Canadian foreign policyafter October 2015: TheUnited Nations and Canada

SPECIAL ELECTION ISSUE

In this issue:• Realizing the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals in Canada and abroad

• Canada can lead in strengthening the rule of law and preventing atrocity crimes

• Canada can and should do more to help United Nations Peacekeeping

•United Nations peacebuilding in the twentyfirst century

•How the Canadian government can improve its record on women’s rights

•Hitting the re-set button: Canada’s role in arms control and disarmament

• Let Canada take the lead at the UN – as it used to do

• The United Nations and human rights

S E P T E M B E R

2 0 15

Building a world community

Published in Canada by the World Federalists, a non-profit organization that advocates more just and effectiveglobal governance through the application of the principles of democratic federalism to world affairs.

www.worldfederalistscanada.org

The release in 2013 and 2014 of books(collections of short expert essays) on “TheUnited Nations and Canada: What Canada hasdone and should be doing at the UnitedNations,” and the associated mediacoverage, left Canadians with a deeperunderstanding of the need for theirgovernment to be more actively involved ona range of global issues at the UN.

In an election year, this 2015 collection ofshort articles provides Canadians concernedabout global governance and their country’splace in the world with an agenda ofimportant policy initiatives that a futureCanadian government should consider.

In September at the United Nations, governmentsfrom around the world will agree to a set ofSustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to replacethe Millennium Development Goals – whichexpire at the end of 2015. e dra outcomedocument for September has been negotiated, andincludes a broad, sustainable development agendaunderpinned by a framework of goals, targets andindicators for 2030. Importantly, the SDGs willserve as a universal agenda, applying to allcountries, not just developing ones. Canada has been participating in consultations inthe lead up to the September summit. roughout

the negotiations, Canada championed an agendabased on realistic, focused and measurable targetsand indicators, and consistently emphasized thepoorest and most vulnerable as a key focus for thesustainable development agenda. Given its strongstatistical system and expertise, Canada has alsobeen engaging on the indicator framework for theSDGs, which is set to be finalized in March 2016. Canada has recognized that the SDGs areuniversal in nature, meaning that they will applyto all Member States, including Canada. However,in June 2015 a confidential memo was leakedrevealing that “Canada has no plans toapply the Post-2015 Agenda domestically,or to take on new reporting obligationsbeyond what [Canada is] currentlyproducing,” notwithstanding thelikelihood that the country will facepressures to do so. At the international level,Canada will be expected to take the SDG agendaseriously, particularly given that the legitimacy ofthe agenda – notably the claim that it represents aparadigm shi from the MDGs which were largelyabout the developing world, to a transformational,universal agenda based on the recognition of

shared challenges – relies, at least in part, on highincome countries taking the agenda seriously bothat home and abroad. In Canada, civil societygroups have called on the government to takeseriously the universal nature of the agenda,including addressing Canada’s sustainabledevelopment challenges such as climate change,poverty and inequalities in Canada. Indeed, ChiefPerry Bellegarde of the Assembly of First Nations,Canada’s largest Aboriginal group, has welcomedthe SDGs, noting the need for greater efforts toclose the well-being gap between indigenouspeoples and non-indigenous peoples in Canada.

Going forward, there are a number ofsteps Canada can take to support thefinalization of the SDG agenda and torealise its potential both at home andabroad. Canada is participating in theInter-Agency Expert Group on

Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (IAEG).As part of the IAEG, Canada has an opportunity tosupport the creation of a realistic, appropriate setof indicators that respect and measure theambitious commitments embodied in the SDGs –including commitments which are more difficultto measure such as those related to issues likegovernance and rule of law. At the same time,Canada should advocate for an indicator set thattakes advantage of existing national andinternational data collection processes andmeasurement frameworks to reduce the burden of

SDG reporting on developing countries. Once theindicator framework is established, Canada shouldcontinue to play a strong role on the accountabilityagenda by supporting developing countries toestablish the necessary data infrastructure andcapacity to monitor sustainable developmentoutcomes. Canada is already taking positive steps

September 2015

page 2SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

Realizing the Post-2015Sustainable Development Goalsin Canada and abroad

By Shannon Kindornay

Shannon Kindornay is aresearcher at The

North-South Institute.Her research interestsinclude development

cooperation,governance of the aid

architecture, aideffectiveness, and aid

and the private sector.Her current work

includes explores howthe post-2015

sustainabledevelopment goals can

be applied to Canada.

in the right direction, announcing the establishmentof a Centre of Excellence for Civil Registration and

Vital Statistics atthe InternationalDevelopmentResearch Centrein July 2015. Sustained and

energetic political and diplomatic engagement willalso be critical for maintaining momentum on theaccountability agenda goingforward. e High LevelPolitical Forum at the UnitedNations will provide politicaloversight of SDGimplementation – achallenging task consideringthe myriad governments,international organisations,and private sector and civilsociety partners that will beinvolved in implementing thegoals. In addition to financialcontributions to facilitatefollow-up and reviewprocesses in partner countriesand support for global andregional accountabilitymechanisms, Canada can leadby example by serving as oneof the first high incomecountries to submit to theglobal voluntary reviewprocess. To be seen as acredible leader on the SDGs,sustained diplomacy andpolitical support will alsoneed to be matched bysignificant Government ofCanada contributions toachieving the SDGs, throughincreased development assistance as well asleveraging partnerships withinternational agencies, civil society, theprivate sector and philanthropicorganizations.At the national level, the Canadiangovernment should commit to the SDGagenda and its robust adoption and implementation.While some consultations have occurred, the federal

government will need to seriously ramp up efforts tomake the SDG agenda a reality in Canada. eSDGs cover a range of issues that spread acrossfederal, and provincial and territorial jurisdictions,such as health, education, energy, the environmentand infrastructure. Cities and municipalities, civilsociety, academics and the private sector are alsoimplicated in the SDG agenda. Strong federalleadership will be needed to raise awareness withappropriate stakeholders and among the public,

consult across levels of governmentand sectors, and establish a nationalstrategy for SDG implementationinformed by Canadian priorities. Asresearch has shown, Canada is hometo many innovative efforts to addresssustainable development challenges.Canada’s SDG roadmap should bedeveloped through a consultativeprocess that builds from existingefforts by different levels ofgovernment, civil society and thebusiness sector.

