Mr. Speaker, I want to let you and the House know from the outset that we in our party will be supporting the motion. I congratulate the hon. member for Rosemont--Petite-Patrie for his good work on the issue. To remind the House and the listening public of the motion I will read it again. It states:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government should take the necessary measures for Canada to ratify the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.
It is amazing that the government has not ratified the convention. The hon. members who have spoken, at least on this side of the House, have raised serious questions as to why the government would not move on it. The motion before us is an honourable one which would send a message to the rest of the world. It is a votable motion, which indeed it should be. It is good to put the government on trial and see how many of its members are brave enough to stand and vote it down.
The Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture was created in 1985 at the 15th regular session of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States. I remind the House that Canada is a member of the OAS. We became a member on January 8, 1990.
Mr. Speaker, during that debate you stood on this side of the House. As you remember, and I know you have a great memory, the Liberal Party at the time was outraged that the Prime Minister of Canada would move Canada into the OAS. One of those convenient anti-American speeches was given by the Liberal Party. There was a round of questions in question period regarding our entry into OAS, if one can believe it. I was here and was part of the debate. I was honoured to stand in my place in the House and vote Canada, through the Parliament of Canada, into the OAS.
It is reminiscent of the NAFTA debate where the Liberals raged against it and wanted to change it but did not change a comma, period or colon. They simply moved on for whatever reason knowing full well we were right to join the OAS, we were right to enter into NAFTA and we were right to enter into the free trade agreement. However that is old political history and I doubt anyone wants to listen to that tonight.
The OAS is made up of 34 active member countries. The U.S. ratified the convention of which we speak and entered into it on February 28, 1987. Canada is lagging way behind.
The spirit of the OAS convention to prevent and punish torture reinforces the Charter of the United Nations and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That was one of the issues the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre brought to the floor of the House in the last few minutes. There appears to be an inconsistency on the part of the Government of Canada. The convention reaffirms:
--that all acts of torture or any other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment constitute an offense against human dignity and a denial of the principles set forth in the Charter of the Organization of American States and in the Charter of the United Nations--
In order for the pertinent rules contained in the OAS and UN charters to take effect the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture must be ratified. It calls for state parties, in this case Canada, to take effective measures to prevent and punish torture within their jurisdictions and ensure that all such acts are considered offences under their criminal law. It says punishment should be severe and take into account the serious nature of all acts of torture. It also calls for state parties, again in this case Canada, to:
--take effective measures to prevent and punish other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction.
The hon. member for Pictou--Antigonish-Guysborough, our justice critic, could speak volumes to this because one of the reasons the government is so reluctant is the sovereignty issue which I hope to touch on. The convention addresses a need to ensure figures of authority such as police do not use torture during interrogation, detention or arrest.
Under the convention anyone claiming to have been tortured is entitled to an impartial examination of his or her case. If an examination results in findings of torture the victim shall be entitled to suitable compensation. However no provisions in the convention shall override the right of the victim or other persons to receive compensation, and this is a key phrase, by virtue of existing national legislation. The convention does not supersede domestic law. It says state parties, again in this case Canada:
--shall take the necessary steps to extradite anyone accused of having committed the crime of torture or sentenced for commission of that crime, in accordance with their respective national laws on extradition and their international commitments on this matter.
The convention does not override criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with domestic law.
Speaking of cruel and unusual punishment, one of the reasons the government might be reluctant is because of what we are witnessing on the other side of the House in terms of the cruel and unusual punishment the Prime Minister of Canada is inflicting on the general public and on his own party.
On the positive side, Canada supports the United Nations charter and condemns all acts of violence against human beings. Ratifying the convention would reaffirm our commitment that human rights should be protected for all humankind. I do not think it is news to members that Canada has an excellent reputation around the world for its record and efforts with respect to human rights. Canada's efforts reflect the spirit of the convention, so why the hesitation?
During the debate on whether we should ratify the convention it has appeared that Canada has been struggling with the issue of sovereignty. It goes back to our reluctance to join the OAS, or rather the reluctance of the official opposition Liberal Party at the time. A thread of anti-Americanism still seems to run through and pervade the Liberal Party. The government is debating whether or not we would be buckling under to the United States which is the driving force and dominant state within the OAS.
This seems to be the constant thread that weaves itself throughout any policy that comes from the present government. The Liberal government is not addressing the issue in a fashion we would expect from a national government, especially the government of a country like Canada that has such a great and unblemished record on human rights.
The government should move on, ratify the treaty and make us all proud to be members of the OAS.