Why Canada is closing its borders to the families of dictators | Bill C-219 (Sergei Magnitsky Law)

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-14

[00:00:00]order. I would now like to welcome our witness for the second panel from the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, Brandon Silver, Director of Policy and Projects. Welcome.

[00:00:12]I now invite you to make an opening statement of up to 5 minutes, please.

[00:00:16]Thank you.

[00:00:17]Mr. Chair, honorable members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

[00:00:25]pleasure for me to uh talk about bill C-219. I'd like to thank MP James Bezan for having introduced this important bill, as well as the government for its expression of support in general. This approach demonstrates the spirit of unanimity that marked the initial adoption of the Magnitsky Act in 2017.

[00:00:52]Professor Irwin Cotler had first proposed uh Magnitsky bill C-339 as a parliamentarian in 2011. In 2013, uh co-founded and headed the Inter-Parliamentary uh Group for Justice for Sergei Magnitsky. In 2015, uh proposed unanimous consent motion uh that was adopted uh calling for Magnitsky legislation. And again in 2015, uh proposed a uh global Magnitsky bill. And in 2016, uh offered emphatic support for the important uh legislation spearheaded by Senator Andreychuk and MP James Bezan.

[00:01:30]Uh we are pleased to uh again offer uh strong support and endorsement of uh bill C-219.

[00:01:40]I will focus my remarks on uh what we consider to be some of the particularly essential uh elements of this bill. Uh first, in changing the uh short title of the Special Economic Measures Act to the uh Sergei Magnitsky Global Sanctions Act, not only honors the sacrifice of Sergey Magnitsky, but reflects the reality of our sanctions regime.

[00:02:02]Human rights violations and corruption would not be sanctionable offenses under SEMA if not for the adoption of the 2017 Magnitsky law amendments. So of the 1,042 human rights sanctions implemented by Canada since these amendments in 2017, 962 of them are under SEMA. So 92% of our country's Magnitsky style human rights sanctions are not actually implemented under the Magnitsky law.

[00:02:32]Over 35 countries now have a Magnitsky Act. So an in an increasingly dangerous and divided world, this simple title change will help streamline collaboration and end confusion amongst our allies and civil society around the world and reflects the reality of how the Canadian government has implemented our human rights sanctions frameworks thus far.

[00:02:54]Second, expanding visa bans to immediate family members fills an important gap in current legislation.

[00:03:03]Grave human rights abusers often like to send their families abroad to enjoy the freedoms that they deny their citizens at home.

[00:03:13]This legislation would close the door on their family members enjoying the banks, businesses, beaches in Canada and thereby also protect our sovereignty from the corrupt and corrosive effect of this foreign capital.

[00:03:34]It enhances our national security, the integrity of our banking systems, protects our borders and is in line with what our allies have themselves integrated into their sanctions legislation and uh in fact is somewhat more narrow.

[00:03:52]Um I would At least what was shared earlier by um the uh important and and hard-working civil service uh leaders, uh I would just want to comment that uh their assertion around dependent family members does not reflect the practice of allies.

[00:04:12]Um the European Union uses uh associated family members, which actually goes beyond uh dependents. And the United States as well goes beyond dependent family members.

[00:04:24]Um and I would encourage uh the committee to therefore go beyond uh defining um immediate family members as only those who are dependent. And uh third, the provision on prisoners of conscience will provide a life-saving spotlight to them.

[00:04:45]Uh for the dissident suffering in the darkness of a dictator's dungeon, this legislation would shine a light on their case that could help secure their freedom. Vladimir Kara-Murza's newfound freedom from Putin's gulags provides a case study. The public disclosure surrounding advocacy on his case, working with his wife Evgenia, and undertaking efforts like sanctioning the officials responsible for his unjust imprisonment, our ambassador holding a press conference on the steps of the courthouse during his unfair trial, and granting him honorary Canadian citizenship helped free him. And I commend the essential work of this committee uh in a multi-partisan way that helped ensure he is alive and free today.

[00:05:25]>> Upon his release, Vladimir Kara-Murza, like all prisoners of conscience we have advocated for, told us that these public activities from governments and parliaments kept him alive. It told him, and it told his jailers, that he was not forgotten.

[00:05:39]Beyond individual cases, the prisoner of conscience provision is essential for data and deterrence. GAC's annual consular report makes no mention of arbitrary detention and hostage taking.