Finally, an important aspect of theSDGs for Canada is the internationalcall to leave no one behind. Researchhas continued to show that Canada’sAboriginal populations fall behindon almost every measure ofeconomic, social and environmentalwell-being. e SDGs present animportant opportunity for Canadato develop and adopt a nationalvision for sustainable developmentin Canada that targets the poorestand the most marginalized, andensures that no one is le behindboth abroad and at home.

September 2015

page 3SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

Indeed, ChiefPerry Bellegarde ofthe Assembly ofFirst Nations,Canada’s largestAboriginal group,has welcomed theSDGs, noting theneed for greaterefforts to close thewell-being gapbetweenindigenous peoplesand non-indigenous peoplesin Canada.

In the early part of this century Canada was a globalleader in the development of two historic initiativesto promote peace, international justice and the ruleof law. e International Criminal Court (ICC)came into force in 2002. And the Responsibility toProtect (R2P), launched following a Canadian-ledstudy in 2001, was adopted by the UN GeneralAssembly in 2005.

Both of these initiatives aim tostrengthen prohibitions against theworst violations of internationalhumanitarian law: genocide, warcrimes and crimes against humanity.Canadian leadership is once againneeded to address criticisms andremedy problems in theimplementation of the Responsibilityto Protect and the ICC’s RomeStatute.Based in e Hague, theInternational Criminal Court nowincludes 123 state parties. ere arecurrently nine situations underinvestigation, relating to crimes in:Democratic Republic of the Congo,Uganda, Central African Republic(two separate situations, referred at

different times), Darfur, Sudan, Kenya, Libya, Côted’Ivoire, and Mali. Additionally, preliminaryexaminations are ongoing in Afghanistan,Colombia, Nigeria, Georgia, Guinea, Honduras,Iraq, Ukraine, and Palestine.Four States Parties – Uganda, the DemocraticRepublic of the Congo, the Central African Republicand Mali – have referred situations occurring ontheir own territories. In addition, the United NationsSecurity Council has referred the situation inDarfur, Sudan, and the situation in Libya – bothnon-States Parties. e Court has drawn criticism from members of theAfrican Union for its perceived excessive focus onprosecuting political and military leaders in Africa.

And outside of Africa critics have pointed to theslow pace of trials as well as the high cost ofinvestigations and court operations. Canada was a true leader in the 1995 - 2002 periodof negotiations and ratification of the ICC’s RomeStatute. Canada led the ‘like minded’ coalition ofmiddle power governments all the way through thenegotiations in Rome. A Canadian government thatresumes that position of energetic (but notuncritical) political support for this still newinstitution and enhanced international system ofcriminal justice is much needed today.  Canada, other states parties and court organsshould:

Make a commitment at the ICC Assembly ofStates Parties to work to reduce by 30 – 50percent the time required to process individualcases.Adopt measures to ensure much greater levels ofcooperation on arrests, protection of witnesses,relocation of witnesses, cooperation withinvestigations, detention, etc.Build on the complementarity provisions of theRome Statute (i.e., the preference for nationalprosecutions, with the ICC only acting whenstates are unable or unwilling to take actiondomestically), in order to increase the number ofprosecutions at the national level. Canada’sCrimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Acthas been notoriously under-utilized since it waspassed in 2000.Demonstrate a greater commitment to the Courtby working diplomatically to improve theinconsistent cooperation between the ICC andinternational organizations, especially the UnitedNations Security Council.

Similarly, the Responsibility to Protect has reached acritical stage. Greater engagement by middle powerstates like Canada would generate considerablebenefits for the international community’s capacityto promote international peace and security andprevent mass atrocity crimes.

September 2015

page 4

Canada can lead instrengthening the rule of lawand preventing atrocity crimes

By Fergus Watt

Fergus Watt isExecutive Director ofthe World FederalistMovement – Canada.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

4

4

4

4

source: denhaag.nl

September 2015

page 5

Ten years aer R2P was formally adopted at the2005 UN Reform Summit, the norm is now firmlyestablished. However, although there exists a solidpolitical consensus regarding the norm’s conceptualoutlines, what is needed now are constructiveactions and proposals to operationalize andinstitutionalize R2P across the machinery of theUnited Nations and within governments.International understanding of the Responsibility toProtect has solidified around the “three-pillar”description first outlined in the UN Secretary-General’s 2009 report to the General Assembly.ese include (1) the primary responsibility of thestate to protect populations from genocide, crimesagainst humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing;(2) the parallel responsibility of the internationalcommunity to assist the state in meeting itsprotection responsibilities, and (3) the internationalresponsibility to respond in a timely and decisivemanner, using whatever tools under Chapters VI,VII, and VIII of the UN Charter are available andappropriate, when the state is failing to meet itsresponsibilities to protect populations from the fourcrimes. Recent criticism of R2P has centered primarily on itscontroversial application in Libya, and also on thefailure of the international community to employR2P in situations such as Syria, Central AfricanRepublic, Myanmar and South Sudan, amongothers.ere are practical steps that Canada could take, athome and internationally, to strengthen theResponsibility to Protect. ese include:

