WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |   ...   | 6 |

«Introduction Voices-Voix, a national volunteer-based coalition, was created in 2010 in re- sponse to a troubling trend of “defunding” Canadian ...»

-- [ Page 1 ] --

Dismantling democracy

Stifling debate and dissent for civil society

and Indigenous peoples

Pearl Eliadis1

Introduction

Voices-Voix, a national volunteer-based coalition, was created in 2010 in re-

sponse to a troubling trend of “defunding” Canadian civil society organizations

(csos) working in the areas of anti-poverty, international co-operation, immigrant

and refugee issues, human rights and women’s equality.2 More than 200 Canadian

organizations and 5,000 individual Canadians have subscribed to its declaration in favour of free expression and transparency in government. Over the last five years, Voices-Voix has documented the suppression of debate and dissent by re- cording incidents and case studies brought to its attention by affected organiza- tions, the media, and through legal and scholarly communities. No other organiz- ation in Canada has been systematically documenting and publishing these cases.3 Since 2010, Voices-Voix published more than 110 case studies on the dismant- ling of democratic rights and institutions and the narrowing space for debate and dissent in this country. All the case studies are available on its website and are clas- sified according to the federal government tactics that are used and their targets.

The first main category deals with the undermining of civil society, as well as In- digenous groups and First Nations; the second examines the erosion of the Can- 37 The Harper Record 2008–2015 | Democracy adian public service and interference with independent officers and agents of Par- liament; the third is the use of retaliation and reprisals against whistle-blowers and advocates; the fourth category describes the savaging of federal departments working on environmental protection; and, finally, the last category records the dismantling of basic science and knowledge, including the suppression of statis- tical tools such as the mandatory long-form census.4 This chapter focuses only on the first of these issues, namely the federal govern- ment’s undermining of Canadian csos and advocates, drawing on 70 case studies (Annex 1) involving 108 organizations and advocates (Annex 2).5 The case studies were developed based on information obtained from the organizations themselves, including personal interviews, as well as from court documents, research reports, and media sources. Voices-Voix has also created a video series, available online, that provides personal testimony about the organizational and personal impacts of the federal government’s actions.6 Civil society organizations The terms “non-profit,” “civil society organization,” and “charitable organiza- tion” (or charity) are used extensively throughout this chapter. They mean differ- ent things, and the terms have important implications for how the government has interacted with the organizations in question. The Canadian non-profit sec- tor is the second largest in the world and includes not only non-governmental organizations (nGos) and grassroots organizations, but also larger non-profit enterprises, such as hospitals. This sector contributes approximately 8% of Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP).7 Civil society organizations are non-profits, but as referred to in this chapter they

include a narrower subsection of organizations that:

Have a presence in public life, expressing the interests and values of their members or others, based on ethical, cultural, political, scientific, religious or philanthropic considerations. Civil Society Organizations (csos) therefore refer to a wide array of organizations: community groups, non-governmental organizations (nGos), labour unions, Indigenous groups, charitable organizations, faith-based organizations, professional associations, and foundations.8 csos in Canada provide much of the “social infrastructure” that binds together our communities, our cities, our workplaces, and our country.9 Whether we are talking about veterans, faith groups, international development bodies, scientific institutions and facilities, environmental protection advocates, unions, cultural instituThe Harper Record 2008–2015 | Democracy tions, sports associations, or Indigenous organizations, they enhance the quality of our lives, the health of the built and natural environment, and the vitality of our communities and neighbourhoods. They strengthen our cultural heritage, encourage people to connect, and protect our collective interests.

Charities are a specific type of non-profit organization recognized under the federal Income Tax Act. Charities must be non-partisan, and are acknowledged by law and the courts as being in the public good because they engage in the small number of activities that qualify as “charitable purposes” or “charitable objects.” Once an institution is legally recognized as charitable, there are considerable financial and reputational benefits flowing from that status.

csos, whether they are charitable or not, contribute to a rich and diverse Canadian society that values human rights and encourages participation on a wide range of issues of public concern.

