Parliamentary Committee Notes: Party and Stakeholder Views
Conservative Party of Canada (CPC)
Position
"Conservatives believe that legislative action is required to address the challenges getting aid into Afghanistan"
March 27th: Bill C-41 would allow the Government of Canada to grant very limited exemptions to the Anti-Terrorism Act to allow the delivery of humanitarian assistance in areas controlled by terrorist organizations. The legislation does not name Afghanistan or the Taliban directly, but it is clearly designed to allow the government to grant narrow exemptions that would allow the delivery of emergency humanitarian relief into Afghanistan.
Public Comments
Conservative international development critic Garnett Genuis said the government's slow response echoed its problems bringing Afghan military interpreters to safety.
"We are studying this legislation and will be working with stakeholders to ensure that the promised and necessary changes are made."
March 27th: “This legislation would allow the Minister of Public Safety to grant certain narrow exemptions.
From the perspective of these organizations, the legislation marks an improvement. However, the process associated with accessing these exemptions would be time-intensive and potentially highly bureaucratic, with no timeline set out. Again, it is not only about how long it takes to pass the bill, but also how long it would take organizations to be authorized to get to work.”
Resources
Liberals to amend Criminal Code terrorism provisions that block aid to Afghanistan
Sitting No. 173 House of Commons
New Democratic Party (NDP)
Position
The NDP is urging Ottawa to prioritize the prospective law.
March 27th: Member's horror and grief at what is happening in Afghanistan, with the discrimination and persecution that women in Afghanistan are facing right now. It is part of the reason my NDP colleagues and I have been so frustrated that it has taken 18 months to get here. We have needed this legislation. However, now that it is here, we are hearing concerns from humanitarian organizations that it may contravene international law and Canada's international obligations. In particular, Doctors Without Borders Canada has expressed these concerns.
Public Comments
"While this legislation comes 18 months too late, New Democrats will take a close look at this bill and work to ensure that Canadian organizations will have the tools they need to finally restart their life- saving work in Afghanistan," foreign affairs critic Heather McPherson said in a statement.
"This legislation, and the resulting deliberations, must be prioritized to ensure more lives are not lost (as) the result of the Canadian government's inaction."
March 27th: Why did the government not do a blanket exemption and carve-out, like many organizations have been requesting? There are no other countries doing the kind of bureaucratic process the government has chosen with a registry. I am curious if the member could explain how this does nor does not contravene our international obligations, and why the government did not listen to the organizations on the ground and do a blanket carve-out.”
Resources
Liberals to amend Criminal Code terrorism provisions that block aid to Afghanistan
Sitting No. 173 House of Commons
Green Party (GP)
Position
March 27th: Many of our allies and other donor countries did not have the problems we have had as a country with getting aid workers into Afghanistan without tripping up into the rules against terrorism. I welcome this legislation. We need to get it through quickly.
Public Comments
March 27th: “Our colleagues in Australia, the U.K. and the U.S. did not have the problems that were created for us by the very strict and overly narrow definitions of terrorism that tripped up our aid efforts. Does she have any thoughts on what we can learn from this experience going forward?”
Sitting No. 173 House of Commons
BQ
Position
March 27th: The problem is that Bill C- 41 turns that presumption on its head. It uses an approach based on mistrust, one that requires humanitarian organizations to prove their abilities before they are allowed to respond to emergencies, and no one knows how long that process will take. One thing we do know, however, is that approval would involve at least two departments and up to nine security or regulatory agencies.
Public Comments
March 27th: “There are a lot of things in this bill. Members know that I care a lot about this bill. With the support of my colleagues, I was one of the first to ask questions about this. We have been waiting over a year for this bill, and it is here.”
Resources
Sitting No. 173 House of Commons
Stakeholders
Islamic Relief Canada
(Part of the 18 coalition)
Position
The legislation might help them deliver aid in other places held by terrorist groups, such as in parts of Syria and Nigeria. ( Save the Children as well)
Public Comments
"We welcome today's announcement by the Government of Canada. We are encouraged that this step forward will not only support the need for humanitarian organizations to operatein Afghanistan, but also in similar contexts”
Resources
Liberals to amend Criminal Code terrorism provisions that block aid to Afghanistan
Save the Children Canada
(Part of the 18 coalition)
Position
The legislation might help them deliver aid in other places held by terrorist groups, such as in parts of Syria and Nigeria. (Views also shared by Islamic Canada)
Public Comments
"Increasingly, the humanitarian space is shrinking for agencies like ours. The world is becoming a place it's difficult for us to work," said Save the Children's Canada head, Danny Glenwright.
"It's better late than never. It's a significant first step."