[00:05:49]A Canadian prisoner of conscience is lumped together with a murderer, thereby equating crimes committed against Canadians by foreign states with crimes committed by Canadians in foreign states.

[00:06:01]If there were clear metrics about detentions of prisoners of conscience and particularly Canadians held abroad, this would inform the travel decisions of Canadians and perhaps even lighten the load on consular affairs that they reference. Perhaps less Canadians would travel to the jurisdictions where there are rising rates of prisoners of conscience and it would perhaps be helpful to Canadians to have this information at hand. Thank you.

[00:06:24]We'll have to conclude. Thank you so much for your statement. We will begin the period of questions beginning with MP Besan. You have 6 minutes. Okay.

[00:06:32]Thank you. And you know, I may may I split my time with um Mr. Chong. Uh thank you.

[00:06:38]>> 6 minutes.

[00:06:39]Okay. You want to take it?

[00:06:40]>> No, no, go ahead. Okay. I don't know how I thought the ad was going to go first, but anyway, thank you so much, Mr. Silver, and for the for for the support of the organization. Make sure you give Professor Cotler our best. You know, his his leading edge work on um Magnitsky sanctions will always be immortalized in in in Parliament and we'll always recognize how hard he's worked in support of standing up for human rights and being such a strong leader.

[00:07:07]He's an inspiration to each and every one of us.

[00:07:11]On I'm glad you you you brought up the importance of why we want to make sure we we shine the spotlight on prisoners of conscience and human rights defenders as the department likes to call it.

[00:07:24]Can you just talk more about the the what's happening now with hostage diplomacy that we're starting to witness from from China and others and how it's important that we continue to have these transparent reporting to ensure that this type of practice stops.

[00:07:40]Sir, thank you very much for that timely and important question. And the rapid rise of state hostage-taking and arbitrary detention perhaps merits a reconsideration of current approaches to better address this situation. Um so, having worked on a a number of of such cases hand-in-hand with uh the the hard-working um you know, folks in consular affairs and uh you know, want to commend the government on establishing a a a special hostage department, which was a necessary step, but more can be done. Um I would suggest perhaps three uh amendments that can help uh reflect this in the prisoner of conscience section. A, mandating that the information on the numbers of prisoners of conscience in a country that um this legislation proposes um actually be included in the travel advisories issued by GAC. So, beyond, you know, the public disclosures, uh right now it's uh at times, you know, in the Jimmy Lai's case, for example, a business advisory was a a travel advisory, sorry, was issued um that Hong Kong uh can {quote} {unquote} uh have the arbitrary application of local laws and that uh Canadians traveling there for business or tourism should take that into consideration. Um this uh can be a a potential uh way of protecting Canadians from being targeted uh abroad and um again, alleviating some of uh the burden on uh GAC.

[00:09:06]Um B, that um the arbitrary detention and uh torture of prisoners of conscience in general and of Canadians in particular perhaps be added as a stand-alone uh sanctionable offense. Uh so, that the TNR additions are essential if we're adding uh sections to Magnitsky law specifically talking about the targeting of prisoners of conscience and the hostage-taking of Canadians can be uh immensely helpful. And uh third, and this is from Professor Cotler's uh bill that he proposed in 2010, Bill C-554, an act to protect Canadians abroad.

[00:09:44]Shifting the the suggestion about public disclosures to be contingent on the request of families, but not in a discretionary manner that pursuant to articles 19 and 20 of Bill C-554, that there could actually be a writ of mandamus where Canadian family members want actions by the Canadian government, they should be able to demand that.

[00:10:09]So, we would actually suggest that the public reporting requirements of this bill not only do we support that, but that that could be expanded to actually give a right to families to demand that of the government. And again, Thank you for those recommendations. I'm going to give the rest of my time to Mr. Chong.

[00:10:27]How much time remains? 2 minutes and 20 seconds. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[00:10:32]I'd like to focus on one of the purposes of the bill, which concerns the broadcasting the broadcasting act.

[00:10:41]You know, we the government effectively took RT off the airwaves in Canada in 2021 through a cabinet directive issued under section 15 of the Broadcasting Act.

[00:10:54]CGTN continues to operate. I know that in the United Kingdom, I believe in 2021, Ofcom pulled CGTN off the airwaves, their CRTC, because it's they concluded that CGTN's broadcast editorial direction was coming from the Chinese Communist Party and the authoritarian state of the PRC. So, can you tell us what other democracies have pulled either RT or CGTN off their airwaves and the method the method by which they did that.