Indigenous organizations Many Indigenous organizations in Canada are set up as non-profit corporations and some have charitable status under the Income Tax Act. Indigenous peoples — whether they are organized as First Nations governments or social justice organizations — are treated as a distinct subset for the purposes of this article. They transcend the definitions of “civil society organizations.” Their status and their missions derive from unique political, economic, and social structures, including treaties and modern land claims agreements, and from Indigenous cultures, spiritual traditions, histories, and philosophies, especially with respect to rights to their lands, territories, and resources. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that governments must respect and promote these rights. As the previous chapter explains, many of the tactics used by the federal government have been deployed in spades against Indigenous peoples, despite the UN declaration.





csos represent an important vehicle by which we express our views and seek to influence public policy and discourse. And yet the relationship between csos and the federal government is at an all-time low as a result of sustained and concerted efforts to undermine science, environmental work, anti-poverty work, international co-operation, environmental protection, Indigenous groups, and the people who

work with them. One consequence has been a decline in the capacity of csos in Canada to make a difference for vulnerable communities and equality-seeking groups:

The influence of civil society advocates for the economic interests of lower-income Canadians has also weakened in recent decades…. Antipoverty groups, women’s organizations, advisory bodies and think-tanks, the traditional champions of the 39 The Harper Record 2008–2015 | Democracy interests of the disadvantaged, have lost public funding and literally disappeared from the public forum…. Charitable civil society organizations that advocate egalitarian policies have been harassed by tax officials for their political activities.10 Those csos that have survived government attacks now live and work with the “chilling effect” created by such attacks on individuals and collectives with aims and policies that do not align with Canada’s federal government.11 A word about what the research says (and what it does not say) This chapter discusses research that synthesizes five years of case documentation involving advocates, csos, and their champions. It does not purport to analyze all Canadian non-profits or charities. Nor does it assert that the sector as a whole is under attack or at risk. It does take stock of what Canadian society may be losing and what it has already and definitively lost under the current government. Sadly and worryingly, the research is not comprehensive. Incidents involving ideologically motivated funding cuts, cRa scrutiny, public vilification and intimidation, privacy invasions and surveillance have been brought to our attention at a rate much higher than Voices-Voix is capable of documenting. In addition, several groups have asked us not to publish information about them out of concern for their reputations and future funding from government and private foundations.

The research is consistent with the thesis that has been advanced by both conservative and progressive writers that the Conservative government is actively and consciously seeking to dismantle the pan-Canadian consensus in favour of social progress, tolerance, and human rights. The claim that progressive organizations have been selectively targeted by the federal government for defunding, or that the audits of the Canada Revenue Agency are politically motivated, has been met with either flat denials or with the argument that such decisions fall within the legitimate purview of a duly elected government. These responses deserve closer scrutiny before analyzing the cases in more detail.

The research discussed in this chapter provides 108 examples of progressive organizations and advocates documented in 70 case studies and the cases speak for themselves. For the vast majority of organizations, this treatment at the hands of the federal government is unprecedented. A growing body of research supports the thesis that progressive organizations are being specifically targeted, either because of their focus on environmental protection, equality and human rights, their opposition to key Conservative policy planks such as the development of the oil sands, or because of their support for Indigenous rights.

40 The Harper Record 2008–2015 | Democracy The Harper government is democratically elected, albeit with a plurality of the popular vote, and it is arguably doing what it set out to do, or at least what it might have been expected to do. As Canadians, we may not all agree with the policy directions of the government of the day, but our constitutionally protected rights and freedoms should provide a platform to express our dissent without fear of reprisal.

It is only fair to point out that the withdrawal of funding (especially core funding) from the non-profit sector began with the Liberal Party of Canada, years before the Conservatives took power, and has also taken place under provincial governments of various political persuasions, including the New Democratic Party (nDP). For those csos that find themselves under siege or enhanced scrutiny today, there is something qualitatively different and more troubling about the current environment. The reasons go well beyond the legitimate policy choices of a democratically elected government.

First, while defunding (one of the government’s primary tactics) may not be illegal, the courts are looking carefully at decisions that appear to be politically motivated and at whether they are being made with an open mind.12 The most egregious funding cuts have targeted the very people who most need the protection of the state, including people with HiV/aiDs, immigrants and asylum seekers, children, veterans with disabilities, and members of Indigenous organizations. In one case, the consequences were so serious that the Federal Court of Canada told the government that cuts to health care constituted cruel and unusual treatment, referring to a section of the Canadian Charter generally reserved for torture cases (the Canadian Doctors for Refugee Care case is discussed in greater detail below).

