Evidence of meeting #19 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was conflict.
A video is available from Parliament.
Professor, Faculty of Law, Queen's University, As an Individual
I'm just telling you what international law says, dear sir.
Conservative
Professor, Faculty of Law, Queen's University, As an Individual
You asked for an answer to the question. I'm trying to give it to you, sir.
Conservative
Professor, Faculty of Law, Queen's University, As an Individual
Listed by whom...?
Conservative
Shuv Majumdar Conservative Calgary Heritage, AB
—which you are now trying to say was justified in attacking legitimate military targets. You are describing Hamas and its activities on October 7, atrocious as they were. You are justifying their attacks on Israeli military installations as somehow legitimate.
Hamas is not a legitimate force. Hamas had infiltrated UNRWA. You reject the evidence, but I think the evidence—
Professor, Faculty of Law, Queen's University, As an Individual
The International Court of Justice does too.
Conservative
Shuv Majumdar Conservative Calgary Heritage, AB
The German government, European governments and governments around the world, including many in the international bodies, have very rightly questioned—
Professor, Faculty of Law, Queen's University, As an Individual
The State of Israel put evidence to the ICJ, which includes a German and an American judge—
Conservative
Professor, Faculty of Law, Queen's University, As an Individual
—and a Chinese judge. They put all that evidence to the ICJ, and the ICJ has been very clear: It's unsubstantiated.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you.
Chair, my colleague had the floor, and the witness, Mr. Imseis, kept speaking over him and taking the floor. Chair, that is inappropriate, and it is your job as the chair to make sure that this doesn't happen.
I'm curious as to—
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
My point of order is not done, Chair.
I'm curious as to why you allowed that interruption to continue rather than bringing order to this committee when that is your job as chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Fayçal El-Khoury
Actually, I did bring order, and I said no crosstalk. Then 15 seconds passed and I had to stop.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
On that point of order, Chair, I would ask you to remind the witnesses that they are here at the invitation of the members at this table. It is their job to respect the questions that are being asked of them and not to speak over the honourable members here.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Fayçal El-Khoury
I totally agree. Thank you.
Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, you have the floor for five minutes.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Now that everyone has had their turn, I can jump in.
Mr. Jai, let me turn to you, since I haven't had a chance to ask you any questions.
In your opening remarks, you spoke about climate change and the displacement of people caused by it. Do you have any concerns at present about efforts to combat climate change, when you look at everything that's happening around the world? There are significant geopolitical shifts, partly because of our neighbour to the south, but also because of an increasingly assertive foreign policy from China. In addition, we need only think of what's happening in Russia and Ukraine. This kind of context relegates what was the most urgent crisis facing all humanity to a secondary priority. As a result, what may happen is that efforts to combat climate change will diminish, climate change will worsen, and population displacement will also increase.
Am I wrong, or do you agree with this assessment? If you agree, what should we do?
Senior Policy Adviser, Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre
In short, I agree with this assessment.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has clearly stated that climate change is increasing both the frequency and intensity of natural disasters. We know that the vast majority of disaster-related displacement is due to weather and climate hazards, including floods, storms and wildfires.
Although no direct link has yet been established, and I can't quantify internal displacement related to climate change, I can say that there is clearly an indirect link. That said, there's a point I often make: We should not attribute everything to climate change. Many things can be done to prevent and minimize disaster-related displacement, whether through urban planning or disaster risk reduction. There are many measures that can be taken.
Clearly, the weakening of climate action does not bode well for efforts to contain disaster-related displacement. That said, there is considerable variability. It is also true that it takes a very long time to establish trends.
What can we do? Obviously, some actors have disengaged from climate action. Canada and other countries, in Europe and elsewhere, clearly have a critical role to play in maintaining, in the hope that this is only temporary, this leadership in climate action and in ensuring that other elements, such as adaptation and the issue of loss and damage, continue to get the attention they deserve.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
I don't think Steven Guilbeault would agree with us today if we told him that we are a leader in the fight against climate change.
Mr. Imseis, my next question may come out of left field, so you may not be able to answer it. I'm seeking your expertise as a professor at the faculty of law at Queen's University to better understand the situation internationally from a legal perspective. Do wealthier countries that emit greenhouse gases and are the largest contributors to climate change recognize that the countries with the lowest emissions are the first to be affected? I'm thinking of places like Tuvalu in the South Pacific, where rising sea levels threaten to completely submerge its territory.
Do countries that are largely responsible for climate change not have an obligation towards countries that are not responsible but are nevertheless its victims?
Professor, Faculty of Law, Queen's University, As an Individual
That's a very good question, for which I thank you. The good news is that the International Court of Justice has also recently issued an advisory opinion on states' obligations for climate change. The long and the short, without spitting the whole opinion out to you, is that, yes, states do have an obligation commensurate with how much greenhouse gas they produce and their abilities to deal with the situation. This case was initiated by, I believe, some South Pacific states—perhaps Tuvalu, Micronesia and so on—because these states are at particular risk of the impact of climate change. This means not only the impact on the production of internally displaced and refugee populations, but also on the destruction of their own states.