International Trade Committee on Nov. 24th, 2009

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

At one point, you talked about exerting some pressure in an effort to have Canada's recommendations followed. I would imagine that you are referring to the report drafted, tabled and adopted by the committee. In its report, the committee called for certain pressure to be brought to bear and for a group of representatives from various field to be appointed to analyze improvements, where necessary, in the area of human rights. The purpose of the exercise would be to monitor improvements and ensure that we continue to see steady improvements before signing the agreement. I would imagine that this was the recommendation you alluded to in your presentation.

Clearly, the three opposition parties worked together to come up with this particular recommendation in the report. And once again, I would like to thank the members of the Liberal Party. Above all, it's important to ensure that things are moving in the right direction.

Professor Mejía, you talked about economic activity and the link between economic activity and the increase, or decrease in the level of violence. You also talked about the homicide rate among unionized workers. However, there's one thing you did not talk about. Perhaps it's mentioned in the document, but we did not receive it far enough in advance to read it.

As I understand it, the unionization rate declined during the same period. This development automatically affected your results. People no longer want to have anything to do with the union. They no longer want to be unionized or to be a union leader, because the risks are too high. You maintain that the risk level is a function of the union activity and that the risk here is minimal. Why then is the government spending so much money protecting union workers, if they are at no greater risk than members of the general public?

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

That's a good question, and I think the answer is because unions are very organized groups that can push for more government protection. Other groups cannot organize with one voice to ask the government for more protection, in my view. For instance, unions are more organized and they have more of a centralized government than indigenous or other groups. They can push the government further on this issue.

With respect to the unionization rate, we do take that into account. We are studying whether one can explain the decrease in the unionization rates, which is very small--it's about 1% per year for the last seven years. It's not that unionization rates have gone down dramatically; they have gone down at the rate of 1% per year, which I agree is worrisome.

So far we haven't found any evidence supporting the view that violence is what is decreasing the unionization rate in Colombia. This is not yet in the document because we are just starting to write the second part of the project.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you.

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you to both witnesses for appearing.

I hope to have a second round to ask you questions about your paper, Mr. Mejía. I should note and put on the record that it has already been largely discredited. The ENS has said a number of things, including that the paper does somewhat employ smear tactics and a false thesis. They've also said the following in response to the paper:

The violence against trade unionists, in addition to persisting, has become more acute in its various forms during this seven-year period, such as threats, arbitrary detentions, harassment, attacks, kidnappings, illegal raids by security forces, and exceed the number that occurred from 1986 until the end of the 1990s. These statistics corroborate that, although there have been some changes and some indicators, there has been no structural change in anti-union violence.

I wanted to get that on the record. Hopefully, I'll have a second round so I can question you more closely on what the data does reveal.

I'd like to go to you, Mr. Rosero--

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Hopefully you'll allow Mr. Mejía to respond to that accusation.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

No, Mr. Chair. It is my question period, and I'd like to--

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I guess if you don't want to be courteous.... You don't need to be rude. I'd be surprised if you were--

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Rosero, could you explain to us how many African Colombians have been displaced? You mentioned that some of the orders from the courts have not been abided by the Uribe administration.

I also want to reference the latest report from the Colombian Commission of Jurists, which talks about torture continuing to be generalized and systematic in Colombia. The party principally responsible for these acts is the state. Isabelle Heyer, from the Colombian Jurists, said that “sexual violence against women and girls is one of the most pervasive modes of torture”, calling it “an habitual, systematic and invisible practice, which enjoys impunity in the majority of cases and whose principal perpetrators are soldiers and police”.

Could you answer the question on how many have been displaced, and could you give more detail on the fact that orders from the courts have not been abided by in the case of African Colombians? Are there cases of African Colombians being subjected to torture from the military and police, in a sense the military arm of the Uribe government?

[Carlos Rosero]

I don't have the comprehensive data, but I do have UNHCR data from the UN. This data says that indigenous peoples represent 2% of the population, but represent 12% of all displaced people inside Colombia. African Colombians represent 8% of the population, but represent 20% of the people displaced internally in Colombia, which shows that there is quite a disproportionate situation. It's a small population, but many people have been displaced.

