Cover image: https://www.ohchr.org/
We are very pleased to be with you today and have the opportunity to reflect on our experience, share perspectives and values, and learn from your work. This presentation discusses the Canadian government’s past record on migration and human rights and how Canadian civil society reacted. It speaks to both advocacy for refugees and the creation of specialized support services for people who have experienced torture and other forms of organized violence. It references these experiences in an effort to confront contemporary challenges to torture prevention and appropriate survivor-centred service. It explores possibilities to ameliorate new forms of racism, xenophobia and human rights crimes.
In the late 1970s, torture was not recognized as the widely practiced phenomenon we know it to be today. Amnesty International, founded in 1961, was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace in 1977 for its strong research and credible evidence on human rights crimes. Their book, Torture in the Eighties, put this practice more into public consciousness (1984). It named torture “the twentieth-century epidemic,” and this was reinforced by the growth of refugee populations in countries of asylum, including Canada.
It is worth recalling Canada’s immigration history. As a settler society, Canada set out to be a white country. Prime Minister John A. MacDonald named Chinese labourers “sojourners”, temporary workers without a claim to stay in the country. He racialized immigration policy from the start of Confederation with racial designations. People of colour were legally forbidden to come to Canada, although people did manage to resist and find a way. In law, there was a colour bar for all immigrants until 1962. A multitude of Asian Exclusion Acts imposed head taxes on potential immigrants. Asian women were entirely excluded. (Walker, Barrington. The History of Immigration and Racism in Canada. 2008). This ban also applied to those seeking a safe haven. When asked how many Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi regime Canada would admit, the answer from Immigration was “None is Too Many” (Abella, I. and H. Troper, None is Too Many,1982). Canada determined to keep its doors tightly closed to designated racialized groups.
But following the devastation of the Second World War, in the wake of the revelation of the Holocaust, the United Nations was created in 1945. It attempted to build a global regime that would ensure peace, security and human rights through diplomatic agreement. A series of conventions and declarations were promulgated to enable this objective. Although Canada was a UN founding member and the United Nations’ Declaration of Human Rights 1948 draft was written by Canadian John Humphries, the country was often slow to engage the obligations. The 1951 United Nations Convention on the Status of Refugees was only signed by Canada in 1969. Even though it took eighteen years to sign onto the Convention, “refugee” was not included in Canadian immigration law, nor was a process in place to admit them. It took a large coalition of faith and civil society groups to press for a refugee policy. Finally, the 1976 Immigration Law described refugees as a distinct group of immigrants and established a policy to allow them to find safety.
This was not the only example of Canada needing a push to sign and implement international conventions. After decades of advocacy by First Nations, the Parliament of Canada passed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) Act in 2021. The UN first adopted this Declaration in 2007 with 144 votes in favour, 11 abstentions and four countries opposed (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States of America).
Canada has yet to sign the 1990 International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.
Once Canada had a process in place so that refugees could enter and remain in the country, there was recognition that many had survived torture and other forms of organized violence.
The Canadian Centre for Victims of Torture had its origins in a working group of immigration lawyers and health professionals who sought to meet the emergent needs of survivors.
At the same time, in Canada, organizations were formed in Vancouver, Montreal, and Winnipeg to meet the needs of survivors in their communities. What emerged was the Canadian Model of Care that sought to appreciate the short and long-term needs of survivors.
All these organizations chose a community-based, not a clinical model, of care. There was an understanding that torture is a political and social phenomenon. The practice may have medical consequences, but while “the target was the body politic, the entry wound was through the individual”. (Simalchik, Joan. Disrupting Legacies of Trauma: Interdisciplinary Interventions for Health and Human Rights in Harvard University Health and Human Rights Journal. Volume 23/1, June 2021, pp. 11-25).
What emerged was the Canadian Model of Care that sought to appreciate the short and long-term needs of survivors. With this understanding, Canadian organizations took the perspective that working with existing community organizations, conducting training and public education, expanding understanding of the particular needs of survivors and offering specialized health and counselling services, all within a survivor-centred approach would create conditions to alleviate the aftermath of torture.
Dr. Ana Maria Barrenechea, herself a refugee from Chile’s Pinochet dictatorship, wrote about the multiple and long-term obstacles, “the many fires”, refugee survivors face when beginning to come to terms with the past ordeal while simultaneously undertaking the many tasks of settlement in a new culture. (Barrenechea, Ana Maria. Under Many Fires: the Lives of Refugee Women. Canadian Woman Studies. Vol 15, No 2-3 1995). Racism and the potential for retraumatization are described as a major problem for survivors.
The international order is under fire in today’s context. As the global situation deteriorates into prolonged war and conflict, even while at the same time more people warrant asylum, challenges to prevention and protection are emerging. Governments that are withdrawing commitments to human rights create conditions that negatively affect survivors' health and well-being.
Solidarity, not charity, is needed. The proliferation of repression, genocide, and war makes the work against torture and its impact ever more essential. Organizations like VAST, CCVT and the Victoria Coalition for Survivors of Torture are critical for both the prevention and protection of survivors. The entanglements existing within and outside of global atrocity charge us to recognize how we all bear the responsibility to engage. Beyond the media images of contemporary war and militarism exist people who require refuge and care. The Canadian model of care confirms that it has the capacity to address and alleviate both.