Ottawa faces calls to scrap rule allowing migrants crossing border covertly to claim asylum after two weeks

2024/12/07 Leave a comment

Will see what government does but my guess is that the pressures to do so will be hard to resist:

…Opposition politicians and provincial premiers have raised fears about an influx of migrants to Canada from the U.S. after president-elect Donald Trump threatened to deport about 11 million people living there illegally.

“At a minimum, the 14-day rule should be suspended temporarily until we know what we are dealing with,” said immigration lawyer Richard Kurland, who obtained the border agency’s intelligence document through an access to information request.

Under the Safe Third Country Agreement between Canada and the U.S., asylum-seekers must make their claim in the first country in which they arrive. In March last year, the two countries restricted the agreement, ending the ability to claim asylum after crossing at Roxham Road.

Both Canada and the U.S. can terminate the agreement with six months’ notice, and they can also negotiate changes. Immigration lawyer David Matas said “the agreement could be extended by removing the possibility of staying in Canada if one enters Canada illegally and remains hidden for 14 days or more.

“That would be even more effective in discouraging traversal of the U.S. than the present form of the agreement.”

Canada does not return people to the United States if they have been charged with an offence that could subject them to the death penalty.

Warda Shazadi Meighen, a lawyer at Landings LLP, said Canada would have the power to enact additional public-interest exemptions to help people facing persecution if they were returned to the United States.

“One can imagine a scenario where women fleeing gender-based violence, and individuals facing LGBTQ+ persecution, for example, would not get adequate protection under certain administrations in the United States,” she said.

Source: Ottawa faces calls to scrap rule allowing migrants crossing border covertly to claim asylum after two weeks

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Immigration minister says ‘not everyone is welcome’ in response to concerns about Trump deportation plan

2024/11/13 Leave a comment

Needed message from the minister and lawyers identifying a possible loophole:

…On Monday, several immigration lawyers urged Ottawa to change a policy that allows migrants fleeing from the U.S. to claim asylum here if they cross the border illegally and evade the authorities for two weeks.

In 2017, Haitians streamed into Canada from the U.S. after the first Trump administration ended temporary protected status for Haitians who had fled to the U.S. The policy sparked an influx of Haitians claiming asylum at the “irregular” Roxham Road border crossing into Quebec.

After talks with the U.S., the Safe Third Country Agreement was revised and Roxham Road was closed in 2023. The changes tightened the rules, but allowed someone entering Canada illegally from the U.S. and remaining undiscovered for 14 days to file a refugee claim in Canada. Those arriving from the U.S. at airports and regular border crossings are usually turned back.

The lawyers cautioned that unless Ottawa changes the policy quickly, record numbers of people facing deportation by Mr. Trump would try to make it to Canada, where they could qualify for a work permit and health care while waiting for their claim to be processed.

Winnipeg refugee and immigration lawyer David Matas urged the government to speak to the Biden administration now, before Mr. Trump takes office in January, about changing the agreement. He said the 14-day provision is “an incentive to traffickers to get round the system.”…

Source: Immigration minister says ‘not everyone is welcome’ in response to concerns about Trump deportation plan

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Ottawa declassifies more details from Rodal report on Nazi war criminals in Canada

2024/02/05 Leave a comment

Of note:

As justice minister in the late 1960s, Pierre Trudeau opposed revoking the citizenship of a naturalized Canadian suspected of murdering 5,128 Jews in Latvia during the Second World War, over concerns about legality and social cohesion, long-redacted memos released on Thursday show.

…The previously redacted sections of Ms. Rodal’s report explore, among other cases, the case of F, from Latvia, a suspected firing-squad captain. He had been convicted in absentia by the Soviet Union. A 1965 memo by the legal division of External Affairs observed that the Soviet Union had requested his extradition to embarrass the Canadian government, but that at the same time, Canada had no reason to doubt the truth of the accusations. If true, the memo says, F was “an ardent Nazi lackey, not only cooperating actively with the occupying German forces but actually serving their Jewish and Gypsy extermination squads.” The memo said Canada had denied requests for extradition in at least four cases.

When the Canadian Jewish Congress asked in 1966 for a re-examination of the legal possibilities for action, a meeting across government departments was held. Two ideas for addressing war criminals were rejected: the revocation of citizenship for failing to disclose details of their past, and therefore not being of “good character” as required in citizenship applications; and retroactive legislation to allow for trials in Canada. There was a caveat: If a major war criminal such as Martin Bormann, who was once suspected of being in Canada, turned up, retroactive laws might be considered.

