The Dominion - Abousfian Abdelrazik

Abousfian Abdelrazik's Statement to the UN 1267 Committee

shainaagbayani — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:02:13 +0000

Abousfian Abdelrazik delivers a message to the UN 1267 list committee about the hardships he endures daily.

Abousfian Abdelrazik's Statement to the UN 1267 Committee

shainaagbayani — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 19:29:49 +0000

Abousfian Abdelrazik delivers a message to the UN 1267 list committee about the hardships he endures daily.

(video ID here: http://www.vimeo.com/25236316)

A Dark Anniversary

Tim McSorley — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 05:30:05 +0000

Abousfian Abdelrazik marks one year back in Canada, languishes under UN watch list

MONTREAL—“There are certain anniversaries that should never take place. The lack of action by the Harper government is unacceptable. Why is Abousfian still waiting for his name to be cleared?” asks Mary Foster, an organizer with the Abousfian Abdelrazik support committee "Project Fly Home."

On June 4, 2009, Federal Court Judge Rossel Zinn issued a stern ruling that Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon had been acting in bad faith and that the Canadian government would need to bring Abdelrazik back to Canada from Sudan. One year later, Abdelrazik continues to wait for his name to be removed from the United Nations Security Council Committee 1267 "Consolidated List," colloquially known as the Al-Qaeda and Taliban Terrorist List, or, for short, the "1267 List." Being on the list impedes Abdelrazik from functioning in the most basic of ways.

Abdelrazik recently sat down at a busy coffee shop in downtown Montreal to speak with The Dominion about what he has dubbed "living in a prison without walls."

A victorious grassroots movement brought Abdelrazik home last fall after six years of forced exile and imprisonment in Sudan. Abdelrazik tried to establish the cornerstones of a regular life—reconnect with family; find an apartment; see what work was available; and get through administrative tasks such as opening a bank account.

“It was very confusing and shameful how I was treated. Less than a week after depositing a small amount in my new account, I was contacted by Caisse Desjardins and told my account had been frozen and that they were unsure as to why but that there was nothing they could do. So no pension and no money and what I am supposed to do?” Abdelrazik asks quietly.

His legal team quickly learned that the reason behind the freeze was that he is still on the 1267 List. Beyond the complete asset freeze, Abdelrazik is also subjected to a total flight ban, and it is illegal for any employer to hire him or for him to receive social assistance, making it difficult to cover his and his children’s basic expenses. Listed individuals face vague allegations; they have no right to a hearing before they are placed on the list; and they are provided with no evidence to support the claims against them. In response, Project Fly Home launched a “Break the Silence” campaign to have him de-listed and to create a surge of popular support.

“Once again it is Lawrence Cannon and his department who have the ability to take me off the list. They refuse to tell me why I am on it, and why they have not worked to take me off of it,” Abdelrazik explains.

Break the Silence has been gaining momentum, with major unions and labour federations such as the Canadian Labour Congress, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, the Canadian section of the International Machinists and most recently the Canadian Association of University Teachers publicly endorsing the initiative and agreeing to hire Abdelrazik for short term contracts. Despite large labour organizations engaging in acts of civil disobedience, Cannon continues to reject responsibility for de-listing Abdelrazik and claims it is up to Abdelrazik himself to get off the list. So far there have been no legal repercussions for unions and organizations actively working to oppose the sanctions against Abdelrazik.

While individuals can apply to be de-listed, says Foster, the process is highly politicized and nearly impossible to get through without state support. But the Canadian government could lift the sanctions itself. “Cabinet could immediately pass an Order in Council to modify or repeal the regulations which implement the 1267 regime in Canada,” Foster explains.

The Dominion received no response from Cannon or Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAIT) by the time of print, but on May 18, Canwest Global quoted Cannon as saying: “All I can say is that in the past I tried to make sure that Mr. Abdelrazik had the support he needed to be removed from the UN list. That attempt, unfortunately, failed.”

A precedent backs Abdelrazik’s assertion that the responsibility for de-listing falls upon Cannon and the Department of Foreign Affairs. On June 3, 2002, on a recommendation from the then-Liberal Minister of Foreign Affairs, the regulations implementing the 1267 regime in Canada were modified to exempt Liban Hussein, an Ottawa citizen who was arrested November 7, 2001, at the request of the United States. The US accused him of supporting terrorism. The exemption effectively ended the sanctions against the only Canadian on the list at the time, and his name was subsequently removed from the Security Council’s 1267 List.

In the first week of June, Abdelrazik’s legal team filed to the Federal Court of Canada a challenge against the United Nations 1267 List. Comparable challenges have been filed in Switzerland and Belgium; both countries saw their federal courts strike down the 1267 regime as unconstitutional and undemocratic. “It is quite risky for countries to put people on the 1267 List because it will undoubtedly be challenged in the high courts because it is so starkly against basic due process,” says Foster.

