Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Bill (Sergei Magnitsky Law)
Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued
October 25, 2016
The Honorable Senator Percy E. Downe:
Honourable senators, I am the critic from the Senate Liberal caucus for this bill, but I totally support it. I don't know if that's a contradiction or not.
I support this bill to ensure that those individuals responsible for the corruption and human rights abuses in Russia are held personally accountable for their actions. By now, all of us are familiar with the state of public institutions in Russia where democratic hopes raised by the collapse of communism have been overwhelmed by a quarter century of corruption masquerading as a free market and repression standing in for governance.
We have all have heard the list of Russian activists, journalists and parliamentarians who have faced prosecution, persecution and worse for standing up to the powerful interests in that country. The NGO Reporters Without Borders, for example, was careful to explain that Russia's rise in the 2016 World Press Freedom Index was due to worsening conditions elsewhere and not because of any progress made there. In fact, the organization stated that:
A witchhunt is being waged against independent media, which are increasingly branded as a "fifth column" seeking to destabilize the country.
The enduring features of the situation in Russia include the impunity enjoyed by those responsible for violence, including sometimes deadly violence, against journalists.
And it is not just reporters who need to fear for their safety simply because their work displeases the powerful. Earlier this spring, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Senate heard from Mr. Vladimir Kara-Murza, a leading figure in the NGO Open Russia, a vocal critic of the Putin regime. He recounted a health scare he experienced in Moscow, but "health scare" doesn't begin to describe it. He told our committee:
In May of last year, I slipped into a coma as a result of severe poisoning of unidentified origins that led to multiple organ failures. Medical tests showed an abnormally high concentration of several heavy metals in the blood, and medical experts told my wife that my chances of survival were 5 per cent.
The good news is that he recovered. The cause of this episode was never fully determined, but it does call to mind a long list of Kremlin critics who come down with terrible diseases, many of them fatal.
(1710)
Less mysterious was the fate of the former Deputy Prime Minister, whose daughter appeared before the committee. She testified that the leader of the Russia pro-democracy opposition was shot and killed last May in the shadow of the Kremlin. The loss to his family needs no explanation, and according to his daughter, his assassination "left an enormous void in the entire democratic movement in Russia." It is reasonable to assume that may have been the very intent.
But perhaps, as Senator Andreychuk has stated, the most prominent example is that of Sergei Magnitsky, which is due in no small part to the efforts of his former colleague William Browder, who has done so much to call international attention to his case and achieve justice for what happened to him.
A tax lawyer, Magnitsky worked for a law firm hired by Browder's capital management company. They were investigating the theft of corporate seals and related documents. This theft, as we heard earlier, involved officials from the Russian Interior Ministry and led to the discovery of a $230 million tax fraud involving forgeries, shell companies and other complicated legal — to use the term loosely — proceedings.
As the investigation proceeded, Magnitsky came to the conclusion that far from being the source of the fraud, the company was, in fact, the victim of misconduct by corrupt officials and their associates. Unfortunately for Mr. Magnitsky, those officials were very well placed to turn the tables on Mr. Magnitsky, and he was charged with the crime and imprisoned. During this time, his health deteriorated because he was subjected to abuse and denied vital medical care. He died in custody in 2008.
However, even though he had died, the Russian government still tried and convicted him of tax fraud in July 2013 — about as strong a case of adding insult to injury as one can possibly imagine.
A more detailed description can be found in the book that Senator Andreychuk referred to as well, called Red Notice: A True Story of High Finance, Murder, and One Man's Fight for Justice, which Mr. Browder wrote. To those who have not read that, I urge you to do so. The parliamentary library has a copy, if you don't feel like spending the money. It's on Heather Reisman's list of book picks. I read it about a year ago, and it's a tremendous read for anyone who wants to know much more detail.
However, Mr. Browder's book and his public activity have not, obviously, endeared him to the Kremlin and as a result he, too, would face numerous charges if he ever returned to Russia.
Key to Mr. Browder's fight for justice and remembrance of his friend is what has come to be known as the Magnitsky legislation: laws to ensure that those officials responsible for abuses of power like the one that befell Mr. Magnitsky would face sanctions to the effect that they, and their money, would no longer enjoy free access to the world economy.
The United States of America has passed legislation that would freeze the U.S. assets of any of these individuals, prohibit any transactions involving those assets to the United States and bar any travel to the United States by them personally.
Senator Andreychuk's bill would have a similar effect. A similar bill is currently in the House of Commons. Last year, a motion supporting such action passed in the house and was unanimous, as Senator Andreychuk indicated. At the time, then-Member of Parliament Irwin Cotler, a long-standing advocate of justice for many around the world, including Mr. Magnitsky, said:
The unanimous support of this motion sends a clear signal to human rights violators in Russia and around the world that they will be held to account for their crimes. By imposing sanctions, we can impose meaningful penalties on human rights violators and deter future violations.
And deterrence is the key. It is worth remembering that the whole Magnitsky story began with tax fraud. If there is one thing I have learned after spending years studying tax evasion, it is that until the perpetrators face real, personal consequences for their actions, their behaviour will continue. And so it is with those who abuse their positions of authority to enrich themselves and their cronies.
Unfortunately, again as Senator Andreychuk highlighted, despite earlier unanimous support of the principle, the actual legislation has hit a bump in the road with concerns being expressed by some in the government about the harm it might do to Canada's re-engagement with Russia. But the question is: Re- engagement on what terms?
During the 2015 election, again as Senator Andreychuk has highlighted, the parties were supportive of this bill. The Liberal Party of Canada, for example, stated that it:
. . . believes that, by imposing sanctions, we can impose meaningful penalties on human rights violators and deter further violations. A Liberal government will introduce legislation, modelled on US Magnitsky legislation, to impose sanctions against Russian officials responsible . . . .
That, senators, is pretty clear.
Well, we have a Liberal government, and as a long-time supporter of the Liberal party, I'm very pleased with many of the initiatives they have taken, such as the $444 million to the Canada Revenue Agency for overseas tax evasion, the child benefit and the list goes on and on.
But where is the action on this legislation? I, as a Liberal Party supporter, call upon the government to live up to the commitment they made in the election. And I call upon Minister Dion to bring forward the required legislation, which the previous Parliament supported, so we can pass this important legislation and send the Russian government a message that re-engagement is on our terms, not just on their terms.