Second, there is mounting evidence that defunding is but one of a series of cascading and interdependent strategies designed to strip csos, advocates, and Indigenous organizations of their fundraising capacity, charitable status, reputations, and privacy. Charitable organizations enjoy a relatively high degree of trust among Canadians.13 Despite such confidence — or perhaps because of it — the Harper government has sought to undermine their reputations and credibility, characterizing them as liars, propagandists, radicals, or threats to national security.

Non-profits that receive funding from foundations in other countries have been targeted as well. While the Canadian government actively courts external investment in Canadian business and views international investment in the private sector in a positive light, the same cannot be said for the non-profit sector. csos that receive funding from non-Canadian sources have been branded as unpatriotic, seditious, or working against Canadian interests.14 Finally, the combined impact of these strategies has been considerably more damaging than any one of them in isolation. As noted earlier, researchers have found that the relationship between the federal government and non-profits has created a “chill” on advocacy.15 In many instances, organizations have simply disThe Harper Record 2008–2015 | Democracy appeared. The consequences can be worse than advocacy chill and other forms of direct or indirect prior restraint. In a small number of cases, groups have been accused of money laundering, or of posing a threat to national security. Several have been placed under surveillance or had their personal and health information disclosed inappropriately. Others have been accused of money laundering and supporting terrorism, leading to serious concerns about the criminalization of dissent.

These attacks have taken place against the backdrop of systemic marginalization of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by the federal government.16 The Conservative government has instructed its own lawyers to ignore the Charter in a significant number of cases, allowing manifestly unconstitutional draft legislation to make its way to Parliament.17 There have been multiple Supreme Court of Canada decisions that have highlighted serial shortfalls in compliance with the Charter.

Organizations and advocates that defend human rights and freedoms are considerably more vulnerable in such an environment. iRFan Canada is the organization that was listed as a terrorist organization on the eve of a hearing challenging the cRa’s decision to strip the organization of its charitable status. One immediate consequence of the listing was that the organization is no longer entitled to hire and pay a lawyer to defend it in court.

Disenabling civil society Hostile or invasive regulatory environments, including those leading to penalties, create a chilling effect on fundamental freedoms. According to a 2001 Supreme

Court of Canada decision:



Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |   ...   | 6 |


Similar works:

«This chapter first appeared in High-Value Natural Resources and Peacebuilding, edited by P. Lujala and S.A. Rustad. It is one of 6 edited books on Post-Conflict Peacebuilding and Natural Resource Management (for more information, seewww.environmentalpeacebuilding.org). Thefull book can be ordered from Routledge athttp://www.routledge.com/books/details/9781849712309/. © 2012. Environmental Law Institute and United Nations Environment Programme. The Kimberly Process Certification Scheme: A model...»

«Alice Gadler Principles Matter: Humanitarian Assistance to Civilians under IHL Supervisor: Dr. Marco Pertile Advisor: Prof. Roberto Belloni October 2013 PhD Programme in International Studies 2 Abstract The provision of relief to civilians in armed conflict is a sensitive activity, subject to specific regulation in IHL treaties. Challenges emerged on the ground have questioned the comprehensive nature of this legal framework and generated debate on the concept of humanitarian assistance itself,...»

«Laws of Unintended Consequences: The Impacts of Anti-Foreign Bribery Laws on Developing Countries by Lindsey Diane Carson A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Juridical Science Faculty of Law University of Toronto © Copyright by Lindsey Carson (2015) Laws of Unintended Consequences: The Impacts of Anti-Foreign Bribery Laws on Developing Countries Lindsey Carson Doctor of Juridical Science Faculty of Law University of Toronto 2015 Abstract Over the...»