[00:11:33]Um I I can seek to undertake to um revert back with that information, but more broadly would just want to comment that um there's a very clear nexus between the object of this bill to combat transnational repression and um the ar- elements of the bill that uh are therefore seeking to limit the ability of uh foreign regimes to uh conduct foreign influence and foreign interference via um their broadcasting.

[00:12:00]So, we'd be broadly supportive of uh And I concur with that assessment. It would be helpful if you could send the committee that information. It would be helpful as we seek to amend that section of the bill. I'd also note in support of what you just said that Ofcom also concluded that the airing of a forced confession um uh of Simon Cheng, the former official at the United Kingdom Consulate in Hong Kong, um was a gross violation of human rights, but also breached uh their licensing code. So, I think that's important for the record to show as well that um that these authoritarian state-controlled broadcasters um you know, have done some pretty egregious things and are acting at the editorial uh direction of uh the CCP and the PRC. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[00:12:47]Thank you very much. Uh we go on next to MP Abdelhak Sari. You have five uh you have six minutes, sorry.

[00:12:54]Merci merci beaucoup, monsieur le président.

[00:12:58]And also thank you uh Mr. Silver is uh very relevant for me because the uh it's the first question that I'm asking uh in this committee.

[00:13:08]And Canada is recognized internationally as having very clear positions on serious infringement of human rights. For Bill C-219 so in order that people will understand very clearly, those who are listening, what is the greatest contribution here to reinforce Canada's position in that way? Thank you for this important question. I think that the elements of legislation that are aimed at prisoners of conscience, they're giving the government more tools to be able to implement sanctions. It's not just a question of giving more powers, more tools to government, it's also sharing the message with the world, with the victims, and to the violators of human rights.

[00:14:06]That Canada commits and its foreign policy is rooted in human rights.

[00:14:16]So, it's not only a question of process, but also an issue of communications. So, that this message is clear, and it's important in that way.

[00:14:27]And in the changes that are proposed for the people who are listening to us, if we want to talk about a concrete impact, a tangible impact, what would the most concrete and tangible impact would be?

[00:14:43]So, thank you very much. If I had to choose one, at first sight, it's the change of the criteria for the implementation of sanctions in order to include transnational repression and to create a definition of this, and secondly, the definition of a prisoner of conscience.

[00:15:08]It's of which the uh government is is asking to make reports. So, until now, the public and the families did not have access to this kind of information. So, the public broadcasting of this information could help Canadians to uh take better decisions when they're traveling uh for pleasure or for business. And it also communicates to um governments who will take Canadians hostage, who will uh seize uh or imprison prisoners of conscience that there consequences.

[00:15:51]If we are publicly disclosing this information, it not only protects Canadians and informs them, but it has a deterrent effect on the imprisoning countries and holds them to account. A lot of them care about their reputation abroad. They're dependent on tourism and on business uh transactions, and this could hopefully encourage some behavior change there beyond sanctions themselves.

[00:16:16]Look at this bill the bill as it is.

[00:16:19]We say we want it to have more teeth, to be more uh to be stronger. Do you think it goes far enough in that respect, or are there things that should be added so that it uh might be uh stronger?

[00:16:33]Thank you.

[00:16:36]I I I had a few suggestions of amendments.

[00:16:44]So, in uh certain aspects, it's a question of interpretation. And if we have clear definitions, as we do in terms of uh sanctions against uh family members of someone who uh has been sanctioned, it makes it stronger. So, I want to repeat our position that a member of the close family has to go uh uh further than a dependent of the family, as our allies have done. And we have many uh that decisions.

[00:17:17]We should not be afraid that it will go to court. It was already fought in the courts in the US and in the European Union and in our courts in Canada.

[00:17:32]refers to decisions in third country democracies.

[00:17:38]inform these interpretations and evidence, I would encourage a more expansive approach to definition of family members, which again will protect our own sovereignty and economy from the corrosive effects of this corrupt foreign capital.

[00:17:50]And secondly, again, I would underscore, you know, the rights of families. I think that that's incredibly important that you know, we take a victim-centric approach.

[00:17:58]Again, as counsel to political prisoners, hostages, family members, the the common thread between all these cases is that they want more public action and more ability to engage with the government in that regard. And having some you know, embedded protections in the legislation that would encourage and allow for that I think would be most welcome. Yeah, okay.

