt]

Thank you very much.

At this point, we're going to go MP Anderson, please.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

My name is David Anderson, and we're very happy to be able to speak with you today.

I have a couple of questions, so I'm going to ask if you could keep your answers fairly succinct so I can get to the second and third parts.

I'm very interested in understanding a little bit more about what the religious components of this situation are. When we see the religious affairs minister going and meeting with one of the extremist groups and basically bowing down before one of the monks and giving them donations, that activity seems to be much at odds with what we would expect from that particular religious sector.

Can you tell us a little bit about how much of what's going on here is religious and how much of it is cultural and nationalistic in nature?

Then I have a couple of specific questions about some of the effects of the laws on the Rohingya.

[Chris Lewa]

As you know, anti-Muslim tragedies have always been rather widespread in Myanmar, not just now. I have been already more than 20 years here in Thailand and in the past have had a lot of contact also with pro-democracy activists. We were generally [Inaudible—Editor] tragedies that come out and they had been [Inaudible—Editor] in the past through anti-Muslim violence.

What is extremely worrying today, and to me it's like a cancer in society, is the fact that the monks themselves are leading this movement as the country opens up a bit more to freedom of expression and freedom of participation. It's not just the monks, but it's also [Inaudible—Editor] society [Inaudible—Editor] extremely crucial. That's why I really cannot talk about the regime without really hoping that the NLD-led government will take a really strong and vigorous plan to try to stop the activities of anti-Muslim groups, especially the monks. I do hope so. Perpetrators of hate [Inaudible—Editor]. Otherwise, you just empower the activists to continue their actions.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Could I just interrupt?

[Chris Lewa]

When you look at the violence, monks were absolutely involved in this. Of course they were driving people out of their villages and they would not tolerate the message of monks. So as long as the [Inaudible—Editor] I think they give them hope.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay. I wanted to ask specifically then, it's not just the monks, because in September 2015, the parliament adopted four race and religion protection laws. There was the population control law, the Buddhist women's special marriage law, the religious conversion law, and the monogamy law. I'm just wondering, could you tell us a bit about what are the effects of those laws on the Rohingya population? Do they discriminate and violate religious freedom? What is the likelihood of the new government to repeal or to amend those laws?

[Chris Lewa]

As you know, this religious law was promoted by the monk-led movement in Ma Ba Tha.

I looked into all the laws and I think many of them do not necessarily apply to the Rohingya. For example, I actually have never come across a mixed marriage between a Rohingya and a non-Rohingya, although it's not totally unusual. Of course on monogamy, it's not the first time; that's always been there, the fact that [Inaudible—Editor] is forbidden. The main one that I am extremely concerned about is the one on population health. It is called the population health control bill. Now the government has made it a policy to actually impose a three-year birth spacing in some regions of the country. It could be used to replace, or even complement—who knows—the previous policy that was imposed in northern Rakhine. That was not in Sittwe, only in northern Rakhine, where married persons ask permission.... Permission is only required of Rohingya to get married, not other groups. They would have to sign a statement that they would not have more than two children. This seems to have been, in practice, no longer implemented, but actually the order for these two checkpoints has never been repealed, and now with this new law on population health control, it is truly dangerous that it could be [Inaudible—Editor] with the intention to [Inaudible—Editor] Rohingya in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Levitt]

Thank you.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Chair, what was it? A three year—

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

She made reference to a three-year something, but I didn't hear it either.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Levitt]

Ms. Lewa, could you repeat what you said about a three year....

[Chris Lewa]

The law states, just off my head, because I don't have text in front of me, that the government can impose in any region of the country where it deems necessary, a 36-month birth spacing between children. How it could ever implement that in [Inaudible—Editor] that women have to wait 36 months before getting pregnant again, I don't know, but this is the fact of the law. There is no penalty attached to it, but the fact that it is in law is worrying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Levitt]

Thank you for that clarification.

Ms. Lewa, we have time for one more short question from MP May. We're going to keep this, if we can, to a total of three minutes.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Thank you for joining us today, Ms. Lewa.

We know that the situation there is horrible. We know that human trafficking is continuing. Just last week there were reports of 12 Rohingya refugees being found in a Thai jungle. We know this type of human trafficking is continuing. Our Minister of Foreign Affairs recently announced that $44 million will be provided to strengthen democratic institutions in Myanmar. We had a witness at this committee not that long ago, John Sifton, who mentioned the importance of co-operation between countries such as Malaysia, Thailand, and Bangladesh.

Through programs like this $44 million, what can be done to promote the political inclusion of the Rohingyan people, in your opinion?

[Chris Lewa]

That is a difficult question, but just looking at perhaps the issue of the regional aspect, yes I think there has been a lot of push. As you know, I have also been participating together with UNHCR and I tried to get countries in the region to coordinate a regional response which would include of course addressing the protection needs of the Rohingya when they flee the country, but also to address together the issue of root causes in Myanmar which of course is the reason these people are fleeing in the first place. The only progress I've seen so far is the last Bali process meeting when apparently the people in affected countries agreed that if there was another crisis, they would take over coordinating a response.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Ms. Lewa, could you repeat that last part? I didn't catch that, and I'm looking at the analysts and they were kind of nodding as well. You said the only progress you've seen has been which?

[Chris Lewa]

It was at the Bali process meeting in March, the ministerial meeting that took place in mid March, and I can't remember the exact date. Apparently additional members of the Bali process agreed if there was a future crisis, the Bali process will become basically the regional platform to discuss coordinating a response. The problem is that, of course, the Bali process is mostly looking at combatting trafficking and protecting borders, but so far, there is little burning sense of improving protection of the people who speak. Anyway that's the first step. The problem also is that they have this principle of not interfering in each other's internal affairs so expecting at the end to be a strong voice to push the Myanmar government to address the root causes is probably not going to happen. How to spend the $44 million is perhaps a bit beyond my expertise especially when you seek to promote a democratic institution. Dialogue of course is important. That is clear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Levitt]

Thank you, Ms. Lewa. We're out of time here. I want to thank you again for your contribution to the committee on this very important topic today. You've touched on a number of areas that I know were instructive and enlightening for this subcommittee, and especially given your sacrifice to call in at midnight.

Thank you very much and we appreciate the time that you've taken.

[Chris Lewa]

You are welcome.

[The Chair, Liberal, Michael Levitt]

The only other issue we have on the docket distributed electronically was a press release regarding the events coming up the week after next around accountability week, just to notify people in case they want to come to the committee or participate.

Shall we go in camera?

[An hon. member]

Sure.