Mr. Trudeau later wrote, in a memo to Paul Martin Sr., who was secretary of state for external affairs, that nothing in Canadian law suggests a citizenship application is “in the nature of a confessional, requiring the applicant to disclose all prior conduct.”

On the subject of F, the alleged firing squad captain, Mr. Trudeau added that while anxiety in the Jewish community was understandable, “it would be most ill-advised for the government to undertake this venture, which would involve publicly accusing a Canadian citizen of having committed crimes in Latvia in respect of which he has been convicted, in absentia, in Russia.” Such a move, Mr. Trudeau said in a separate memo, could suggest widespread revocations of citizenship ahead.

…..Mr. Matas said Mr. Trudeau has since been proven wrong on his legal concerns, as the courts have allowed the revocation of citizenship for intentional non-disclosure.

Source: Ottawa declassifies more details from Rodal report on Nazi war criminals in Canada

Filed under Citizenship, Holocaust, Revocation Tagged with , ,

Rota debacle renews calls to examine history, including war crime records

2023/09/29 Leave a comment

Needed:

Canada could revisit calls to declassify documents about the presence of Nazi war criminals in the country, Immigration Minister Marc Miller said Wednesday, as the fallout continued over Parliament’s recognition last week of a man who fought for the Nazis.

“Canada has a really dark history with Nazis in Canada,” Miller said, heading into the weekly Liberal caucus meeting.

“There was a point in our history where it was easier to get (into Canada) as a Nazi than it was as a Jewish person. I think that’s a history we have to reconcile.”

Many Jewish organizations in Canada say doing that requires a public airing of information, and that means all the records Canada has about the presence of war criminals must be opened up.

“I think part of the problem here is that the records are closed,” said B’nai Brith senior lawyer David Matas in an interview.

“You can’t remember the past unless you know the past, and you can’t know the past unless you get the records.”

B’nai Brith Canada and the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center both reiterated their long-standing calls this week for the government to make public all records about the admittance of former Nazi soldiers.

That includes the entirety of a 1986 report from a public commission on war criminals, which is often referred to as the Deschênes Commission for the judge who led it.

The report has never been fully released, including an appendix with the names of 240 alleged Nazi war criminals who might be living in Canada that the report recommended Canada investigate.

“It’s now time for Ottawa to not only release the unredacted files related to the Deschênes Commission, but to also address the stark reality that there are still former Nazis with blood on their hands living in Canada,” said Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center President Michael Levitt.

Matas noted that in June, a House of Commons committee studying Canada’s access-to-information system recommended all historical documents be released in full after 25 years.

He said implementing that recommendation would fulfil the desire to see Canada’s war criminal records.

Currently, records can be released 20 years after someone’s death. But Matas said that rule doesn’t apply in this case, because information about people who died can’t be accessed unless their names are available.

He said it’s not that every person named in the records is guilty, but that a justice system relies on openness, and you can’t have justice without transparency, whether you’re guilty or innocent.

There is also little to no information publicly available about what follow-up was done to investigate alleged war criminals named in the Deschênes report, or bring any of them to justice.

All of this comes after what some have called the most embarrassing international debacle in Canadian history.

On Friday, during an official visit by Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the House of Commons Speaker pointed to a guest in the gallery he identified as a war hero.

Parliamentarians and dignitaries who were present gave two standing ovations to a 98-year-old Ukrainian Canadian war veteran without knowing or understanding that the unit he fought with was formed by Nazi Germany to fight against the Soviet Union.

Speaker Anthony Rota, who said he did not know about Yaroslav Hunka’s background, apologized for making an egregious mistake inviting him to Parliament. He announced Tuesday that he would resign from the role.

On Wednesday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau issued an apology on behalf of Canada and all parliamentarians for the debacle.

University of Alberta professor John-Paul Himka pointed out that nobody seemed to immediately understand how Hunka’s military history implied he would have fought with the Germans.

That’s because of a great lack of understanding of history, even among elected MPs, he said.

“I mean, this man was introduced as somebody who fought the Russians during World War II. Who was fighting the Russians during World War II? It was the Germans,” he said.

Matas concurred.

“I mean if Rota didn’t know about this whole issue and he was the Speaker of the House of Commons, you can imagine how widespread the ignorance is,” he said.

Still, said Matas, the uproar has rejuvenated the discussion about exposing that history, including all the records.

“This is on the radar, now, I think,” he said. “They’re paying attention to it.”

Miller said he has read the Deschênes report twice since this all happened, and encouraged all Canadians to do so.

He also said he knows there are many people demanding the release of the records, and it is something the government “could possibly examine again.”

But he said because he doesn’t know exactly what is contained in the documents, he doesn’t yet want to say if he backs their full release.