[00:18:25]What we don't like is to have bills that are only symbolic. Do you think that we would need more legislation or more will to make it stronger? Was it a legislative problem or a problem of willingness?

[00:18:46]I think efficient action needs both. The more tools we give ourselves, the more we can get the government committed.

[00:18:58]of legislation creates the context that can catalyze action, but having the correct tools in a more narrow procedural sense and in a substantive sense, I think, you know, goes well beyond just rhetoric. Again, the rhetoric's important and I think some of the symbolic aspects of this law are essential, but it goes beyond symbolism and you know, changes some of the triggering thresholds for the implementation of sanctions. It embeds definitions of of political of prisoners of conscience with reporting requirements. There's a lot of highly substantive and procedural additions in this law that will not only empower action, but hopefully encourage more of the discretionary movement that you've alluded to. Thank you very much. We go next to MP Dusep. You have 6 minutes.

[00:19:42]Merci Mr. Mr. Silver. Rebonjour.

[00:19:46]Mr. Silver, you're often here with us.

[00:19:50]We have to give you a pass for the committee and I think your expertise in Bill C-19 is obvious with the work that your organization does. I'd like to ask some broader questions. Earlier, I talked with the officials from the from GAC. So, the bill is asking for an annual report where there's disclosure that would give more visibility to the prisoners of conscience, but in your experience, is the disclosure of information about prisoners something that could expose their family to harms?

[00:20:29]It's always an ish decision that that's made in each case for deciding what information can be disclosed which would help the case and not harm it.

[00:20:45]family members against those seeking to support political prisoner cases.

[00:20:50]Um, you know, whether it's the council of um, you know, prisoners of conscience being targeted, their family members. This is a rising trend, so it's it's an important question, but ultimately the release and dissemination of information provides a protective cover and it should be up to the family members whether uh this information is released. If there is and again I believe that this bill actually already embeds the correct safeguards. There is mention of exceptions where the minister feels that this information shouldn't be disclosed or it could cause harm. It wouldn't be but by default more public reporting can be helpful and we found in cases that that has more often than not led to you know the releases again this critical mass of pressure on the imprisoning regimes that encourages them to realize it would cost them more to keep this prisoner of conscience imprisoned than to release them.

[00:21:48]>> [clears throat] >> with you. I've worked in few cases like this often with press conferences or where all of the parties in the house are joined together to uh uh with somebody we think of Raif Badawi, Jimmy Lai and others.

[00:22:11]And Merza as well. But in the text my question I want to repeat it. I'm not in favor of one option or another but in the text currently what we have is that it is up to the minister to decide to disclose or not the information. Whereas some people and I'm wondering should we not ask for a model that would be based on prior consent of the families before the minister would have their uh uh word.

[00:22:47]So would it be would it be wise to publish the information or not and it's not really expressed in C-219.

[00:22:54]Would it be useful to have that as an amendment? First of all thank you for your commitment uh for all these uh prisoners of conscience throughout the world and your contribution is in those cases uh where the uh prisoners were liberated or their conditions were improved.

[00:23:14]As I referred to in my uh opening statement, I think those victims imprisoned abroad and uh their family members uh should be the driving force of this. A victim-centered approach uh would would be uh the most uh appropriate uh and again shifting the burden from what uh the minister um may feel should be done in a particular case or another regardless of family concern not to be uh rather the family's wishes that if the family wants this information made public, wants certain government interventions, that that should be the default and that they should even be allowed to apply for a mandamus to uh compel government action.

[00:24:04]I think [clears throat] perhaps would suggest that some Canadians could have gotten home even sooner if the government would have decided to speak out earlier.

[00:24:17]Maybe the last question. I think I still have a a minute or so.

[00:24:22]I'll uh speak more broadly. You talked about international uh jurisdictions that do things differently. How would C-219 bring us closer to what's uh being done internationally?

[00:24:39]Uh I think it would bring us closer to what's happening.

[00:24:43]I'm proud that the uh Canadian parliament in a multipartite effort uh makes it so we don't follow our allies.

[00:24:55]Every other country followed what Canada did. We were the first to implement sanctions in the case of arbitrary detention. We're the first country to give him honorary citizenship. Um, so yes, there are things that our allies are doing that can be reflected in legislation as I suggested earlier when it comes to, you know, the definition of immediate family, for example, but I think we can go beyond that. This is an opportunity for Canada to be a leader in global Magnitsky sanctions. The bill as it stands already makes important contributions in that regard and some of the suggested amendments, like adding to TNR, you know, prisoners of conscience in in that, given that prisoners of conscience are already in the bill, having that be a you know, triggering threshold, the arbitrary detention of Canadians abroad.