Secondly, it is possible, and the government has insisted on this repeatedly, that the total number of people displaced within Colombia has been decreasing. However, they haven't progressed, and the resistance strategies posed by the communities in different parts of the country have changed. If you look at the number of people displaced today, the numbers are lower, but there are a growing number of communities throughout the country that are subjected to the same risk factors, and the fact is they cannot move, they cannot be displaced, or they have chosen not to leave their lands. So if you take this into consideration, of course, yes, the rate of people displaced has diminished; however, the risk factors, in other words the risks themselves, have not disappeared.

We know of cases, not cases of torture by the public security forces, but we do know of other situations in Río Micay, in the area of Buenaventura. There, for example, the armed forces have subjected agricultural workers in Colombia to forced labour. For example, a helicopter will land and they take the young and they force them to clear the entire territory so that other helicopters will be able to land. In other words, the young will not be allowed to say, “I'm not doing that job; it's not my job to do it.” They can't do that. And this, of course, translates into a context in which there are territorial issues and risks for all those young people. There's a danger of being attacked by armed forces.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you for that.

We have a recent report by CENSA, which indicates that “Human rights violations, widespread in Colombia, are linked to efforts by those behind Colombia's paramilitaries to create conditions for investment from which they are positioned to benefit.” They certainly talk in this report about the palm oil plantations and the forced displacement of African Colombians.

I would like to come back to the issue of torture and the African Colombian community. Do you agree with this report's conclusion that often those investment conditions help to propel human rights violations?

I think you've been very clear that this agreement should not be pushed through. Do you see it as a reward for a government that clearly is not acting yet according to the standards that the international community would demand of it?

Finally, what other witnesses could you suggest to us as we go, probably in 2010, into a study on Colombia, if Parliament chooses to do so?

[Carlos Rosero]

I think the Colombian government, in relation to average Colombians, doesn't make enough of an effort to improve the human rights situation of our people.

For example, there's a great deal of evidence in the communities in which we work where non-compliance on the part of the government in relation to its obligations to protect our rights, specifically in this case prior consultations, leads our communities to demand the application of those rights, and as a response we are threatened by paramilitaries.

It's very clear, you don't allow companies to come in. What we're saying is there are rules of the game, and companies should respect these rules of the game. The final decision is to be taken by the government; it's not a final decision to be taken by the communities, which do respect the rules, respect our rights.

I think what's very important for us is that a recommendation that comes from this current debate is that there should be a study of the impact of the FTA on our human rights. We haven't seen that in any other free trade agreement, and I think that would make a big difference. Take into account what the impact on human rights and what the measures of compensation, mitigation, could be in relation to these impacts.

This is not only a proposal, it's also a responsibility that will represent a great benefit to the rights of our people, and a clear message would be sent to the international community about what responsible investments should be like. In other words, there can be a follow-up on the impact of these investments to correct any problems that could arise in the future.

I think in the future you will have the opportunity to listen to more people from our communities, and I think you'll form a better idea, a clearer idea, of what's currently happening. Based on the testimony of many people, I hope you'll take a very responsible decision granting people their rights and providing incremental benefits that should be clean.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you, Mr. Rosero.

Mr. Harris.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I had a series of questions for Mr. Mejía, but following Mr. Julian's—I guess it would be appropriate to call it a drive-by smear in refusing to allow Mr. Mejía to respond to the attack Mr. Julian made on the integrity of Mr. Mejía's paper. I would like to give Mr. Mejía an opportunity, maybe a couple of minutes, to respond to Mr. Julian's attack. Then I'll follow with some questions.

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

Thank you for allowing me to respond to this.

If they discredit the study, on academic grounds I would like to know why exactly. Is it the statistical tools we use? Is it the figures we use, which are their figures? Every single number we use is cited, from the document we take it from.

It would be really nice to know why the study is wrong. It is surprising to me, I have to say. This doesn't come off as good news for the unions. You mentioned they referred to this as no structural break in the homicides of union members. I see a structural break. We can discuss that on academic grounds. We can look at the figures. We can look at the clear table constructed from their data and discuss whether you see or don't see a structural break. As an independent academic economist, I see it.