Appointing an R2P focal point. Within nationalgovernments, R2P focal points are seniorofficials with a mandate to operate acrossdepartments and mobilize protective strategiesto prevent and halt mass atrocities crimes. Atpresent 50 governments have identified suchsenior officials, forming a network ofpractitioners that helps overcome internationalindifference and inaction and demonstrates anational commitment to atrocities prevention.At the United Nations, operationalization of R2Pobjectives requires full integration withinexisting conflict prevention and resolutionprocesses, accompanied by broader acceptanceof the relevance of R2P across UN organs,offices, agencies, and mandates. Promoting a

more coherent systemic approach in afragmented state-driven organization like theUnited Nations is difficult, but necessary.Persistent advocacy by like-minded governmentscan make a difference. Promote a UN General Assembly resolution toformalize and regularize consideration of R2P bythe assembly and lay a foundation for deeperinstitutionalization within the Secretariat, forexample by generating regular requests forfollow-up and reporting.Join the ACT (accountability, coherence,transparency) group of states. e SecurityCouncil veto is oen a barrier to collectiveaction to stop mass atrocities. While reform ofthe Council is politically difficult, the ACT groupof states are mobilizing international support forrestraint on use of the veto in instances whenmass atrocities are being committed. Support calls for greater oversight by theSecurity Council in the implementation ofresolutions that invoke R2P and include civilianprotection mandates, especially when preventionfails and collective measures under Chapter VIIare necessary to respond to mass atrocity crimes.An example is Brazil’s proposals for “ResponsibilityWhile Protecting” an effort to remedy perceivedexcessive use of force and misinterpretation ofSecurity Council mandates during theimplementation of resolutions in Libya, and thelack of needed state rebuilding andreconstruction efforts following thatintervention.

Both the International Criminal Court and theResponsibility to Protect are controversial initiatives,which have attracted considerable criticism in recentyears. Nevertheless, the world community hasevolved beyond the stage when governments,citizens and international organizations can simplystand idly by when others become the victims ofgenocide or other atrocity crimes. e ICC and R2Prepresent the emergence of a new, more maturesystem of international justice and the rule of law,built on the enforcement of universally acceptedinternational humanitarian norms. Support for theeffective application of these norms would form animportant element of a more civilized andenlightened Canadian foreign policy.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

4

4

4

4

4

September 2015

page 6SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

Canada can and should do more tohelp United Nations PeacekeepingSince 1948, there have been 71 United Nationspeacekeeping operations. ere are currently 16such operations with over 125 000 uniformed andcivilian personnel -- more than at any time in theorganization’s history. Peacekeeping has evolved over the years, and willneed to adapt further to meet the challenges arisingfrom present and future demands.

In March, United StatesAmbassador to the UNSamantha Powerannounced that U.S.President Barack Obamawould hold a world leaderssummit on peacekeepingduring the opening of the70th session of the UNGeneral Assembly inSeptember “to help catalyzea wave of newcommitments.” And in June, the UN

Secretary-General received the report of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations chairedby Jorge Ramos-Horta. e panel’s report is due to beconsidered by governments this fall. Among thepanel’s many recommendations are a number of ideasCanada has championed in the past – like a rapidlydeployable military headquarters, a vanguard forceand other measures for more rapid deployment ofpeacekeepers.e leaders’ summit hosted by President Obama isintended to build support for improvedpeacekeeping, particularly by addressing the threecore needs that were identified in the high-levelpanel report: closing gaps in existing peacekeepingmissions (for example, the need for specifictransport and other equipment); new commitmentsof rapidly deployable personnel; and a broader set offorward-looking personnel commitments to stafffuture missions and fill gaps in current operations. e 2015 WFM – Canada fact sheet on “Canada andUN Peacekeeping” documented significantpersonnel shortages, below levels mandated by the

UN Security Council, in five current missions (inAbyei (Sudan), Central African Republic, Darfur(Sudan), Mali and South Sudan). e currentshortage of peacekeepers was prominent indiscussions earlier this year when U.S. AmbassadorPower went to Brussels to lobby European countries(and Canada) to increase their commitments ofpersonnel as well as medical capacity, militaryintelligence, and the provision of helicopters andother vehicles.Another important issue is the use of technology. In arecent report by the Expert Panel on Technology andInnovation in UN Peacekeeping it was noted that,“despite the omnipresence of advanced technologyand applications in our daily lives, United Nationspeacekeeping remains well behind the curve.”While the UN struggles to overcome shortages ofequipment and personnel, sexual violence bypeacekeepers continues to generate a great deal ofnegative publicity. In particular, there have recentlybeen a number of cases of sexual exploitation andabuse, many involving children, by peacekeepers inthe Central African Republic. Although UN officialsinsist on a “zero tolerance” policy, they are limited intheir capacity to enforce reforms. e UN cannottake legal action against peacekeepers, as that is leto the troop-contributing governments. FormerCanadian Supreme Court justice Marie Deschampshas been named to head an independentinvestigation into the current allegations. As well,the NGO AIDS-Free World has launched acampaign, Code Blue, to address the issue of sexualabuse in the context of peacekeeping operations. Will Canada return to its former role as a leader inUN peace operations? As reported in WFM –Canada’s current update of Canada & UNPeacekeeping, while demand for peacekeepers hasnever been higher, Canada’s contributions remain atan all time low -- 26 military personnel and 85 policeas of June 2015. Canada now ranks 66th in personnelcontributions to UN peacekeeping even though publicopinion measurements continue to demonstratestrong support from Canadians for peacekeeping as atop priority activity of their military.

By Monique Cuillerier

Monique Cuillerier isWFM – Canada’sMembership andCommunicationsDirector.