[00:25:42]Those are kinds of things that I think, you know, apropos some of the earlier questions about the rise of global hostage taking that can really help ensure Canada is a leader in that. And again, I think the public reporting requirements are essential and other countries are doing some good things on that. Again, the US, I think in a bipartisan way, has, you know, pursued a lot of important, you know, legislation, executive orders in that regard. We can go beyond that and, you know, encourage the world to follow Canada's leadership as we did in the Cairo case in a multi-partisan way.

[00:26:14]Thank you very much. I will start a very quick lightning round of 3 minutes each beginning with the MP Ziad Aboultaif.

[00:26:20]You have 3 minutes. Well, thank you, Mr. Silver. Welcome to committee again. Just interested in knowing the uh existing sanctions regime in Canada, how do you believe that uh the procedures for sanctioned entities with demonstrated acts of transnational repression is it effective and where do you believe that we uh are vulnerable in this regard?

[00:26:44]I'm sorry, could you please repeat the question? Yes, the question is do you believe the existing sanctions system we have in Canada is effective enough and whether where are we vulnerable in the whole process.

[00:26:58]Sure. Well, you know, there there's been a question of enforcement in Canada's current sanctions laws. So, relative to, you know, on a per capita basis Canada is actually one of the leaders in sanctions implementation. Um but are lacking in enforcement and one of the suggestions of the bill and I think helps fills one of those gaps and and deficiencies. Uh a lot of the sanctioned individuals often evade those sanctions by using their family members to do so.

[00:27:28]Um by adding in, you know, visa bans on immediate family members, we're helping to close some of those gaps. So, uh that's one, you know, easy reference in terms of gaps in existing legislation that this law helps to fill. And certainly when it comes to transnational oppression, some of the specific acts enumerated aren't covered under the current law and at the very least, I should say may not be covered under the current law and both ensures that the tools are there and encourages government action to use them.

[00:28:00]You see any fundamental reasons that deterring us or not preventing us from going further on the strengthen the sanctions system and especially on the implementation part of it.

[00:28:13]Um no, and and actually I think, you know, it didn't get much reference in some of the earlier exchanges, but I want to specifically point out the part of Bill C-219 that mandates government responses to requests for sanctions from the committee.

[00:28:31]That is an important act of transparency. It has a parallel to existing frameworks in the Magnitsky law. So, currently uh parliamentarians can pass a motion to repeal sanctions, but can't pass a motion to implement sanctions. So, there's a bit of an incongruity there.

[00:28:50]So, I think this bill actually helps to to fix that and make sure that, you know, parliamentarians can encourage the government to do so. And I would add that it doesn't put a a significant burden on the government.

[00:29:01]It's enshrining in legislation what can potentially be done creatively with order paper questions, but in a much more sort of transparent, democratically oriented way that again parallels existing sanctions removal mechanisms in the current legislation. Thank you.

[00:29:19]Thank you very much. We go next to MP Clark. You have 3 minutes.

[00:29:24]Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. And Mr. Silver, thank you for for being here today and obviously your organization's been dealing with these issues for for well over a decade, a long time. So, congratulations on all the work that you've done in this regard. I wanted to ask you if you were the previous hour we we touched a bit on on terms and kind of prisoners of conscience, which is the the term used in C-219 and then human rights defenders. And you may have heard that there was some discussion about the fact that perhaps human rights defenders is a is a term that might capture other individuals that would otherwise be excluded under this legislation. I'm just wondering if you had a point of view on those those terms and how we might balance them to be most effective.

[00:30:07]Sure. Thank you very much both for for your kind words and very you know, incisive question.

[00:30:13]So, I would only comment that in relation to some of the discussions about human rights defenders versus prisoners of conscience, all human rights defenders arbitrarily detained abroad are prisoners of conscience under the definitions that were proposed.

[00:30:29]But not all prisoners of conscience are human rights defenders.

[00:30:34]So, I would assert that the prisoner of conscience definition is actually broader and better suits the intentions of the bill and of Canada's human rights foreign policy. And I'll give you two concrete examples of cases we've worked on as an institution that would be excluded if the definition was shifted from prisoner of conscience to human rights defender. One, we've represented um Baha'i members of the Baha'i faith like the Iran um who are persecuted and imprisoned in Iran and Yemen for example. Um they self-describe as prisoners of conscience. They do not engage in human rights defender activity. Um they would be excluded. Another one, Canada's, you know, been an important leader when it comes to protecting LGBT Q persons.