“But again, in a country like Canada that has not only a difficult history with Nazis in Canada, but also one of the most important diaspora of Jewish people, including some of the largest proportions of Holocaust survivors, impunity is absolutely not an option,” he said.

Mental Health Minister Ya’ara Saks, whose York Centre riding in Toronto has about one-fifth of its population identifying as Jewish, said Canada should look at what it can do to help provide answers and closure to Jewish Canadians.

She said opening the records is something to be looked at.

Source: Rota debacle renews calls to examine history, including war crime records

Filed under Antisemitism, Holocaust Tagged with

Canada must better protect immigrants, refugees from foreign intimidation, report says

2023/09/19 Leave a comment

Yes indeed:

A new report by human-rights lawyers, released ahead of the public inquiry on foreign interference, says Canada must be prepared to take forceful action to protect those who are often the targets of these attacks: immigrants and refugees.

It says Canada is breaking its obligations under international law to protect those who start a new life in this country but often face intimidation and pressure from authoritarian governments they left behind in their homeland.

“Canada is legally obligated to protect people within its borders against certain human-rights violations arising from incidents of transnational repression, and there are legal frameworks and mechanisms available to Canada at the international and domestic levels to combat such incidents,” the report said.

“Despite this, the Canadian government has yet to sufficiently respond,” it added.

In order to combat this repression, the report urges Ottawa to cancel a long-standing treaty with China that obliges it to co-operate with Beijing on police and criminal investigations.

As Western intelligence agencies, including the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, have warned, Beijing has a history of using what are ostensibly anti-corruption campaigns, such as Operation Fox Hunt, to instead find and punish dissidents who have fled to other countries. Last fall, it was reported that China ran a network of illegal police stations in Canada and around the world.

Canada should end its 1994 treaty with China on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, the authors say, referring to an agreement that allows Chinese or Canadian prosecutors to call upon investigators in each other’s country to help obtain evidence.

On Monday, Quebec Court of Appeal Justice Marie-Josée Hogue begins her term as commissioner of a public inquiry into foreign interference by China and other hostile states.

The inquiry follows months of reporting on Chinese foreign interferenceincluding revelations in The Globe and Mail on May 1 that Beijing targeted Conservative foreign affairs critic Michael Chong and his relatives in Hong Kong in the lead-up to the 2021 election. The disclosure of this meddling prompted Ottawa to expel Chinese diplomat Zhao Wei later that month.

The new report, Combatting Transnational Repression and Foreign Interference in Canada, was authored by international human-rights lawyers Sarah Teich, David Matas and Hannah Taylor.

It’s published by Human Rights Action Group as well as the Council for a Secure Canada. The report is endorsed by nine groups representing diaspora communities that fight transnational repression from countries including China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Ethiopia, Eritrea and others.

The report says that the various agencies and departments of the federal government need to work together to effectively combat transnational repression.

Canada needs not only a registry of foreign agents to track efforts to influence this country, it says, but also a commissioner of foreign influence to receive and investigate complaints: including alleged violations by foreign embassies and consulates.

The authors say Canada needs a dedicated hotline where targets of intimidation can call for help in order to co-ordinate a response and keep track of these repressions.

Canada should criminalize the offence of “refugee espionage” where foreign governments spy on those who have fled their homeland to settle in this country, they say. And, it should create a civil cause of action – a basis to seek judicial relief – specific to transnational repression so that diaspora groups have easier standing to sue foreign governments or agents in Canada working for them.

Ottawa should also train law-enforcement officers and campus security at universities to recognize and address cases of transnational repression, the report said.

In addition, it should commit to slapping targeted sanctions on foreign officials or entities found to be engaging in transnational repression, the report said.

Canada has a poor global reputation right now for tackling this form of foreign interference, the authors say. They noted that a report from Freedom House, a Washington-based advocacy group for civil liberties, concluded that mechanisms available to report incidents of transnational repression in Canada are inadequate, and that victims are often “disappointed by the lack of response from law enforcement.”

The authors of the new report say Canada is failing its obligations to protect people in this country from foreign-based repression, including under the 1954 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Most of the rights it’s obliged to protect are also listed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These rights include the right to life; the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; the right to liberty and security.

The report calls on Ottawa to create a specialized fund to provide physical, psychological and financial support for victims of transnational repression that can be used for needs such as emergency housing, physical and mental health treatment and new phones or laptops for those whose devices are hacked.

Source: Canada must better protect immigrants, refugees from foreign intimidation, report says

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Matas: Canada urgently needs to release its Holocaust-related records 

2023/07/06 Leave a comment

Agree:

The Canadian Access to Information system has broken down. The dysfunctional nature of the system is highlighted by the difficulty in accessing Holocaust records.