Canadian personnel on UN peacekeeping missionssource: UN data

At the 2005 United Nations Reform Summit,member states launched an unprecedented set ofinstitutions referred to as the PeacebuildingArchitecture -- the Peacebuilding Commission,along with a special Fund and a support unit insidethe UN Secretariat. e 2004 “High Level Panel on reats, Challengesand Change” had recommended a new UnitedNations structure to support transitions fromconflict to post-conflict, particularly in “marshallingand sustaining” international support “over whateverperiod may be necessary”. e Secretary General’s2005 response, “In Larger Freedom”, therefore,proposed the creation of a PeacebuildingCommission along with a voluntary fund to financeurgent interventions.Peacebuilding per se goes back several decades;however, its UN roots are in the Secretary General’s1992 “Agenda for Peace.” But it was aer 2000, withthe international community’s focus on refining thetools of mediation, peacekeeping, development,human rights and humanitarian action andcoordination, that the concept of peacebuildingevolved substantially. It became more and moreevident, from academicand practical work on thelink between conflict anddevelopment, that longerterm efforts were required

to ensure the sustainability of peace in post conflictcountries. Populations in war-affected countries needto see the benefits of peace, and governments needsupport in rebuilding institutions if countries are toavoid relapse into conflict. In addition, it becamepossible to identify trends in fragile states that couldlead to conflict, thereby providing potential avenuesfor prevention of conflict. e body of institutions referred to as thePeacebuilding Architecture comprise thePeacebuilding Commission (PBC), a 31 memberintergovernmental advisory body; a PeacebuildingFund (PBF), a multi-year standing fund to launchimmediate activities for post-conflict peacebuilding;and a small Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) toassist and support the Commission. e Fund andthe Support Office would come under thesupervision of the Secretary General. e PBC’smandate is to support countries emerging fromconflict by: extending the period of politicalattention; bringing together all relevant actors;marshalling resources; advising on and proposingintegrated strategies for post conflict peacebuildingand recovery; and laying the foundation for

September 2015

page 7

“If Canada returned to UN peacekeeping, it couldhave a real and lasting impact on peace and securityin many of the world’s most dangerous regions,” saysWalter Dorn, Professor of Defence Studies atCanadian Forces College. “Post-Afghanistan, there isso much Canadian skill, equipment and know-howthat can be put to good use.”Peter Langille, a peacekeeping expert and member ofWFM – Canada’s Advisory Board coordinated theorganization’s submission to the UN High-levelIndependent Panel on Peace Operations. He hasbeen a consistent campaigner for a UN EmergencyPeace Service, a permanent standing UN capacity

that would allow for rapid deployment. “Even if theEuropeans, Canada and others strengthen theirpolitical commitment to UN peace operations, thatwill still leave the problem the UN has getting troopsinto the field in a timely manner. e best solution isto create a UNEPS, a kind of ‘UN 911.’ We wouldn’twant to live in a community without the means, suchas police or a fire department, to respond quickly toemergencies. e time is long overdue to give theUN the capacity to respond rapidly when theSecurity Council calls for new peace operations.”

United Nations peacebuildingin the twenty-first century

By Carolyn McAskie, O.C.,

Carolyn McAskie, O.C., hasheld numerous posts atthe CanadianInternationalDevelopment Agency andin the UN system. Shewas United NationsAssistant SecretaryGeneral forPeacebuilding Supportfrom 2006-2008.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

source: UN website

September 2015

page 8

sustainable development. e architecture washailed as an innovative mechanism to close the gapin the UN’s response to sustainable peace. In its firstyears the PBC has taken on strategic reviews ofpeacebuilding requirements in Burundi, SierraLeone, Guinea-Bissau, the Central African Republic,Liberia and Guinea-Conakry, in all cases at therequest of the countries themselves. In addition, 32countries have received support from thePeacebuilding Fund. Aer ten years of operation, the PeacebuildingCommission is still finding its feet. e first stage of amandated 10-year evaluation has been completed withthe recent publication of, “eChallenge of Sustaining Peace,Report of the Advisory Group ofExperts for the 2015 Review of theUnited Nations PeacebuildingArchitecture.” is report makesclear what many of us knew, i.e. thata member state body, with aninadequately funded support systemand a small fund, would not be ableto solve all the problems with whichcountries coming out of conflict arefaced. Much has been accomplishedwith support given to peaceprocesses and critical interventions,both political and through thePeacebuilding Fund. But the Reportgoes much further to say thatPeacebuilding must be everyone’sresponsibility and advocates anambitious system-wide UNapproach to “sustaining peace.” e report argues that UNleadership must now inculcate aculture of peace into all of theUN’s work and that management systems should beput in place to counteract the fragmentation of theUnited Nations varied institutions in this regard.Donors too must start to implement their endlessagreements to work together with developingcountry partners, supporting local efforts and notcompeting with each other. Attention must be paidto better leadership on the ground, both for theinternational community, but also in supportingleadership in post-conflict countries and incountries at risk of falling into conflict.