Again, if you look at my website, I have been very critical of the government in some respects, but these are their figures, not the government's figures.

I would like to know exactly what is the criticism of the paper. Is it just that they don't like it, or is it that they have comments on the tools we use, on the codes we use, on the methods? That I am willing to discuss. Whether they like it or not, what can I do?

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Mejía.

Mr. Julian's tactics are a testament to the historical rudeness and intolerance he has shown on this committee to our witnesses, and sir, I apologize for that on behalf of the Government of Canada. I'm sure the members of the Liberal Party, the official opposition, would agree with me.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but I think I saw something the other night about President Uribe. Have there been about 12 or 13 assassination attempts on his life in the past few years?

I also understand that he enjoyed in the last election--and currently enjoys--somewhere in the neighbourhood of 51% popularity in the country. Is that number correct as well?

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

I don't know the exact number of attempts to kill President Uribe, but I know that many have been made. I don't have the figures.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Okay.

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

Regarding his popularity, most polls I have seen that were done in Colombia—this is not part of my research and I'm not talking here as a university professor—talk about a popularity above 60% or 70%, depending on the survey you look at.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

I also understand that establishing free trade with other countries was high on his campaign list. Now I understand that about five or six other countries are trying to establish free trade agreements with Colombia. I'm trying to determine whether they are any more acceptable to Mr. Rosero, or those in Colombia and on this committee who are opposed to this particular Canada-Colombia free trade agreement. In other words, have they announced that they are going to accept and press for all of the demands we've had made upon us, as far as this trade agreement goes? Have they agreed that they won't sign an agreement unless all of these conditions are met?

Are you aware that other countries are willing to accept all of these human rights demands that have been made on Canada--that they would sign an agreement?

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

Not that I know. I know that the European Union and the United States are concerned about many things, as Colombians are concerned about many things. We don't neglect that there are many problems in Colombia, but I think we should look at the evolution over time in solving these problems. This is not about Uribe. Uribe is going to last one or five more years. This is about the country in general.

If you're going to oppose huge economic reform for Colombia that's going to bring economic development, technological transfers, more opportunities for workers, lower prices for consumer goods—many good things from free trade—just because of the current Colombian president, I think that's unfair to the country.

If someone doesn't like Uribe, fine, let's discuss it. But let's discuss a free trade agreement on the grounds of what it is going to bring. What schemes should be in place to compensate people who lose and gain from the free trade agreement? But in my view, this is a personal discussion about the President, which is not fair to 40 million Colombians.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Thank you.

If I have any time, left I'll share with it Mr. Cannan.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

You have a few minutes.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to my colleague. Thanks to both of our witnesses here today.

Some of us on the committee have had the opportunity to travel to Bogota to see first-hand, on the ground, some of the challenges that Colombians are facing and some of the great opportunities. We've also had the pleasure of having the President come to testify and hear some of the issues from our committee members.

I appreciate your presentation here. The fact that there's no statistical evidence supporting the claim that a greater intensity of union activity leads to more violence against union members or union leaders is very important.

We've heard concerns about human rights, and we all share those concerns and see that President Uribe and the government have been identifying strategies. On cleaning up his own government of corruption, when we were there, several members of his own government were being charged. I don't know if the convictions went through, but house cleaning was definitely going on.

Is that integrity and his own leading by example still being followed today?

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

Yes. Most of the justice system in Colombia is now taking care of all the corruption and all the problems where the senators and congress had ties to paramilitary groups and ties to guerrilla groups.

If we are going to discuss corruption, violence, and displacement, let's discuss it in general. Guerrilla groups also displace a lot of people to plant coca crops. Not only the paramilitaries do it. The guerrillas and the paramilitaries do it. Senators are being charged by the justice system for ties with the paramilitaries, but there are also senators charged because of ties to the guerrilla groups.

So yes, there are a lot of problems in Colombia, and I think they are being taken care of by the judicial system, which is an independent entity of the country.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I have one supplemental question. We've heard from a variety of witnesses over the last year in this committee. One of them was the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who saw no reason why a Canada-Colombia free trade agreement should not be supported. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?