A Judicial Haven (by the Collectif Ressources d'Afrique)

As much the Canadian government as the liberal opposition have just sanctioned Canada as a judicial haven for global extractive societies.

That is the appraisal of the researchers of the African Resources Collective, Delphine Abadie, Alain Deneault, et William Sacher, authors of Noir Canada, Pillage, corruption and criminalité en Afrique (Black Canada, Pillage, Corruption, and Criminality in Africa) (Écosociété, 2008).

Published in March, the federal government report, Building the Canadian Advantage (1) presents itself as a “corporate social responsibility strategy for the Canadian international extractive sector. It sanctions nevertheless Canada as a judicial haven for the extractive industry. It is known that 60% of global mining societies are registered or listed on a Canadian stock exchange. Now, by this statement of principle, our jurisdiction releases the Canadian mining industry from all constraining obligations with regard to fundamental rights. “Obligations under international human rights conventions apply to states and do not directly create obligations for companies.”

Canada does not foresee for its industry anything more than “voluntary principles on security and human rights”. It has appointed to assist them in their choices a “counsellor” which “will not review the activities of a Canadian company on his or her own initiative, make binding recommendations or policy or legislative recommendations, create new performance standards, or formally mediate between parties”.

What is more, Canada intends to promote this model with its international partners.

As for the liberal counter-proposition, bill C-300 tabled by John McKay, it, just like the government, does not take into account the politics and activities of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), nor the opaque character of the body, Export Development Canada. It does not take stock of allegations of political interference that are sometimes attributed, in relation to mining interests, to Canadian diplomacy in countries of the South. It does not consider the prejudicial role of the Toronto Stock Exchange when estimating the worth of concessions obtained, often under shady conditions, in countries of the South. It does not indicate whether, and under what conditions, one can or could in Canada pursue in court, civil or criminal, Canadian societies for harmful conditions that are attributed to them abroad. It does not foresee that an independent body will receive complaints from the nationals of foreign countries but rather allows the “ministers” to carry out this task. It does not foresee mechanisms for establishing damages suffered by populations outside of Canada and for envisaging compensation programs. Finally, it does not consider at all the very numerous cases of abuse on the part of Canadian societies already registered in many a credible document (expert reports of the UNO, parliamentary reports, conferences held in the parliamentary chambers, reports from independent organizations such as Amnesty International or Global Witness, investigative journalism reports, convincing documentaries, recognized expert appraisement, …)

Noir Canada cited in the Chamber of Commons

Commenting on the liberal bill, the federal member of parliament, Richard Nadeau (Gatineau, Bloc québecois), has for a long time made a point of mentioning the positions of the African Resources Collective on these questions, citing Noir Canada, during an intervention in the Chamber of Commons on Friday April 3. “If bill C-300 is a step in the right direction, we believe just the same that there are shortcomings in terms of the recommendations of the advisory group report on the round tables. Notably, bill C-300 does not contain a clear mechanism, independent and transparent, that allows the rendering of accounts and that also allows watching over the respect of norms of responsibility of Canadian societies. [translation]”

As for the member of parliament Paul Dewar (Ottawa, New Democratic Party), he declared, on the same day, regarding the government announcement: “Instead of adopting norms that apply to Canadian enterprises with activities abroad, in the sense that I have just explained, individual rights, workers’ rights, and environmental rights, and instead of creating a mechanism for watching over the application of these norms and to have them respected, what does the government do? It establishes voluntary guidelines. I think that it suffices to pronounce those two words in order to understand what they mean. [translation]”

(1) http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/ds/c...?