«The Deadman’s Statute: Opportunities and Pitfalls Second Edition (Sept. 2014) Tom Williamson Williamson Law LC Richmond, Va. www.wllc.com I. Introduction Death changes life for those who survive. Litigants are not spared from this dictate. When death (or incapacity) has claimed a party to a controversy in litigation, lawyers for all parties to the action must focus upon the consequences of the demise. One of the most important new realities of the case brought on by the death is the...»

«NOTICE WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS: The copyright law o f the United States (title 17, U.S. Code) governs the making o f photocopies or other reproductions o f copyrighted material. Any copying o f this document without permission of its author may be prohibited by law. Automating Knowledge Acquisition For Aerial Image Interpretation David M. McKeown,Jr.,Wilson A. Harvey January 28,1987 CMU-CS-87-102 Invited Paper Presented At The DARPA Image Understanding Workshop Los Angeles,...»

«145 Claiming Rights: Organizational and Discursive Strategies of the Korean Adoptee and Unwed Mothers Movement* Paul Y. Chang** Andrea Kim Cavicchi*** Since the Korean War, the South Korean adoption industry has grown to be one of the largest in the world today. In 2011, the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea changed the name of the Special Law Relating to the Promotion and Process of Adoption *** This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the...»

«THE GREY HAT HACKER: RECONCILING CYBERSPACE REALITY AND THE LAW Cassandra Kirsch* “Borders and boundaries pose no obstacles for hackers. But they continue to pose obstacles for global law enforcement, with conflicting laws, different priorities, and diverse criminal justice systems. With each passing day, the need for a collective approach—for true collaboration and timely information sharing—becomes more pressing.” Robert Mueller Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (2012)...»

«They call it the Dead Frontier. It’s as far from home as the human race ever went, the planet where mankind dumped the waste of its thousand year empire and left its culture out in the sun to rot. But while one Doctor faces both his past and his future on the Frontier, another finds himself on Earth in 1996, where the seeds of the empire are only just being sown. The past is meeting the present, cause is meeting effect, and the TARDIS crew is about to be caught in the crossfire. The Third...»

«bs_bs_banner 167 Making Way: Legal Mobilization, Organizational Response, and Wheelchair Access Jeb Barnes Thomas F. Burke Questions of how and why organizations respond to legal rights are analyzed in several sociolegal research traditions, including studies of legal mobilization, regulation, and neo-institutionalist accounts of the diffusion of organizational structures. Using original qualitative and quantitative data, this article examines the responses of ten organizations to wheelchair...»

«GOING SOLO: BIG BUCKS & NO BOSS!?! The Nuts and Bolts of Opening Your Own Law Office The Nuts and Bolts Of The Law Office By: Jim Calloway, Director Oklahoma Bar Association Management Assistance Program © 1998, 2000, 2004, 2005 Oklahoma Bar Association Visit Jim Calloway’s Law Practice Tips Blog at http://jimcalloway.typepad.com/ The Nuts and Bolts Of The Law Office By Jim Calloway, Director Oklahoma Bar Association Management Assistance Program (Author’s note: This is a compilation of...»

«Tokomane ya Therišano 139 TSHEKASEKO YA MOLAO WA KGATELELO YA BOLOI (MOLAO 3 WA 1957) Projeke 135 Letšatšikgwedi la mafelelo bakeng sa diswayaswayo: 30 Moranang 2016 ISBN: 978-0-621-44208-3 ii MATSENO Khomišene ya Kaonafatšo ya Molao ya Afrika Borwa e hlanngwe ka South African Law Reform Commission Act, 1973 (Molao 19 wa 1973). Maloko a khomišene keMoahlodi Mandisa Muriel Lindelwa Maya (Modulasetulo) Moahlodi NaranNgaka an (Jody) Kollapen (Motlatša Modulasetulo) Moprofesa Marita...»

«Korean-Japanese? Shifting Perceptions of Belonging among Koreans in Japan Jeffry T. Hester Associate Professor Asian Studies Program Kansai Gaidai University, Hirakata-shi, Osaka, Japan jfhester@kansaigaidai.ac.jp Paper prepared for the First World Congress of Korean Studies, Seongnam, Republic of Korea, 18-20 July 2002 Koreans in Japan have been a socially excluded minority group in Japan for much of the last 80 years. Incremental changes over the past couple of decades, including changes in...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.