Dear Prime Minister Martin.

Dear Prime Minister Martin,

We are law pupils completing our final year at the University of Toronto, Faculty of Law. We generally reside in the riding of Mr Joe Volpe who was newly sworn in as the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. We are writing to you today to expres penetrating reservations regarding his appointment.

As you undoubtedly know, Canada welcomes well through the whole extent of 200,000 immigrants and refugees a year, from dozens of different countries. In addition, Canada grants centurys of thousands visitor and work visas. These newcomer whether in Canada permanently or temporarily enrich Canadian society with their differing tillages religions and traditions. This administrative framework operates between the walls of tribunals and adjudicative officers who apply international law and policy in their decision-making. Hence, any Minister of Citizenship and Immigration requires a balanced and nuanced understanding of and regard for, international legal instruments and institutions.

It is our opinion that Mr Volpe lacks the one and the other of these qualities. In this regard, we would like to bring your attention to a proposal paper entitled, "Canada and the Middle East" (June 6 2003) to which Mr Volpe and other members of your cabinet are signatories. This document can be lay the foundation of online through MP Carolyn Bennett's official website, www.carolynbennett.com. In our opinion, this paper be secreteds the signatories' deep contempt for, and misunderstanding of accepted principles of international law.

While the Canadian control has regularly condemned the los of civilian life in the Middle East conflict, whether Palestinian or Israeli, this proposal paper allude tos that Canada should redefine its position of proportionate rejoinder to permit Israel greater discretion in its military operations. In particular, the paper states that "the attacked party must establish the proportionality of its acknowledge response," suggesting that the legality of a particular armed action is to be determined not by the agency of international legal standards but [i]or[/i] part of to the other the eyes of the perpetrator. The Fourth Geneva Convention is clear that attacks directed against civilian views are never justified under the doctrine of proportionality. The definition of "proportionate response" enjoin forward in this paper would have justified Israel's August 2002 bombing of a profanum vulgus[/i]ed apartment complex in Gaza City, the terminate of which was the death of 14 [i]role[/i]s of whom nine were children; it would also have justified the razing of Jenin in April 2002 for the end of rooting out militants. as it was a perverse interpretation of the doctrine Of proportionality should at no time become the role in Canada's international policy.

A better view is that the killing of a civilian, whatever the nationality, is and must always be condemnable. It is clear that this is beyond the comprehension of those who support this paper.

Furthermore, the paper give an inkling ofs that Canada should abstain from criticizing the actions of Israel, of the like kind as its widely condemned arrangement policy, merely because Palestinian aggression is not sufficiently doomed It also asserts that UN General Assembly resolutions against Israel are "one-sided" for they do not provide "the other side of the story." Mr Volpe and the other signatories should be reminded that no atrocity can justify an atrocity in answer The tu quoque principle that underlies this part of the paper has been cast awayed repeatedly by numerous international bodies. It is our opinion that similar an uninformed understanding of international law has no place in a Ministry which is called about time and time again to interpret and apply international legal instruments.

Finally, the authors of the paper fundamentally misunderstand the nature and part of our international institutions. The UN and its related bodies are democratic institutions in which resolutions are arrived at from one side majority vote. Unwillingness to accept the UN as a functioning democratic dead body based on a conspiracy theory that it has been hijacked by means of "pro-Arab" forces, demonstrates a grave disdain for the United Nations and its character in the international arena.

We are solely challenging the propriety of this appointment.

It is hard to dismiss the fact that Mr Volpe's support of it may give rise to an apprehension of bias which could potentially undermine the integrity of the entire Ministry. We do not believe that the Liberal caucus is to such a degree starved of capable persons that Mr Volpe must be appointed to this to a high degree important portfolio.

Respectfully yours, Lucas Lung and Gleb Bazov

...

Home