In his judgment that forced the Canadian government to bring Abdelrazik back to Canada, Federal Court Judge Zinn wrote, "I add my name to those who view the 1267 Committee regime as a denial of basic legal remedies and as untenable under the principles of international human rights. There is nothing in the listing or de-listing procedure that recognizes the principles of natural justice or that provides for basic procedural fairness...It can hardly be said that the 1267 Committee process meets the requirement of independence and impartiality when, as appears may be the case involving Mr. Abdelrazik, the nation requesting the listing is one of the members of the body that decides whether to list or, equally as important, to de-list a person. The accuser is also the judge."

University of Ottawa Law Professor Amir Attaran has been closely following the case of Abdelrazik and cautions against putting the responsibility solely on the Canadian government. “While Canada’s almost certainly illegal error has been to follow an unjust UN system, the deeper problem lies with the UN, which created and administers the 1267 sanctions system, and which oddly believes it is consistent with human rights law. It is time to call into question the belief, too frequent and trusting on the political left, that the UN are good guys. They are not: Abdelrazik’s unjust persecution amply proves it.”

The 1267 List was established as a sanctions regime measure “to deter terrorism” by the United Nations Security Council in 1999 after the 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya. In 2001, after the 9/11 attacks in the United States, the list was broadened to target Al Qaeda as well as the Taliban. The resolution has been widely understood to be serving a political agenda to target countries the United States deems problematic. However, it seems to have evolved to become a tool numerous states are using to stifle political dissent and internal sovereignty movements, including Russia against Chechnyans and India against members of the Khalistan movement.

When asked what he would like to see happen next, Abdelrazik smiles softly and with quiet determination states, “The government could revoke the regulations entirely. This step would send a clear signal to the United Nations Security Council that Canada will no longer participate in this unjust regime and will let me continue on with my life. Until then we will continue with the campaign.”

Amy Miller is a media maker and community organizer who resides in Montreal.

Fly home

Torture, a Canadian Value?

dru — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 22:56:06 +0000

Ottawa's complicity in torture merits a national discussion

MONTREAL—Each year in June the UN marks the International Day in Support of Torture Victims. However, numerous UN member states continue to practice torture—in many cases, openly. Political contradictions here abound, nuzzled between the horror of torture as a politically administered reality and the apparent international consensus in opposition to torture.

Canada is one country where political links to torture in recent years are unmistakable.

From the haunting testimonials from Canadian Omar Khadr who remains at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, to the widely documented torture of Canadian Maher Arar in a Syrian prison, torture is key in Canada’s political relationship to the world since 9/11.

"Today, a very specific narrative on torture is circulating in Canada," outlined Sherene Razack, professor at University of Toronto and celebrated author of multiple books on race issues in the law.

"The narrative that torture works and that it is necessary is gaining prominence more than it ever has before—claims that have really gone unchallenged in the popular media, which is really very dangerous for our society," she told The Dominion by phone.

Abousfian Abdelrazik is a Canadian who can speak directly to Canada’s take on torture.

Abdelrazik was imprisoned in Sudan, where he was tortured. He is now at the epicentre of a grassroots campaign that recently pressed the government to repatriate Abdelrazik from Sudan, a citizenship right denied by successive Canadian governments.

According to Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, "every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada." These rights were denied to Abdelrazik. In June, after six years in exile, he returned to Montreal when a key ruling from a federal court judge forced the government to respect Abdelrazik’s right of return to Canada.

"I traveled to Sudan to visit my sick mother; without telling me, agents from CSIS recommended to Sudan that I should be arrested," explained Abdelrazik. "I was thrown in prison because Canada asked, imprisoned [and] beaten. I was tortured."

Beyond the false intelligence from Canada leading to Abdelrazik’s imprisonment and torture in Sudan, the direct role that the Canadian government played in Abdelrazik’s torture is the most arresting factor in his case.

"The Canadian government knows that Sudan tortures prisoners but it did not help me," outlined Abdelrazik. "Instead, the Canadian government sent CSIS agents to interrogate me in the prison."

Today, Abdelrazik is demanding redress from the Canadian government.

"I want those people who play a role in this matter to face justice, not because I seek revenge," Abdelrazik explained to the press shortly after returning to Montreal. "I want this not to happen to any Canadian."

Abdelrazik is now struggling for a full restoration of his citizenship rights in Canada. Due to claims that Abdelrazik maintains associations to Al-Quada, radical allegations which have never been proven in court, Abdelrazik remains on the United Nations' terrorist watch-list. This prohibits him from holding a bank account or accepting any kind of financial assistance, including employment wages in Canada.

Denying Abdelrazik a passport was a clear breach of Canada’s Citizenship Act, and serious criticism has been leveled against successive Canadian governments for it.