The Holocaust ended in 1945, more than 78 years ago. The Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals, headed by Justice Jules Deschênes, completed its work in 1986, almost 37 years ago. The Canadian effort to bring Nazi war criminals to justice has ended. The survivors are fast disappearing.

Though the records in Canada of the Holocaust and its perpetrators are old, their release is urgent. We will soon no longer be able to keep the memory of the Holocaust alive through the testimony of survivors – we will have to rely on the records. Yet, efforts to get the release of Holocaust-related records have gone nowhere.

Remembering the Holocaust means not just remembering the victims. It means also remembering their murderers. We need access to the report written by Alti Rodal for the Deschênes Commission, titled Nazi War Criminals in Canada: The Historical and Policy Setting from the 1940s to the Present. It was written to be public in its entirety, but has been released subject only to inexplicable extensive deletions. Part II of the Deschênes Commission report, addressing individual cases, has not been made public. And the hundreds of Nazi war crimes files originally held by the Department of Justice and Royal Canadian Mounted Police are inaccessible.

Canada is a member of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. The Alliance’s 2000 Stockholm Declaration commits the signatories to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the opening of archives in order to ensure that all documents bearing on the Holocaust are available to researchers.” The Alliance’s Monitoring Access to Archives Project recommended in 2017 that governmental archival institutions “release Holocaust related records, irrespective of any personal identifying information or national security classifications.” Yet, Canada is not respecting these commitments.

B’nai Brith Canada filed a request for Nazi war crimes related records in January, 2022, to Library and Archives Canada. A year and a half later, the institution has yet to provide a date by which the request would be processed.

In February, 2022, B’nai Brith Canada asked the Department of Justice for the files of all Nazi war crimes relating to people who died more than 20 years ago, the period after which privacy protection expires. The department replied that “it does not have the capabilities” to respond to the request.

B’nai Brith Canada then modified its request to ask for only those Nazi war crimes files of the people named by the Deschênes Commission, excluding cases that went to court, and persons not yet dead for 20 years. The Department of Justice responded in July, 2022, that it would take 1,285 days, that is to say more than three-and-a-half years, to answer the request

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, in its report dated June 20, made a number of welcome recommendations, one of which was the automatic release of historical documents that are more than 25 years old. The federal government has so many documents and so little staff and budget allocated to deal with them that the only way to make the access to information system work is to automatically release whole categories of records. Requiring consideration of each and every document to determine whether any one of a long list of exemptions to disclosure applies is a recipe for inaction.

Philosopher George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Yet, we cannot remember a past that remains hidden from us. To remember the past, we have to know the past.

Only through public access to Holocaust archives can we learn lessons from those archives. Learning lessons from the Holocaust is a legacy we can create for the victims, giving meaning to the senseless death of innocents. To learn those lessons, we need access to the archives.

David Matas is senior counsel to B’nai Brith Canada. He is a member of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Monitoring Access to Archives Project.

Source: Canada urgently needs to release its Holocaust-related records

Filed under Antisemitism, Holocaust, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Canada should say no to racism at the United Nations (20th anniversary of Durban Conference)

2021/02/19 Leave a comment

The legacy of Durban… Would be nice if there would be greater focus on China’s treatment of its religious and other minorities:

By bringing together all nations — democratic and non-democratic alike — the United Nations provides opportunities for both: For states that respect human rights, the UN can provide a forum for promoting that respect, while for states that violate them, the UN becomes a forum in which to defend, divert, and obfuscate.

One diversion tactic the latter use is to point human-rights standards elsewhere. They might use the vocabulary of human rights, but these words mean what they want them to mean.

The 2001 World Conference against Racism is a prime example. By singling out Israel, the concluding document was itself racist. The document called the Jews of Israel foreigners, even though Jews have lived continuously in Israel since prehistoric times.

The document further referred to their presence in the region as colonial occupation, even though colonization of the area had ended with the termination of the British mandate in 1948. The document blamed the plight of the Palestinians on Israel alone, as if all the terrorist organizations targeting the Jews of Israel, not least the Palestinian governing authority, had nothing to do with it.

While the strategies employed by rights-violating states at the UN to smother criticism are various, a notable component is an inordinate focus on Israel. Israel is small and geopolitically insignificant. A raft of states in the Arab and Muslim world are opposed to its very existence. Non-democratic states who are neither Arab nor Muslim, but who want to make sure the UN busies itself with anyone but them, are quick to join Arab/Muslim states in elaborate, prolonged, exaggerated criticism of Israel.