e need for a dynamic change of approach is mademore urgent by a worrying tendency, which shows,aer two decades of a global reduction in conflict,that the number and intensity of major conflicts arenow increasing and, as the report points out, theyare “more complex, increasingly fragmented andintractable.” It is now obvious that there are twovery different classes of conflict. ere are theongoing crises (and potential crises) in neglectedand fragile states, many in Africa which are still, ifnot ignored, then not the subject of sufficientpolitical and developmental attention. ese includeSouth Sudan, Central African Republic andSomalia, with Burundi and Guinea Bissau and

others at risk of relapse. But theever more complicatedemergencies in the Middle East,such as Iraq, Syria and now ISISwill always be beyond the remit ofthe Peacebuilding Commission.e ambitious goals outlined inthe Report of the Advisory Groupof Experts must be seen in thecontext of the original goals set forthe Peacebuilding Commission in2005. e Report rightlychallenges member states to seesustaining peace as the core taskset for the UN by its Charter, witha high priority to be given toresources, capacities andorganizational hierarchy. Furtherit calls for sustainable methods offunding, a strengthened fieldpresence and headquarterscapacity, mandated coordinationamong UN operational entitiesand better cooperation among key

member state bodies including the SecurityCouncil, the General Assembly and ECOSOC.Member states will now review therecommendations and decide on action to be taken.It is important to note, however, that the originalgoals for the PBC, seen as ambitious in 2005, areconsiderably more modest than those outlined bythe Advisory Group of Experts, but neverthelesshave not been met. is does not augur well for thereview. e PBC has been largely ignored by theSecurity Council, and the Peacebuilding SupportOffice has never been in a position to mandate

is report makesclear what many ofus knew, i.e. that amember state body,with aninadequatelyfunded supportsystem and a smallfund, would not beable to solve all theproblems withwhich countriescoming out ofconflict are faced.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

September 2015

page 9

is year marks the 15th anniversary of UNSecurity Council Resolution 1325, the auspiciousformal beginnings of the UN’s fight against sexualviolence in conflict.

e resolution reaffirms the important role of womenin the prevention and resolution of conflicts, peacenegotiations, peace-building, peacekeeping,humanitarian response and in post-conflictreconstruction. It stresses the importance of theirequal participation and full involvement in all effortsfor the maintenance and promotion of peace andsecurity. Resolution 1325 and a number of subsequentrelated resolutions call on all parties to conflict to takespecial measures to protect women and girls fromgender-based violence, particularly rape and otherforms of sexual abuse, in situations of armed conflict.In the 15 years since UNSC Resolution 1325 wasadopted, Canada has implemented a NationalAction Plan on Women, Peace and Security (WPS),

and otherwise engaged in the WPS agenda. Andthere have been other highlights, such as Canada’sDevelopment and Peace Project in Afghanistan.However, there is still much that the nextgovernment can do to improve this country’s recordon women’s rights.

Although Canada has long had a position amongstthe world’s nations that earned respect for its humanrights record and history of peace building, thisreputation has been eroded. e UN Human RightsCommittee and other UN human rights reportingbodies have on multiple occasions called for changesto the way Canada approaches the human rights of itscitizens, in particular with respect to aboriginalpeoples and women. On 23 July 2015, the Committeereleased its first report card on Canada inapproximately 10 years and, unfortunately, ithighlighted a number of examples where this countryis failing to meet its human rights obligations.

How the Canadian government canimprove its record on women’s rights

By Marilou McPhedranand Megan Nobert

Marilou McPhedran is ahuman rights lawyer who

served as the Principal(dean) of the University

of Winnipeg’s GlobalCollege in its founding

years from 2008-2012 andcurrently teaches human

rights at the GlobalCollege.

Megan Nobert is aCanadian born

international criminaland human rights lawyer.

She is currently workingas an independent

consultant and activistwhile she completes her

Doctorate of Law ongendercide at Tilburg

University.

actions by other parts of the UN system. But themost egregious failure of the Commission is that,over and above the work of the Peacebuilding Fund,there has been little in the way of serious fundingfor sustainable peacebuilding in the countries on thePBC’s agenda. Canada spent five years as the Chairof the Commission’s sub-committee on Sierra Leonewithout making a single financial contribution tothat country. Nor have there been efforts from manyother donors for re-building health and education,justice and good governance and other criticalsectors. Is it possible that the effects of the Ebolacrisis would have been mitigated if UN memberstates, both donors and responsible governments,had invested the kind of massive resourcesenvisaged in the health sectors of Guinea, Liberiaand Sierra Leone in the years in which thesecountries have been on the Commission’s agenda?Would Burundi be suffering its current politicalcrisis if similar investments had been made in thejustice sector, and in education and employmentover the last ten years? ese countries have just not

had the massive increase in donor attentionpromised by the mandate of the PBC and thereforeremain far behind in their own peacebuilding goals. e recommendations of the Advisory Group ofExperts on the Peacebuilding Architecture present amajor challenge to member states, includingCanada. To implement these recommendations willnot only require substantial funding, but willrequire a substantial review of how the organs of theUnited Nations carry out their business in pursuit ofpeace. It remains to be seen the extent to whichmember states will share the admirable andambitious goals of the Advisory Group and whetherthey, along with the senior management of the UN,will be prepared to revamp and finance theworkings of the system, well beyond the confines ofthe Peacebuilding Architecture, to work towardsglobal sustainable peace. is will present a major challenge for the Canadiangovernment in the post-election period.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

September 2015

page 10

Of particular importance is the reference to the factthat Canada has yet to implement a number of theUN Human Rights Committee’s previousrecommendations, a signifier of the Canadiangovernment’s lack of commitment to human rights.is is troubling for a country that has the means toprovide full human rights protection to its citizens,but seems to lack the will to do so. Specific recommendations also target the currentgovernment’s lack of response to the issue ofmurdered and missing aboriginal women inCanada. With an overwhelming number of otherreports and recommendations on this issue, it’s notsurprising that the UN Human Rights Committee is

again calling outthe Canadiangovernment forignoring thisglaring problem.What should besurprising is ourcontinued blaséresponse to suchdisturbingstatistics –approximately1,017 missing andmurdered