Resources
Liberals to amend Criminal Code terrorism provisions that block aid to Afghanistan
World Vision Canada
(Part of the 18 coalition)
Position
The #AidforAfghanistan coalition welcomes the new amendments to the Criminal Code, as it will allow for life- saving humanitarian aid to be delivered in Afghanistan without fear of criminal prosecution
Public Comments
"What this is going to allow us (to do) is to unleash the power of Canadian private donations," said the charity's president, Michael Messenger.
“Today's proposed legislative change is a critical first step toward ensuring Canada's legacy in Afghanistan continues in that spirit of support and commitment and to allowing Canadian organizations and our millions of supporters across Canada to once again provide desperately needed support to Afghan women, children and communities.”
Resources
#AidforAfghanistan coalition of 18 organizations responds to government plan to amend Criminal Code
Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)
Position
Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) does not support these changes and encourages Canada to instead enact a full humanitarian exemption, as recommended by the Canadian Parliament's Special Committee on Afghanistan, to ensure that humanitarian assistance to people affected by conflict is not held back by any laws intended to criminalize terrorism-related offences. MSF encourages the Government of Canada to improve the draft legislation by learning from the experience of other States who have included a humanitarian exemption in their relevant laws.
Criminalizing Canadian humanitarian agencies or their staff for working in territories controlled by terrorist groups would be contrary to existing international norms and laws, most notably the Geneva Conventions, and might even be unconstitutional.
Bill C-41 is exactly that: unduly restrictive, and it should be replaced with a general humanitarian exemption. Such an exemption would align with international law while removing any ambiguity in the Criminal Code regarding the protected status of humanitarian aid. As it stands, we are faced with a bill that, if passed, will subject humanitarians to undue scrutiny, under a cloud of criminal suspicion, for doing what most Canadians, including those in government, genuinely want them to do: get aid to those who need it most.
Public Comments
“The amendments proposed by the Government of Canada are incompatible with the level of flexibility and urgency required for delivering an emergency humanitarian response. For years, we have known that parts of Canada's Criminal Code could make delivering humanitarian assistance to some people a criminal act. MSF has been advocating for a humanitarian exemption in the Criminal Code to remove any risk that our staff or our organization could be charged with a criminal offence for delivering medical care to a patient in a place where Canadian anti-terror laws apply.” Jason Nickerson, Humanitarian Representative to Canada, Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)
Resources
MSF response to new Canadian government counterterror laws
International Civil Liberties Group
(Part of the 18 coalition)
Position
Supports the proposed Bill-41. Does have concerns.
Public Comments
“We welcome the government's action on this urgent issue, and want to congratulate the dedication and hard work of humanitarian organizations and other stakeholders who for nearly two years have been advocating for Canadian organizations to be able to resume their important work in Afghanistan, in particular the Aid for Afghanistan coalition”
Concerns
“The ICLMG coalition also expresses concern that an exemption regime does not address the central problem at the heart of this issue: that Canada's overly- broad counter-terrorism laws allowed for this situation to occur in the first place. The ICLMG, among others, has long raised concerns that the inherent vagueness and political nature of “terrorism” will continue to have unintended consequences, including on Canada's international human rights and humanitarian obligations, evidenced by the current restrictions on the provision of aid.”
“ […] the new exemption regime will also require deep scrutiny, particularly in regards to a possibly onerous process to apply for an exemption; the creation of new information-sharing protocols between government agencies; and broad criteria that can justify the denial of an application based on undefined “links” to terrorism”
Resources
ICLMG response to criminal code amendments on counterterrorism and international assistance
Carters Professional
Position
Carters professionals have area of concern regarding the Bill.
- Bill C-41 grants a discretionary exemption that can be withheld or revoked without providing an NGO documented reasons.
- Bill C-41 is too narrow in scope.
- The authorization only applies to “a specified geographic area that is controlled by a terrorist group”
- Religious NGOs may not be allowed to provide spiritual care.
Public Comments
“The lengthy and complicated provisions proposed by Bill C-41 are unnecessary and overly restrictive, especially when compared with the more remedial legislation in other jurisdictions that provides a simplified approach of a blanket exemption for humanitarian aid from their criminal code provisions”
“Criminal Code is described in 72 words, whereas the authorization to provide humanitarian assistance in the proposed section 83.032 is described in over 1200 words This means that the proposed legislative exception to the offence of making property available to a terrorist group is more than 33 times longer than the description of the offence itself.”
“As it is currently written, Bill C-41 raises many concerns, 19 but two overarching themes will be covered in this Alert: (1) the exception is discretionary and (2) the exception is too narrow in scope.”