[00:31:21]Um just 3 days ago a group of LGBT people were imprisoned in Russia. They would be excluded if uh the definition uh were changed to human rights defender. People who are targeted simply for, you know, immutable characteristics and their identity um would be covered under prisoners of conscience. They would likely not be covered under human rights defender. I appreciate that. Um and I I have short period of time, but I wanted to ask quickly about transnational repression as well.

[00:31:49]Uh obviously that's a concept that's become more relevant in or uh prominent in recent years. Uh in your view, what's proposed in this bill? How does that compare contrast with what peer countries might be doing? And is there anything you would like to see added or adjusted on that issue in particular?

[00:32:05]Sure. Um this is a nascent area of growing concern and again like our sanctions legislation more broadly is an opportunity for Canada to lead.

[00:32:18]Um the specific acts enumerated um in this bill and in the definition would hopefully give the government greater authority to take action in these types of situations. Um there was the important uh G7 uh statements that were initiated by Canada. And uh you know, the compendium that was put together under Canada's chairmanship of the G7, a further joint statement led by Canada of 14 countries about transnational repression targeting human rights defenders, Jewish citizens, former ministers, including uh the founder and chair of our center. Um and therefore, there might be an opportunity there.

[00:32:57]Um When this uh legislation is further considered to move to coordinate with allies. Uh there's, you know, reference to And again, I think it's important amendments this bill makes to uh working with allies, and a reference is, you know, NATO, for example. I think the proactive use of this legislation to counter TNR can be done unilaterally and and should be, but in particular done in concert with allies. And we could be leading in NATO, leading in the G7, as we have on TNR as a thematic concept to ensure coordination of sanctions implementations with with allies.

[00:33:30]>> Thank you very much. We go finally to um Mr. Duceppe. Uh you have 3 minutes.

[00:33:35]Merci, monsieur le président. Je vais vous poser Thank you, Chair.

[00:33:38]I'll ask you one question, Mr. Silver, and if you have other comments that you want to add using the time that's left to us, please feel free to do that.

[00:33:48]Currently, you're uh working in uh one way when you want to present one or more prisoners of conscience. If uh C-219 is adopted, as we uh hope, what will it change in your work as uh someone who represents those people, be it uh the political level, the media level, or the legal level?

[00:34:14]I think will be a game-changer in shifting public conceptions around arbitrary detention, whether it's prisoners of conscience globally or of Canadians in particular. Uh the greater transparency that this will inject into processes is something that we can leverage to improve prison conditions of prisoners and even help secure their freedom. Um again, would encourage that um the prisoner of conscience uh definition and public reporting be embedded, you know, into the sanctions uh triggers um as well and that, you know, um some of the the public reporting um even be expanded um as we've suggested. Uh the the bill itself again adds important transparency, democratic principles that could be leveraged in individual representation and in those emblematic cases where, you know, the freedom of one person can have a positive impact in encouraging the freedom of so many others whose uh cases and causes they represent like Jimmy Lai and like Vladimir Kara-Murza did.

[00:35:23]So it could maybe become a model for other allied countries who would want to achieve the same goals as we wish to with C-219.

[00:35:35]played a a leadership role in in many regards and this is a chance for us to do so again and uh it's encouraging that the the work of this committee on uh you know, whether it's been on, you know, previous iterations of uh you know, Magnitsky law so the first one and then it's amendments or on uh countering arbitrary detention, hostage taking, advocating for political prisoners that these have been um rare issues uh not only of of agreement but of unanimity.

[00:36:00]The fact that Magnitsky law was passed unanimously in 2017, that the um honorary citizenship for Vladimir Kara-Murza was adopted unanimously, that Mr. Lai's case was supported unanimously. I think these are issues of common cause that um you know, bring Canadians together and uh that, you know, reflect your your own leadership in having come together on this and it's it's very gratifying as a, you know, civil society organizations uh to see that and and hope that this here to C219 will be a place of of coming together for for the sake of global justice and human rights.

[00:36:36]Thank you very much uh on behalf of the committee I want to thank you for your appearance and for your answers to the questions. We will now briefly suspend for in order to go into in camera session.