aboriginal women between 1980 and 2012. It isimportant to bear in mind that this number is likelyquite a bit higher, and does not take into account thenumber of aboriginal women subjected to sexualviolence throughout the country.Now, one might say that perhaps Canada is doing abetter job of protecting the human rights of those inother countries, upholding its tradition ofpeacebuilding and humanitarian aid. However,although considerable sums of money have beenspent on victims of sexual violence in theDemocratic Republic f the Congo (DRC), acommendable and appropriate way to fulfill thecountry’s commitments under UNSC Resolution1325 and the other associated WPS resolutions,some of the specifics of this humanitarian fundingfall short of what we should expect from Canada.Although money is provided to ensure that victimsof sexual violence in the DRC have access to healthcare, the provisions by which this funding isprovided are quite specific in that it cannot be usedto fund abortions for rape victims. is requires

women who have already been traumatised, who arealready stigmatised by their communities, to carrythe child their rapist le within them. It is a cruel andunnecessary provision that undermines Canada’sprogramming on sexual violence in the DRC.Similar stipulations against funding the full range ofhealth services have tarnished Canada’s currentinternational development priority on Maternal,Newborn and Child Health. ese are just a few examples of the problems facingCanada and its obligations to fulfill human rights, athome and abroad. e two are connected: theexample we set in Canada strengthens ourinternational standing and credibility to promotehuman rights internationally.In this anniversary year of UNSC 1325 a globalreview is underway at the UN, to draw lessons fromthe past and develop improved programs formember states and the UN system in the yearsahead. e next Canadian government shouldsupport this process.At present, Canada’s WPS National Action Planreporting process – plagued by delays, lack ofclarity and incomplete reporting in the past – is indanger of not being funded at all beyond 2016. A future Canadian government should commit tolong term funding for the WPS national reportingprocess under START (the Stabilization andReconstruction Task Force). is would provide anexample and catalyst for a wider commitment to theWomen, Peace and Security agenda internationally.A future Canadian government should alsoconsider Canada’s poor record on women’s rights athome in the past few years, and take a long look atthe recommendations on how to combat theproblem of the murdered and missing aboriginalwomen in this country. It should consider whetherwe are spending our humanitarian aidappropriately, in a way that treats victims of conflictwith dignity. In essence, a future Canadian government shouldconsider making some changes so that Canada canonce again say that it is fulfilling its internationalobligations towards women, at home and abroad.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

September 2015

page 11

If, or when, a new political day dawns on Canada,there will not be a moment to lose to regain ourcountry’s involvement in the long struggle to free theworld of the specter of nuclear weapons. What, exactly, should a new Canadian governmentdo? e first move should be to give a new priority tothe subject. e continued existence of 15,850nuclear weapons, 1,800 of them kept in a state ofhigh operational alert, a broken Non-ProliferationTreaty, the storm clouds over a diplomatic deal tokeep Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon are allfront and centre on the world political stage. So toois a new humanitarian movement, built on hugeconferences of governments and civil society in Oslo,Nayarit and Vienna, which shows the “catastrophichumanitarian consequences” of any use of nuclearweapons. It has led, so far, to 107 states signing theHumanitarian Pledge “to identify and pursueeffective measures to fill the legal gap for theprohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons.” Allof this forms the run-up to a 2018 UN InternationalConference on Nuclear Disarmament.A changed Canadian government attitude wouldgive a priority to Canadian involvement with like-minded states now searching for the best legal routeto a nuclear weapons-free world. Instead of shunningsuch work, as in the recent past, the governmentwould embrace it and begin by implementing the2010 unanimous motion in Parliament, whichsupported the UN Secretary-General’s call for aNuclear Weapons Convention and urged thegovernment to take a major worldwide diplomaticinitiative for nuclear disarmament.A positive attitude to this work by a new governmentwould re-energize parliamentary and civil societywork in the development of public opinion tosupport Canada’s efforts. Just changing the angle ofthe government’s vision from negative obstruction topositive involvement would set a new course forCanadian action. e changed angle of vision could be signaled byopen support for the Iran nuclear deal as by far the

best resolution of a verifiable way to keep Iran fromacquiring a nuclear weapon; signing theHumanitarian Pledge to show that Canada takesseriously the need to move away from reliance onnuclear deterrence for global security; opening up aworking relationship with the New AgendaCoalition, a group of middle power states seeking away to start negotiations for the elimination ofnuclear weapons.ese measures are, in government parlance, easily“doable,” when the government has the political willto take them. is more holistic approach to nuclear disarmamentwould be a great improvement over the presentslavish adherence to the discredited “step-by-step”approach, whichhas led, not tonucleardisarmament, butto themodernizationprograms of all thenuclear weaponsstates, which ifunchecked, willcarry their nucleararsenals throughthe rest of the 21stcentury. e dra Final Document of the 2015 NPT ReviewConference pointed to a new strategy. It contained apassage calling for a new working group to identify“legal provisions” to contribute to a nuclearweapons-free world. e Final Document requiredconsensus to pass and, unfortunately, a dispute overa proposed conference to plan a nuclear weaponsfree zone in the Middle East derailed the whole NPTmeeting. But the idea of an open-ended workinggroup to plan legal work forward may yet survive atthe UN General Assembly this fall. is wouldprovide Canada an instant opportunity to roll up itssleeves and get to work.

Hitting the re-set button: Canada’s role in arms controland disarmament

By Douglas Roche

The Hon. DouglasRoche, O.C., is anauthor,parliamentarian anddiplomat, who hasspecialized inpeace and humansecurity issues.Mr. Roche was aSenator, Member ofParliament, CanadianAmbassador forDisarmament, andVisiting Professor atthe University ofAlberta.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

source: International Commissionon Nuclear Non-proliferation andDisarmament (ICNND)

September 2015

page 12

By John E. Trent

John Trent is aformer professor ofpolitical Science at

the University ofOttawa and current

Chairperson of theWFM – Canada

Board of Directors.He is a former

Secretary Generalof the

InternationalPolitical Science

Association and haswritten several

books on theUnited Nations.