Resources
Humanitarian aid authorization proposed in Bill C-41 (PDF 269 KB)
Canadian Red Cross, Canadian Foodgrains Bank, Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan, Cooperation Canada, CARE, Islamic Relief Canada, Presbyterian World Service & Development, World Vision
Position
The listed stakeholders are in agreement with Bill C-41 and think of it a crucial step forward, However there they offer some suggestions both short and long term to alter the regulatory framework to strengthen it.
Short term goals:
- To enable greater clarity in operations, expand the applicability of the exemption mechanism to include other offences under Part II.1 of the Criminal Code.
- To provide greater certainty as to the intended scope of terrorist groups, modify 83.032(2) to include only UN Security Council listed entities or entities listed pursuant to regulation under 83.05.
- To align and simplify description of relevant geography, clarify the language in the current 83.032(1) and 83.032(2).
- To clarify the scope of applicability, provide additional clarity around which individuals an exemption can apply.
Long Term Goals:
- The process should be as aligned to be as “fit for purpose” for operational realities.
- The listed sector partners encourage the Government of Canada to ensure that the approval process be streamlined, properly resourced and clear to make it as efficient and effective as possible.
Public Comments
“The listed humanitarian sector organizations welcome Bill C-41 as a critical step forward in efforts to protect the provision of neutral, impartial and independent humanitarian assistance and to bring Canada towards better alignment with its global partners.”
“The listed sector partners support the adoption of Bill C-41 in order to remove a significant barrier to the provision of aid in Afghanistan and other complex contexts globally. As with any Bill altering a regulatory framework, there are aspects to the proposal that could be strengthened and adjusted to make the framework better fit for purpose and to ensure it effectively supports the overall goal of allowing for neutral, impartial and independent humanitarian assistance.”
Resources
Humanitarian Sector Partners Submission On Bill C-41
Individuals
Afghan diaspora in Canada
Position
the Afghan diaspora in Canada had been pushing authorities in Ottawa to keep the law in place because they feared the international aid fund would go to the Taliban.
The previous, western- backed Islamic Republic faced decades-long accusations of corruption and fraud, and there are fears among some that the Taliban's Islamic Emirate may end up being just as corrupt.
Public Comments
“I have consistently advocated for continued humanitarian aid to Afghanistan in response to a very dire humanitarian situation in the country,” said Hassan Soroosh, a member of the group. “But like many fellow Afghans, I believe that aid should be delivered in a manner that doesn't serve the Taliban.”
Resources
This new bill would make it easier to deliver Canadian aid to Afghanistan. Not everyone’s in favour
Lauryn Oates - Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan
Position
Has lobbied for months to find a mechanism to be part of the international humanitarian effort in Afghanistan without fear of being penalized.
Public Comments
Oates is concerned by how long the wait might be before the new rules take effect; “it's a bill being introduced, so it has to go through readings in Parliament,” she said. “It's not going to be tomorrow that it would be ready, and we'll all be able to get back to work.”
- Lauryn Oates, the executive director of Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan
Resources
This new bill would make it easier to deliver Canadian aid to Afghanistan. Not everyone’s in favour
Graeme Smith - Senior analyst for International Crisis Group, who focuses on Afghanistan.
Position
Support of the Bill but concerned about the timeframe.
Public Comments
“It's great that the Canadian government wants to support efforts that would allow Afghans to earn a living, because economic growth is the only way for millions of people to save themselves from dangerous levels of poverty.”
“This bill shows that Ottawa is trying to fix the problem, but humanitarian and development experts will be looking closely at the details. At first glance, it seems the Canadians are still lagging behind.”
Resources
This new bill would make it easier to deliver Canadian aid to Afghanistan. Not everyone’s in favour
Mark Blumberg
Position
Charity Lawyer: Mark Blumberg has wrote on C-41 in the Canadian Charity Law blog, where he is questioning aspects including the extensive security review and reasonable timeframes. Interestingly however, Blumbergs’ pre-budget submission (as well as the blog) speaks to the lack of transparency in the not-for profit / charitable world regarding abusive actors adept at taking advantage of weaknesses in the rules and enforcement as well as blind spots in transparency.
Public Comments
De Novo: I will engage legal as I do not fully recall the rationale but wanted to share the past legal assessment of 83.05(2)* of the listings provisions pertaining to an application to the Minister to delist prior to a JR that involves a de novo process where the applicant can put forward additional arguments for consideration to address NS reasoning. In the context C-41, we did discuss an administrative recourse but it was deemed unnecessary for the reasons you both raised. I will loop back with a more precise response after engagement and to be included in the QAs.
Resources
- Date modified: