Evidence of meeting #9 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was genocide.
A recording is available from Parliament.
7:40 p.m.
As an Individual
This is interesting, because there is still a distinction to be made between genocide and its intentional element, as Mr. Eboe‑Osuji has just mentioned, and the crime against humanity that is extermination. That exists, too. It has been proven in the case of Rwanda, and it could be proven in other situations as well. In the case of extermination, it is not necessary to establish this intention to destroy, in whole or in part, an ethnic, racial or other group.
This distinction between the two is fine for lawyers and professors. For the general public, however, it is sometimes difficult to understand. Nevertheless, the distinction exists.
Genocide is an important crime, of course; it's horrible. That said, other crimes are equally horrific in terms of their consequences for victims, such as murder, extermination, rape or deportation.
7:40 p.m.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Thank you, Mr. Eboe‑Osuji and Mr. Stewart.
I have a question for Mr. Czolij.
There was a lot of talk about this being a new war. Mr. Robinson talked about the fact that the experts in Russia did not think it was going to happen, but it did. In essence, one could say that this is not a new war, but a continuation of the invasion of Crimea.
Could you tell us about what is happening in Crimea right now and the situation of the Crimean Tatars, for example?
7:40 p.m.
President, Non-Governmental Organization Ukraine-2050 and Honorary Consul of Ukraine in Montreal, As an Individual
You are absolutely right. This is not a war that started on February 24; this is a war that took an incredible turn on February 24. It is a destruction unparalleled since the Second World War. It is a war that began in 2014 with the invasion of Crimea and part of the Donbass region, Donetsk and Luhansk.
7:40 p.m.
President, Non-Governmental Organization Ukraine-2050 and Honorary Consul of Ukraine in Montreal, As an Individual
Okay.
You're absolutely right that this is a continuation of a war that started eight years ago.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
7:40 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you so much.
I'm hearing this testimony, and it's very interesting. The very first question I have is for Mr. Czolij.
From your perspective, have we heard intent from Vladimir Putin? Have we heard his intent to enact genocide on the Ukrainian people?
7:40 p.m.
President, Non-Governmental Organization Ukraine-2050 and Honorary Consul of Ukraine in Montreal, As an Individual
As I quoted, after the events of Bucha it was clear. The acts perpetrated in Bucha clearly are the acts that one finds in article II of the genocide convention. The question is intent. When the president of a country awards, with one of the highest honours, a regiment that has committed atrocities in Bucha, and states, in the presidential decree, that “the unit’s staff became a role model in fulfilling its military duty, valour, dedication and professionalism”, the president is clearly directing all of his troops to be committing acts of genocide.
7:40 p.m.
President, Non-Governmental Organization Ukraine-2050 and Honorary Consul of Ukraine in Montreal, As an Individual
The intent is clear.
I would like to say the following to Mr. Trudel and Ms. McPherson.
I'm a lawyer by profession. I understand what Mr. Stewart is saying, that one must be very careful in order not to allow articles in newspapers and media to be deciding the issue of whether or not a crime has been committed. However, in this particular instance, with the advantage of media, watching CNN, watching almost live bombardments, indiscriminate bombardments, destroying literally....
Mr. Stewart was saying that one has to distinguish this, maybe, from a bombardment that was aimed at a military facility and hits a civilian region. Here we have, on a daily basis, bombardments that are aimed at civil infrastructure. Clearly, the intent here is to destroy Ukraine as a whole, to punish the civilian population for not surrendering in the first three days, as Putin had wanted to occur and unfortunately many western countries also thought would happen. Ukrainian forces have incredibly resisted and demonstrated that the Russian army is not that most powerful army that everybody was fighting with. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian civilian population is paying the high price of a genocide as a result of the success of the military.
To your earlier question on whether the courts can stop the genocide, I agree with what was said earlier. I would remind you that the International Court of Justice in March ordered the Russian Federation to stop the so-called military operations in Ukraine. Russia has clearly blatantly ignored this order and violated it on every single day since then.
The only way to stop a genocide from being committed, or to take even a larger portion of the population and the property, is not to rely on the courts. It is to provide Ukraine with defensive lethal weapons so that Ukraine can defend its territorial integrity. It is also to isolate Russia totally. Isolating Russia totally and preventing European and western dollars, including petrodollars, from funding a genocidal war, that is the way you stop a genocide.
7:45 p.m.
Prof. Paul Robinson
Can I come in?
7:45 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I will say, too, that we all recognize that the Ukrainian people have been heroes through this. Thank you for also acknowledging that.
You spoke about the need of the criminal court and how we can't depend on that. Mr. Stewart, I recognize how you're framing it, which is that we need to be patient and that justice is a long game that we have to work towards.
Should the criminal court have a police force? Is there something we can do with the criminal court to make the laws more enforceable? Is there something more that we should be doing at that level?
7:45 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
That's not a very brief question. I apologize, Mr. Stewart.
7:45 p.m.
As an Individual
I guess you have to make what you have work.
I must say that Mr. Czolij makes a very good argument in terms of the kind of evidence you want to look at for genocide.
I think the horrible truth here, frankly—and he's right about this too—is that you have to stop the war. That means through military means. You have to defeat and then accountability follows. That's how it works. We should do it.
7:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michael Cooper
Thank you very much.
We are going to go into our third round and I'd like some direction from committee members.
We are scheduled to have the witnesses up until eight o'clock. I believe it's close to 2 a.m. where Mr. Stewart is. We do have some committee business. It was scheduled for a full half-hour beginning at eight. However, in fairness, I think it's very unlikely it will take anywhere near a half-hour.
I would suggest that we do shorter three-minute rounds. However, if committee members wish to take up a full five-minute round each because everyone has a lot more questions—we have very good witnesses—I'd like some direction from the committee with the time that we have.
Mr. Trudel.
7:45 p.m.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
I think that, if we can take five minutes, that is what we should do. Indeed, I think all we have to do is determine the winners of the prizes. That can be done fairly quickly.
7:45 p.m.
Conservative
7:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michael Cooper
Let's proceed with one final round of five minutes each.
With that, I recognize Mr. Sarai for five minutes.
7:45 p.m.
Liberal
Randeep Sarai Liberal Surrey Centre, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is a very impressive panel, with your level of expertise, whether it's on Ukraine itself or at the international court. I'm very impressed with that.
Your dedication, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Eboe-Osuji, to put people to justice who have done some of the most egregious crimes in the world is very commendable.
During the committee's last meeting, we heard from three courageous human rights defenders in Ukraine who were documenting the war crimes and crimes against humanity that were being committed by Russian forces against civilians.
Mr. Eboe-Osuji, based on your previous experience, what documented evidence is required in order to properly prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity?
May 3rd, 2022 / 7:50 p.m.
Professor, Lincoln Alexander School of Law, Ryerson University, University of Windsor, As an Individual
Thank you very much.
We will begin, of course, with the eye-witness accounts of what happened. That is always a traditional method of proving cases in court.
We don't leave it only at that. Nuremberg, which prosecuted the Holocaust and war crimes that were committed during the Second World War, was heavily reliant on documentary evidence to establish the case. That is another way of proving things.
Since Nuremberg, things have moved a long way. We now have a lot of technology. James Stewart used to work in an office that had all those gadgets to sneak out what people are doing and that sort of stuff. They can use technology nowadays and things have really moved forward.
There are all sorts of programs. I know the university of Berkeley has some programs that track human rights violations in circumstances like this and others. There are different sources of evidence that could be pulled into the court to make a case.
James, maybe you can come in here. I used to be a judge until recently and James remained a prosecutor.