Considering all the opportunities open to arevitalized Canada, the Canadian Pugwash Group’sconference in July at the inkers’ Lodge, Pugwash,N.S., recommended that Canada host an inclusiveinternational meeting to explore effective legalmeasures for the prohibition and elimination ofnuclear weapons. Such a meeting could elaborateelements of a working agenda for a multilateralprocess to achieve the goal of a nuclear weapons-freeworld. is is the kind of action Canada took in1997 in convening interested states to start writingthe successful Anti-Personnel Landmines Treaty.e resistance of the nuclear weapons states (the P5)to the non-nuclear weapons states getting into activework for nuclear disarmament is, of course, wellknown. It takes courage to go up against the bigboys, but the NPT has been explicit in affirming thatall states have a responsibility to enter into this work.is means also challenging the NATOestablishment, which still considers nuclear weaponsthe “supreme guarantee” of security despite theNPT’s “irrevocable undertaking” for elimination.Canada, which once did inspiring, effective work ondeveloping verification measures for arms control,can recover its leadership role and once againbecome a valued member of the internationalcommunity whose leading members are workingdaily to find viable ways to peace in the 21st century.e rejoining of this effort with a changed attitudewould be an accomplishment in itself.

A new government should move immediately torepair the damage done to Canada by its refusal,until now, to sign the Arms Trade Treaty, which hasset new international standards for regulating the$70 billion business that fuels conflict, underminespeace and security, threatens economic and socialdevelopment, and causes widespread humansuffering. With 130 states parties to the treaty (71ratifications), the absence of Canada, for thespurious reason that it would restrict domestic gunownership, is a lamentable shirking of ourinternational duty. is obduracy to the commongood needs to be quickly swept away by a newgovernment recognizing Canada’s responsibilities tothe world.Similarly, quick action should be taken a by a newgovernment in closing the loophole Canada gaveitself permitting Canadian soldiers in combinedoperations with allies to use cluster munitions. Sucha provision, as 27 international lawyers and formerambassadors for disarmament have pointed out,undermines the legislation, which is aimed at endingcluster munitions. e fact that all Oppositionparties in the House of Commons voted against thismarred legislation indicates that a new governmenthas plenty of scope to revise it.A new day is ahead for Canada’s role in arms controland disarmament. What counts is the political willto make changes.

Let Canada take the lead at the UN– as it used to doCanada must once again take the lead on theUnited Nations and global institutions in general– as it used to do. In the past Canada was a leader,not a follower or an absentee.e Need: e world has a desperate need forglobal institutions capable of making decisionsabout the multitude of global problems. Askanyone and they will tell you the world ischallenged by one or several of the followingproblems: conflicts, climate change, theinequality gap, terrorism, pollution, the plight ofwomen and children, fundamentalism of manykinds, mass migrations, pandemics, financialcrises and enfeebled states etc. But, many do notseem to recognize that each one of these global

challenges has one common denominator: theworld is incapable of taking decisions that willcommand respect in order to resolve theproblems. Syria: no decisions. Ukraine: nodecisions. South Pacific: no decisions. Israel andPalestine: no decisions. Nuclear weapons, nodecisions. But arms sales flourish and thousands die.Why can’t the UN make the big, urgentdecisions? In one word, because of sovereignty –the belief that each state can do as it wants withimpunity. Worst of all, the major powers whichshould be leading the world are hobbling theSecurity Council by threatening to use theirvetoes to stop any possible action. e fivePermanent Members use their sovereignty to

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

September 2015

page 13

preserve their own power and spheres of interestrather than promoting cooperation.What would effective global institutions looklike? is is the question experts are trying toanswer. But it is putting the cart before the horse.Some two centuries ago, when the United Statesand then Canada wanted to form continent-widefederations they first of all had to set the politicaltable. ey had to convince each other that achange in their political institutions wasnecessary before they could decide on the natureof the institutions. ey had to decide how to getfrom A to B. at is our most importantchallenge today. ere are lots or learned tomeson what international organizations should looklike but few about how we can get them.But this we can say: neither states nor citizenswill allow global governance to be authoritarian.Any new institutions will include the techniquesof democratic state-cra developed over the pasttwo hundred years including: dividing andcontrolling power, promoting rights andequality, constitutional safeguards, democraticinstitutions, elections, federalism, liberalism,rule of law, local police and militias anddecentralization.How can Canada move the world ahead? Aforward looking government of Canada willmake ‘Rethinking the United Nations’ a centralprogram of the Department of Foreign Affairsand give it the resources required to promotethis quasi-constitutional process and toencourage other ‘like-minded’ countries tobecome partners. Civil society organizations andacademics can plan, push and prod, and will beimportant partners in the process, but onlygovernments have the resources to initiate theglobal diplomatic processes. If such a unit existed today, it would be expectedto help steer Canadian policy and engagementwith a growing number of studies and initiativesfor global governance reforms. ese include:

e High-level International Panel on UNPeace Operations and the PeacekeepingSummit being convened in September byPresident Obama;e Advisory Group of Experts reviewing theUN’s peacebuilding architecture; International reform efforts such as theCommission on Global Security, Justice andGovernance, and the Independent

Commission on Multilateralism of theInternational Peace Institute;Building support for the goal of having UNdevelopment, humanitarian andpeacebuilding activities in countries to beadministered through one budget and leadagency;Implementing recommendations from theSecretary General’s report on his ‘Ten YearReflection’ on the ‘Responsibility to Protect’normative framework;Restructuring of the UN Human Rightsmachinery being led by the HighCommissioner for Human Rights.Effort for a UN Parliamentary Assembly,supported by more than 65 Canadianparliamentarians, from all parties;Proposals for the creation of a UnitedNations Emergency Peace Service;Practical steps to make selection of the UNSecretary-General, and other high level UNposts, more transparent and merit-based.

On June 16, 2015, the Report of the Commissionon Global Security, Justice & Governance  waslaunched at the Peace Palace in e Hague. Inpresenting their report, Co-Chair, formerNigerian Foreign Minister and UN Under-Secretary-General of Political Affairs, IbrahimGambari noted that “the UN and globalgovernance institutions are ill-suited to addressmany modern, evolving threats and must reformor risk prolonging and deepening global crises.”According to co-chair former U.S. Secretary ofState Madeleine Albright, the world requires“more capable tools of global governance, withdifferent kinds of public, private, and mixedinstitutions designed for twenty-first-centurychallenges.” eir report includes many recommendationsfor improving the UN system in the short term.But they also acknowledge the need for a longerterm approach to global governance reforms.ey call for “a transitional strategy that includesbuilding coalitions to initiate and nurturereforms . . . to martial, monitor and sustainsupport for the reform agenda.” Canada must embrace the need for reform,dedicate resources within the federalgovernment and help lead the way.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

September 2015

page 14

In 1945 the United Nations recognized that youcould not have world peace without respect foruniversal human rights. As a result the UN Charterincluded several significant provisions to this endand called for the establishment of a Commission onHuman Rights, which was set up in 1946 with its firsttask the draing of the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights.Driven by the contributions of Eleanor Roosevelt,René Cassin and Canadian John Humphrey, theCommission completed the Universal Declaration in1948, and it was adopted by the General Assembly bya vote of 48 to nothing, with eight abstentions. iswas an outstanding achievement, an importantlandmark in human history. is was followed byinternational instruments dealing with genocide, warcrimes, refugees, racial discrimination, torture andthe rights of women and children.

All of this is to saythat the UN has beenextremely successfulin adopting humanrights standardsapplicable to thewhole world, to allcontinents and allcultures. ere hasbeen however aserious problem withimplementation. Itwas expected that thehighest level of

implementation would be accomplished by thepassage of implementing legislation by the ratifyingstates, with human tights charters and human rightscommissions in all states. Although many countrieshave done this, there are still too many wars, toomany conflicts and too many human tightsviolations.Canada has ratified nearly all the major human tightsconventions, has legislated these human rightsstandards, set up human rights commissions, andadopted a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.Nevertheless, in recent years Canada has failed torespect its obligations under several of these

instruments – through the imprisonment ofindividuals without due process under securitycertificates; through the indiscriminate naming ofinnocent citizens to “no-fly lists;” and through therecent passage of Bill C-51 (e Anti-Terrorist Act).On July 23, 2015 the UN Human Rights Committeechastised Canada for several provisions in C-51 thatwere in violation of the International Covenant onCivil and Political Rights, including its failure toprovide appropriate oversight to prevent and correctabuses. e same UN report also censured Canadafor its treatment of aboriginal children and women.In addition there are several instances where Canadahas fallen behind in its obligations to UN treaty-based reporting requirements, and its failure tosupport requests for more funding for the UNHuman Rights System.Canada is not alone in such matters. In fact there isno state without fault. But Canada should show theway in correcting such failings. Taking international human rights obligationsseriously domestically not only strengthens humanrights protection in Canada. It also has major foreignpolicy implications. If we are conscientiouslyimplementing our obligations at home, as well asacting on the recommendations from UN humanrights treaty bodies, then we will be in a muchstronger and more credible position to advocate thatothers also fulfill their obligations. Signing on to key UN treaties allows us to press othercountries to follow suit. Engaging in UN reviews ingood faith means we can demand the same of othergovernments. And showing we are serious aboutimplementation is essential, as that is where theinternational human rights system falls short,worldwide.Our goal must be to strengthen the implementationprocedures and the oversight mechanisms for allhuman rights standards. Canada in the past hasshown great leadership in supporting UNpeacekeeping, development and human rights. isis a proud tradition, which should be enhanced andcontinued.

The United Nations andhuman rights

By Warren Allmand

The Hon. WarrenAllmand P.C., O.C.,Q.C., is the current

National President ofthe World Federalist

Movement – Canada.He was President of

Rights and Democracy(the InternationalCentre for Human

Rights and DemocraticDevelopment). Thisfollowed a 33-year

career as a Member ofParliament during

which he held severalcabinet posts.

SPEC IA L   E L EC T ION   ED I T ION

Eleanor Roosevelt with Declaration of Human Rights

soucre: UN photo

Published by the World Federalist Foundation (WFF) and the World Fed-eralist Movement – Canada (WFMC). e World Federalist Foundation isa Canadian Revenue Agency registered charitable organization (reg.#:123998957RR0001). e World Federalist Movement – Canada is a na-tional non-profit membership organization that advocates more just andeffective global governance through the application of the principles ofdemocratic federalism to world affairs. e WFMC President is the Hon.Warren Allmand. WFMC is a member organization of the internationalWorld Federalist Movement (WFM), which includes world federalist or-ganizations in 24 countries around the world.

Material is not copyrighted. Submissions are welcome.

Il nous fera plaisir de publier les articles présentés en français.

ISSN number: 1488-612X

Mondial’s editorial working group: Leonard Angel, Robin Collins,Monique Cuillerier, Karen Hamilton, Simon Rosenblum, Fergus Watt

World Federalist Movement – Canada323 Chapel Street, Unit 110

Ottawa, ON K1N 7Z2

www.worldfederalistscanada.org