Zionism stands for the existence of Israel as the realization of the right to self-determination of the Jewish people. Anti-Zionism stands opposed. There is a confluence of agendas of the anti-Zionists states and the other non-democratic states. Anti-Zionists, having failed in their attempts to destroy Israel through force — in 1948, 1967, and 1973 — have switched to terrorism and delegitimization through demonization. A primary vehicle for this delegitimization strategy is the United Nations.

Jews are the prototypical victims of racism. They are a people whose victimization has been so awful, it gave racism itself, before the Holocaust a widely accepted ideology, a bad name. Yet, they themselves are labelled by anti-Zionists (in a typically tyrannical vocabulary inversion) as racist. Non-democratic states that repress their minorities and who truly are racist are more than happy to jump on this anti-Zionist bandwagon barrelling toward Israel and away from them.

We can be thankful that Canada and several other states walked out of the Durban Conference. But the anti-democratic/anti-Zionist coalition at the UN never misses a trick. It embraced a Durban Review Conference in Geneva in 2009, and a 10th-anniversary event in New York in 2011. Canada boycotted both, as did other rights-respecting states.

At the end of last year, the UN General Assembly decided by resolution that in September 2021 it will celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Durban Declaration. Canada voted against this resolution, as did several other rights-respecting states. The anniversary celebration this fall is expected to call for the full implementation of the declaration.

Feb. 22 is the first day of the next session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. On opening day, a high-level panel is scheduled to discuss the upcoming 20th anniversary. Canada should there express again its concerns about the Durban document and make clear its intention not to attend the celebration.

Canada, despite all the obfuscation of the cabal of anti-Zionist and other non-democratic states, should work through the United Nations to combat real racism. One component must be standing continuously against the Durban perversion of the anti-racist agenda to serve racist ends, with Jews yet again the intended victims.

The fight against racism is too important to ignore. Through their resurrection of the Durban Document and their pretend accusation as racist of a people devastated by racism, truly racist states attempt to avoid the criticism they so justly deserve. Canada at the United Nations should continue to say no to racism, real racism, and no also to this 20th anniversary.

Sarah Teich is a senior fellow with the Macdonald Laurier Institute. David Matas is senior honorary counsel to B’nai Brith Canada.  He was rapporteur for the Jewish Caucus at the 2001 Durban World Conference Against Racism.  

Source: Canada should say no to racism at the United Nations

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with , ,

Matas and Cotler: Legal steps must be taken against China for initial inaction

2020/05/27 Leave a comment

Of note. Feasabiity of most questionable given international political realities but lays out the options:

In order to safeguard global public health, the world must take action against the Government of China for its role in this global pandemic crisis. The Chinese Communist Party of China (CCP) and the Government of China, which the party directs, bear a large measure of responsibility for the global spread of COVID-19.

In the early days of the pandemic’s spread and during the Lunar New Year travel season, the Chinese government downplayed the severity of the illness and its spread. Human Rights Watch said in January that Chinese authorities had “detained people for ‘rumor-mongering,’ censored online discussions of the epidemic, curbed media reporting, and failed to ensure appropriate access to medical care for those with virus symptoms and others with medical needs.” Amnesty International warned soon after that the withholding of information was putting at risk the medical community’s ability to combat the virus.

There is authoritative and compelling evidence – including a study from the University of Southampton – that if interventions in China had been conducted three weeks earlier, transmission of COVID-19 could have been reduced by 95 per cent.

Meanwhile, an analysis of Chinese censorship around COVID-19, by the Munk School’s Citizen Lab, found that “Censorship of COVID-19 content started at early stages of the outbreak and continued to expand blocking a wide range of speech, from criticism of the government to officially sanctioned facts and information.”

The Chinese government’s wrongdoing and the suffering of its victims within its borders and internationally calls out for justice and accountability. There are clear and compelling legal remedies that should be considered to effectively address and redress this matter.

International

The International Court of Justice through a request for an advisory opinion from the United Nations General Assembly

The United Nations Charter provides that the UN General Assembly may request the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to give an advisory opinion on any legal question. Any UN member state can ask the General Assembly to make such a request to the ICJ, and China would not be able to veto such a resolution. The General Assembly could therefore request that the ICJ determine whether the actions of Xi Xinping’s China regarding coronavirus were in breach of its international legal obligations.

United Nations Human Rights Council

The United Nations Human Rights Council can pass a condemnatory resolution, or even establish a commission of inquiry into China’s actions regarding the coronavirus. If such initiatives are unlikely to muster the necessary majority of votes by member states of the council, independent statements can be made at the council’s regular sessions. Under agenda item 4 — “human rights situations that require the council’s attention” — any country, whether a member of the council or not, can deliver an oral statement. The wrongdoing of the Chinese government in the global spread of the coronavirus should be a matter of continuing concern at future sessions of the Human Rights Council.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, currently Dr. Dainius Puras, can consider individual complaints, issue annual reports and conduct country visits. Accordingly, he should be asked to address China’s culpability in the spread of COVID-19.

There is a sense of urgency to such a prospective path towards accountability, as the current Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health will be replaced at the Council Session taking place between June 15th and July 3rd.

China was appointed in April to the Consultative Group of the Human Rights Council. The group advises the President of the council on the appointment of special rapporteurs and holds final approval over council appointments. It is therefore unlikely that the council, with a member of the Chinese Communist Party as part of its makeup, would appoint to any specialized mechanism a person who may be critical of the government of China.

The World Health Organization

The World Health Organization (WHO) was critical in 2003 of the Chinese Communist Party for its secrecy, dishonesty and cover-up concerning the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak in Guangzhou, Guangdong of 2002. However, the behaviour of the WHO in the current pandemic is disappointing.

One might have hoped that the Chinese government has learned the lessons of its failures from the time of the SARS outbreak. Instead, of China reforming its policies and practices, it is the WHO that has altered its approach, failing to stand up to China.

The WHO has an important ongoing mandate and responsibility for our health and security which becomes particularly urgent in a time of a global pandemic, such as SARS in 2003 and now with COVID-19. Therefore, the WHO must be a particular focus of accountability efforts and encouraged to do the right thing, which is also the smart thing, for global public health and effectively confronting the Coronavirus.

International Health Regulations

The International Health Regulations were adopted in 2005 by the World Health Assembly of the WHO, to protect humanity from the international spread of disease. The unprecedented global impact of COVID-19 has demonstrated the ineffectiveness of these regulations.

In particular, there are no effective mechanisms when a state party violates regulations. All measures are subject to the approval of the violating state party, an unrealistic expectation when it comes to Xi Jinping’s China.

Yet, these regulations should not be rendered inoperative merely because of the necessity of agreement from Xi Xinping’s China to make them effective. An effort should be undertaken to render these regulations operable, and the very pursuit of this objective will underpin accountability efforts, promote a truthful narrative and mitigate Chinese propaganda.

International Court of Justice through the World Health Organization

The Constitution of the WHO provides that any dispute concerning the application of the constitution not settled by negotiation or by the World Health Assembly shall be referred to the International Court of Justice. A dispute regarding whether Xi Xinping’s China violated the International Health Regulations would likely constitute a dispute that could be referred by any WHO member state to the International Court of Justice.

The World Health Assembly

More broadly, the systemic challenges of the WHO must be addressed, and its next gathering from May 17 to 21 in Geneva presents such an opportunity. Ironically, the assembly may be unable to meet due to the failings of the WHO and the International Health Regulations in combatting the spread of COVID19.

In the World Health Assembly, as in the United Nations General Assembly, Xi Xinping’s China does not have a veto. This an opportunity for the international community to prioritize public health and pursue justice regarding the pandemic.

The Biological Weapons Convention

The Biological Weapons Convention obligates state parties, of which China is one, not to retain biological agents other than for peaceful purposes. A biological agent has been defined under the Convention to mean any organism which can cause death, disease or incapacity. 

Repressing or misrepresenting information about the virus, detaining health practitioners who seek to sound the alarm, and arguing publicly against global travel restrictions, are forms of retention of the virus that have harmed global peace and security.

Any state party to the convention could therefore make a complaint to the U.N. Security Council. Given that the convention has 183 state parties, that includes nearly every country in the world. The UN Security Council, on receipt of a complaint of violation, must investigate the matter and produce a report.

National

Magnitsky laws

Magnitsky laws for global justice and accountability, named for murdered Russian whistle-blower Sergei Magnitsky, allows for the public listing of serious human rights violators – naming and shaming them – and subjecting them to visa bans and asset seizures, thus challenging the cultures of corruption and criminality, and the impunity that underpins them.

There are six countries with this law. None of them have targeted any rights violators in Xi Xinping’s China. More countries should enact such laws, and all those with Magnitsky legislation should consider implementing them to pursue justice and accountability for those responsible for perpetrating and perpetuating COVID-19.

Universal jurisdiction laws on crimes against humanity through prosecution 

Many countries have laws which allow for the domestic prosecution of those who have committed crimes against humanity abroad. While these laws typically apply to permanent residents and citizens, some may also apply to visitors.

The accused would have to be found in the territory of the country in order for the local courts to have jurisdiction. While it varies by country – with some allowing for the private initiation of prosecutions – it is most often the exclusive decision of public prosecutors. Prosecutors are, however, usually reluctant to engage in such prosecutions, due to the prohibitive costs and evidentiary obstacles inherent in a case where the criminality and material evidence is abroad. Where private prosecutions are possible, they should be vigorously pursued.

There are other states, beyond China, that have contributed to the spread of COVID-19 through bad public policy and poor governance. Any liability response should be compelling and comprehensive, holding all wrongdoers to account. Yet, in doing so, the intentional and particularly intensive wrongdoing of China should be duly considered.

The denial, coverup and counter-factual narrative surrounding COVID-19 – underpinned by the use of global political pressure abroad and the repression of whistleblowers and medical heroes at home – has become standard operating procedure for the Communist Party of China. Immunity and impunity invite repetition.

In order to safeguard global public health, the world must act. Short-term political or economic considerations encouraging the indulgence of wrongdoing in Xi Jinping’s  China come with a long-term cost. Preventing another pandemic and protecting humanity necessitates pursuing justice and accountability for the Communist Party’s actions.

Source: Legal steps must be taken against China for initial inaction

Filed under foreign policy, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

A Toronto conference on racism will feature both anti-Islam speakers and Jewish groups

2018/12/21 Leave a comment

Strange bedfellows:

An upcoming Toronto conference is going to feature anti-Islam speakers, anti-hate advocates and some of the most recognizable Jewish organizations in Canada.

The “national teach-in” on hate and racism is organized by a group called Canadians for the Rule of Law, which argues on its website that “‘political correctness’ is distorting valid criticism” and “‘Libel chill’ is preventing the sharing of ugly facts.” The teach-in seeks to expose those who perpetuate these problems to the detriment of Canadian democracy.

To that effect, the March 17 conference will scrutinize “(A) the radical left; (B) radical Islamists; and (C) the radical right,” in that order of priority. The teach-in was supposed to take place at an important synagogue in Toronto until it pulled out last week over security concerns.

B’nai Brith Canada, one of the country’s most prominent Jewish advocacy groups, has agreed to their CEO Michael Mostyn moderating one of the panel sessions, while Robert Walker, the head of Hasbara Fellowships Canada, a pro-Israel group that works primarily on campuses, is also speaking at the event next March.

Though the conference features a number of well-known, mainstream anti-hate advocates such as Donald Carr, who sits on the board of CFTRL, David Matas and Anita Bromberg, a significant number of organizers and featured speakers are active in Canada’s anti-Muslim or alt-right circles.

Perhaps most notable among these are Charles McVety, president of Canada Christian College, and Christine Douglass-Williams, who was fired from the Canadian Race Relations Foundation board for being an active writer to Jihad Watch, a leading Islamophobic platform. McVety had a national TV show pulled off the air in 2010 for his remarks against the LGBTQ community. His college hosted a Rebel Media event in Feb 2017, emceed by prominent far-right propagandist Faith Goldy. He also hosted the popular anti-Islam activist and then Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders in 2011. At the time, McVety described the spread of Islam in Canada as a “demographic jihad.” “Islam is not just a religion, it’s a political and cultural system as well and we know that Christians, Jews and Hindus don’t have the same mandate for a hostile takeover,” he said in 2011.

“No reason whatsoever not to engage in a public discussion.”

John Carpay, who heads up Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, will also be at the conference. He spoke at a Rebel Media event in Calgary last month about the threat of totalitarianism in Canada partly by comparing the Nazi swastika to the “rainbow flag,” a comment he later said was “unintentionally” made. Rebel also fundraised on behalf of Carpay’s centre and some of its initiatives.

B’nai Brith Canada’s media liaison Marty York qualified his organization’s overall involvement when asked whether the decision to send its CEO to participate was made with the consideration that it features such a prominent anti-Muslim presence.

“Mr. Mostyn is moderating one single session on hate speech, which is something he does regularly,” York told VICE News. “He found out who the panelists are going to be and he was comfortable with their identities. Whoever else is involved during the day in other sessions, I’m not even sure if he even knows.”

He said Mr. Mostyn saw “no reason whatsoever not to engage in a public discussion” on hate speech in his one session.

“So there seems to be a smear by association campaign going on, and if that’s the case it’s very unfortunate.”

He added that B’nai Brith Canada “supports the rule of law” in Canada and thus “has no qualms at all about” Mostyn’s participation, regardless of who else is involved throughout the day-long conference.

David Matas, a noted human rights specialist and Senior Honorary Counsel for B’nai Brith, says he’s troubled by the anti-Muslim presence in the planned conference, but didn’t know until friends and colleagues emailed him their concerns.