Abdelrazik's case is one example of how the Canadian state is turning its security arsenal against citizens. Another is the government's "security certificate" program, currently directed towards five permanent residents of Ontario and Quebec.

In 2003 Canadian security forces seized Adil Charkaoui in a highly publicized arrest, issuing a security certificate against him. This sparked a popular campaign across Canada to abolish the legislation, which allows the indefinite detention and eventual deportation of terror suspects without a public presentation of evidence.

After more than four years in prison, without ever knowing the charges against him, Charkaoui was released on severe conditions, including wearing an electronic monitoring bracelet.

In 2006 Charkaoui launched a successful challenge to the security certificate, condemned by the UN Committee against Torture and in the Supreme Court of Canada, which deemed the legislation unconstitutional. In response, the Conservative government revamped the legislation in 2007, introducing a "special advocate" into the certificate process, maintaining the fundamental structure of the legislation, which was reinstated in 2008.

Today, Charkaoui remains under threat of deportation to Morocco, a country where he could face torture. Canada’s attempts to deport Charkaoui to Morocco are in violation of Canada’s commitments under the UN Convention against Torture.

Canada’s security certificate legislation is another key to understanding Canada’s relationship to torture in recent years.

"In Canada, when the security label is applied to people, their humanity is automatically degraded and torture becomes a possibility," explained Mary Foster, an activist with the Peoples Commission Network, a community coalition opposing Canadian immigration and security policies which undermine human rights. "The trends towards normalizing torture works towards dehumanizing our society, pushing people to think more about their own individual security and not about our collective security."

Canada has also come under harsh criticism for its treatment of Afghan detainees, many of whom were tortured.

In 2008, after torture testimonials were collected from multiple prisoners, Amnesty International launched a lawsuit against the Canadian government which would permanently halt the transfer of Afghan detainees to Afghan prisons.

"In Afghan prisons torture is rampant and systematic, [and] in our view it's very likely that a good number of those who are transferred from Canadian custody into the Afghan prison system will end up being tortured," explained Alex Neve, the secretary general of Amnesty International's section in Canada, in 2008. "If the risk of torture is a real one, which Amnesty believes it is, it's incumbent upon Canada and it's actually a matter of international legal obligation not to hand the prisoners over."

Amnesty’s case on Afghan torture is now pending at the Military Police Complaints Commission, which launched a series of public hearings on the issue last month.

The hearings are centered on whether Canada knowingly transferred prisoners to torturers in Afghanistan.

In Ottawa, the Conservative government is attempting to secure a court injunction to halt public hearings scheduled to continue this fall.

Other tales of torture, told by Canadians Maher Arar and Abdullah Almalki, who were tortured in Syrian prisons, are accompanied by silence from Canadian officials.

"As a nation we need to face up to the reality of our complicity in torture," stated Alex Neve of Amnesty International, whom The Dominion reached by telephone.

Canada is a signatory to the 1984 UN Convention against Torture. Even so, the actions of Canadian governments contradict the anti-torture convention.

"Torture itself, as well as stories about torture, are actually meant to teach us something," said Razack. "Stories meant to teach us who belongs to the national community and who doesn’t, so you get massive numbers of people who think that Muslims do not belong to the national community and are not deserving of their fundamental rights—and that really is the damage of torture."

Stefan Christoff is a journalist and community organizer.

Torture as a Canadian Value

April 7 - May 7: Cross-Canada Campaign to Bring Abousfian Abdelrazik Home

Sandra — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 03:29:16 +0000

[[Reposting of Project Fly Home update & call for action]]

Bring Abousfian Abdelrazik Home!
Cross-Canada Campaign 7 April to 7 May
Update and Call for Action

On Friday, 3 April, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon refused to give a passport to Abousfian Abdelrazik. The flight Abousfian was due to board left without him, and he remains in the same situation of forced exile that he has been in for six years - living for almost a year in the Canadian embassy in Khartoum.

On Tuesday, 7 May, his lawyers will go to the courts to ask for a mandatory order to compel the government to bring Abousfian back by "any safe means at its disposal". This is being argued on the basis of section 6 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states, "Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada."

If they wanted to, government officials could, literally, send a plane today to bring him home tomorrow. But the government's actions have flown in the face of the law and public opinion, and officials have refused to do what is both within their means and within their legal obligation - to bring Abousfian home. Without public pressure, there is no guarantee that they
will even respect a court order.

Project Fly Home is thus calling for a public campaign leading up to 7 May to push the government to act NOW to bring Abousfian home.

It is imperative that the level of pressure and public scrutiny remain very high. The government has clearly proven its capacity for duplicity and its strong resistance to upholding Abousfian's rights. This is a case which is important not only for Abousfian but for all of us who are concerned about preserving the rights and freedoms - and most importantly, the dignity and equality - of all.