Senator Mobina Jaffer

The migrant ship carrying Tamil migrants that arrived in BC last week presents an interesting conundrum, highlighting the difficult issues Canada faces in relation to its immigration policy. The approximately 490 Tamil individuals aboard the migrant ship have been travelling for 4 months in unsafe conditions. Horrifyingly, the Tamil migrants say they are fleeing "mass murder" in Sri Lanka, a country thatrecently ended a 25-year-civil war. Among the migrant ship passengers are 25 women and 44 children.

Yet, the Canadian government is still deciding what to do. Canada's reaction is complicated by the fact that those on board may be connected to the Tamil Tigers terrorist group. The migrant ship – a cargo ship refurbished to cram in 500 people – may present a case of human smuggling in connection with a criminal group. The ship may simply be a "test" – those who sent it could be watching how Canada reacts before sending more migrants forward. Some argue that, if granted refugee status, the Tamils are jumping the queue to migrate to Canada (see CBC report: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/08/16/tamil-migrant-ship-toews.html)

With this in mind, our government must decide whether or not to grant the Tamil migrants refugee status, while determining whether or not they are connected to a larger criminal group. It must also consider national security concerns that result from the arrival of a ship filled with individuals who have unclear identities.

Even if the Tamil migrants have been smuggled into Canada, they may have chosen to come in this way because they are fleeing persecution. People are smuggled into Canada on a daily basis. What makes this case unique is that these individuals have been brought on a ship and in large numbers. We need to formally assess whether or not the migrants are indeed facing persecution and at the same time find ways to punish the smugglers. The migrants demand our compassion.

-Mobina

Today, Omar Khadr’s pre-trial at Guantanamo Bay begins. In fact, as I write this posting, it is ongoing. But firstly, I would like to recap the activities of the last week.

Last Monday, Khadr’s US defense lawyer, Lt. Col. Jackson filed a motion with the US Supreme Court on the unconstitutionality of the military commission system. He had filed a similar motion with a local D.C. Federal Court four months earlier, but had not received a response.

On Wednesday, the Federal Court of Appeal rejected Jackson’s original motion stating that Khadr could appeal the constitutionality of the military commission system after a final judgment from his trial was rendered.

On Thursday, Jackson filed a document with the military court asking for a kinder looking courtroom for his client’s upcoming trial. He argued that the show of force used in the courtroom with Khadr could prejudice the jury and "undermine the presumption of innocence."

Typically, when Khadr goes to court, he is shackled, then escorted by a team of guards who sit him down, stay close to him and even "put a hand on a seated Khadr’s shoulder to make sure he doesn’t stand with everyone as the judge comes and goes from the room" as the Miami Herald reports.

The process in which Khadr is handled makes him appear to be highly dangerous when in fact he "has never acted in a violent or aggressive manner," Jackson says.

On Friday, the US Supreme Court ruled on Jackson’s motion of unconstitutionality. They denied his motion as the Federal Court had done. However, no reason was given.

On the same day, a document was released that showed that Jackson filed a motion with the military commission system asking that if convicted, Khadr be given three-for-one sentencing credit for the mistreatment he suffered while in pre-trial custody. Additionally, Jackson argued that his client should receive regular time served credit for pre-trial detention, reports The Globe and Mail.

Khadr has complained of abuse and torture during his eight years in detention. The prosecution however suggested that Khadr was not mistreated at all.

Khadr’s pre-trial hearing began today. His lawyers were worried that their client would not attend the proceedings due to the unjust process of the military court system. However, Khadr appeared in court where he pled not guilty to all charges against him. As well, the judge finally ruled on the admissibility of Khadr’s past confessions as evidence stating that the confessions will be accepted as will the video of a young Khadr building and planting bombs in Afghanistan.

Khadr’s trial is now scheduled to begin tomorrow and a verdict could be delivered before the end of the month.

Sketch of Omar Khadr during today's pre-trial hearing

Last week, I attended a film screening organized by Justicia for Migrant Workers and RAICES Latin American Cultural Society. The film, called El Contrato (The Contract), traced the lives of migrant Mexican farm workers in Leamington, Ontario in their quest for dignity and respect amidst poor working conditions about 10 years ago.

As migrant workers who had come to Canada under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program (SAWP), they worked 10 hours a day, 7 days week at minimum wage for 8 months. They had no vacation and were not paid for overtime. They lived in cramped quarters with other workers, did not have access to the right safety gear for their jobs (such as appropriate clothing for spraying pesticide) and had trouble accessing health care in the event of workplace accidents.

To make matters worse, many of them lived in a constant state of fear of their employer.  Out of desperation, they had come to Canada to make money to support their families in Mexico. If their employer fired them, they would be deported back to Mexico, making them wary of complaining about their poor working conditions or reporting workplace injuries.

The film shocked me. What shocked me more is the fact that the film was made 10 years ago and, since then, conditions have not improved. So why, did this abuse take place and why are similar things still happening in our country today?  Before I get into that, I would like to clarify that the situation described above is not the experience of all temporary migrant workers in Canada. Many of them are treated well by their employers and leave our country with positive experiences. The problem is that the stipulations of the visas for the SWAP program make it possible for such abuse to occur.

When temporary agricultural workers come to Canada they are assigned to a specific employer and must live in lodging provided by that employer. They can only switch jobs if their country's embassy, their current employer and their new employer all approve, which creates many hurdles for those who face poor working conditions. If a worker is let go before his or her work term is over, the worker does not have a chance to appeal or look for another job. Instead, he or she is sent back home within 24 hours at their employer's expense. If the worker chooses to remain in Canada instead, he or she must pay for the plane ticket home, find a new employer, and pay for housing - expenses which are difficult for the migrants to afford. Meanwhile, even if the workers pay taxes, they do not have the rights and benefits of Canadian Citizens. They contribute to employment insurance, but cannot claim it if they lose their job in Canada. They may also have trouble standing up for the rights they do have, as many of them possess low levels of education and speak poor English.

More blog posts to come during the next few months as we work on a strategy to draw attention to this issue in the Senate.

Alia (in front row) and I waiting for the film to begin

One of the presenters talking about the many problems temporary workers have to deal with when in Canada

On Monday, Omar Khadr’s US military defense lawyer, Lt. Col. Jon Jackson filed an emergency motion with the US Supreme Court asking them to halt his client’s upcoming trial. Jackson argued that the military commissions system at Guantanamo Bay is unconstitutional and will "provide young Omar, a Canadian citizen, second class justice. This kind of discrimination is something we cannot stand for as a country." One of these injustices he mentions is that the war crimes system is only applicable to non-US citizens like Khadr himself.