“This all sort of just popped up and I have to go through all of it and make a decision collectively with my colleagues,” he says. “I admit that from what I’ve seen, there are obviously concerns that we need to discuss and I may end up not participating, but we have to look at all the information first.”

Robert Walker, executive director of Hasbara Fellowships Canada, cited addressing “anti-Semitism” and “anti-Zionism” as the main reasons for his involvement in the conference, preferring to offer no comment on the anti-Muslim participants.

“There are obviously concerns that we need to discuss.”

Hasbara is an initiative run out of Aish Hatorah, a major international network of Jewish educational centres and synagogues.

“Contemporary anti-Semitism often masquerades behind different masks, such as anti-Zionism, which is denying the Jewish people’s right to self-determination in their historic homeland,” he told VICE News. “I do not and cannot speak for other panelists or speakers.”

Among the conference’s main topics is “Actions Against BDS,” or the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the state of Israel.

The conference was originally supposed to take place at the prominent Beth Tikvah synagogue in North York. But in an email to VICE News, Rabbi Jarrod Grover of the synagogue noted that it has pulled out of the arrangement, leaving CFTRL without a host.

Grover stated that the decision to pull out was based primarily on security concerns for participants and to avoid a “media circus” — not over any ideological concerns.

“I defend the right of CFTRL and their speakers to say what they want to say within the limits of Canadian law.”

“We like dialogue and free speech, but we are a religious, not a political organization,” he wrote. “I defend the right of CFTRL and their speakers to say what they want to say within the limits of Canadian law, despite the fact that I obviously have different beliefs than many speakers at this conference.”

According to the Canadian Jewish News, the decision to pull out came after Karen Mock, president of the progressive Jewish group JSpace Canada, reached out to Rabbi Grover to discuss “potential damage control” over media interest in the event due to “the Islamophobia and bigotry associated with some of these groups and individuals.”

A response for a media request to CFTRL’s general inbox was replied by board member David Nitkin, who rejected the request on the basis that VICE News is an “alt-left” publication. Carr did not respond to requests for comment. He told the Canadian Jewish News that the event will go on, and “we reject any attempt by those who wish to stifle free speech.”

Nitkin is also a leading organizer and board member of the anti-Islam group, Canadian Citizens for Charter Rights and Freedoms (C3RF), which indicates in its mission statement that “Islamophobia” is a concept invented by the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies to infiltrate Canada and implement Shariah law. It is listed as a “community supporter” of the conference, along with ACT! Canada, which is a prominent anti-Islam group.

Source: A Toronto conference on racism will feature both anti-Islam speakers and Jewish groups

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Some fears of Islam justified: Lawyer [David Matas]

2017/10/20 Leave a comment

Sun Media continues to cover the perspectives of those concerned without comparable coverage of those in support of M-103. Both perspectives need to be covered.

My (faint) hope is that the Canadian Heritage committee will come up with a consensus on a working definition, one that puts that particular canard behind us, and allows focus on the day-to-day practical issues:

A celebrated Canadian human rights lawyer urged MPs to be careful in their use of the term Islamophobia, saying “fear of some elements of Islam is mere prudence.”

David Matas, an Order of Canada recipient who began his career as a clerk for the Chief Justice of Canada in the 1960s, delivered testimony Wednesday before the M-103 committee hearings in his capacity as senior counsel to B’nai Brith Canada.

“Not every fear of Islam is Islamophobia,” Matas said to the House of Commons Heritage Committee, noting that anyone who is not afraid of the various radical Islamic terrorist outfits in the world is “foolhardy”.

“Islamophobia does not appear in a vacuum,” Matas told MPs. “It grows out of a fear of incitement and acts of hatred and terrorism coming from elements of the Islamic community.”

The Winnipeg-based lawyer, who ran for office years ago as a Liberal, recommended the committee take a “dual focus” approach on both those victimized by Islamophobia and those within the Islamic community inciting hatred and terrorism.

Following Matas’ testimony, Shimon Fogel, CEO of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, urged the committee to aim towards a more precise definition of Islamophobia.

M-103 was nominally designed to denounce, and study, all forms of racism and discrimination, but has faced extensive controversy for singling out Islam.

Fogel pointed to a Toronto District School Board booklet’s definition of Islamophobia that included mere dislike of political Islam as worthy of censure.

“This incident exposes significant problems with relying on ad hoc, inadequate definitions of Islamophobia,” said Fogel.

On Monday, Muslim author and Sun columnist Farzana Hassan told the committee her concerns about how the term is used in other countries to suppress criticism from within the faith.

Source: Some fears of Islam justified: Lawyer | St. Thomas Times-Journal

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

← Older posts