The Election Committee would like to welcome you to participate in the 2017 Iranian

Canadian Congress elections.

The elections will be held on May 28 th , 2017 from 11am – 4pm at the North York Civic

Centre - Chamber.

Please take note of the following important details:

1. Eligibility to vote:

a. Only the following members are eligible to vote on the day of the AGM:

i. Those who became a member by the previously announced deadline of midnight on May 25, 2017;

ii. Those who were members from May 16, 2016 to May 28, 2017 and renew their membership on the day of the AGM;

iii. Those who have not voted online; and

b. Who present a valid ONTARIO ID.

2. Absentee/Proxy voting:

a. If you have yet to cast your vote but are unable to vote in person on the day of the AGM, you may authorize a proxy to vote on your behalf in person.

You will have to provide the proxy with:

i. a copy of your valid Ontario ID; and

ii. the following proxy form dully executed by you:

http://www.iccongress.ca/election-update- 2017-ec- proxy

b. Please note proxy voters do not need to be ICC Members.

3. What is being voted on:

a. The following two motions appear on the ballots voted on online and to be voted on the day of the AGM:

i. For the four (4) nominees to be acclaimed to the four (4) positions available for the ICC Board of Directors; and

ii. For the ICC, who is presently incorporated as a provincial organization, to seek registration as a Federal Organization.

Election Committee 2017- Rules of Engagement

b. To learn more about the candidates please click:

http://www.iccongress.ca/list_of_icc_board_candidates_2017_including_their_bios_nomination_statements.

4. Quorum: Please note that quorum for initiating the AGM is fifty (50) per cent of the ICC members plus one (1). The total number of members whom must vote

in order to meet this quorum will be finally determined by the number of expired members who renew their membership on the day of the AGM.

5. Noting Irregularity

A formal complaint regarding the live voting process on the day of the AGM or the ballot count must:

a. Fill out an official complaint form available at the site of the AGM and the counting stations thereafter;

b. Attach proof of the complaint and list of any witnesses;

c. Supported by and filed on behalf of at least one of the four (4) candidates running for a position; and

d. File same with a member of the Election Committee or by emailing it to electioncommitteeicc@gmail.com within one (1) hour of the completion of the vote count.

We hope this provides you with the information you need to actively participate in the

2017 ICC Election. Should you have any further questions related to the elections proceedings please contact the Elections Committee at electioncommitteeicc@gmail.com.

Regards,

If you'd like to vote in the upcoming ICC Annual General Meeting on Sunday May 28th, 2017 please note that registration deadline is tonight before midnight (May 25, 2017 by 11:59PM).

Please note that on the day of the AGM, only those whose membership have expired since the last ICC AGM will be able to renew their membership (expiration dates between May 16, 2016 to May 28, 2017). If you have any doubt, we suggest you renew using the online membership form before the deadline tonight. 

New members joining on the day of the AGM will be allowed to attend the General Meeting but will not be able to vote. Once again the deadline for new members to register is tonight before midnight. After midnight we will close the online registration till after the AGM.

Online Membership Form: www.iccongress.ca/joinICC

Sincerely,

Mehran Farazmand

Board Secretary

Attention: CBC News Comment Editor, Robyn Urback, and CBC Contributor, Michael Petrou

On May 15th, 2017, an opinion piece by Michael Petrou, entitled “What does Canada get out of restoring diplomatic ties with Iran?” was published on your networks. In it, Petrou severely downplays the benefits of restoring diplomatic ties with Iran, suggesting that re-engagement may only result in “more convenient travel for Iranian Canadians and their relatives ... and the possibility of modest trade and business deals down the road.” In fact, the benefits of re-engagement with Iran are significantly more pronounced.

It is Iranian-Canadians themselves who have suffered disproportionately in the years since the former government broke diplomatic relations and instituted strict sanctions on Iran. When relations were broken in 2012, Iranian-Canadians suddenly found themselves unable to access consular services and were faced with considerable difficulty when attempting to acquire visitor visas for their relatives still living in Iran. Ironically, Iranian-Canadians have had to travel to Washington, DC, where Iran maintains an Interests Section, to access consular services--an option that now makes them vulnerable to United States President Trump’s travel restrictions. Petrou’s reference to the opportunity for “more convenient travel” is therefore quite an understatement. It is disparaging to the hundreds of thousands of dual citizens who are at risk of not being able to renew their student visas, work visas, or passports, or are unable to see aging relatives at home as a result.

The sanctions imposed on Iran also created often insurmountable barriers for honest and hard-working Iranian-Canadians. Many business owners who were dependent on the trade between Iran and Canada for their livelihood suddenly found their legitimate business activities rendered illegal. Additionally, banks refused to deal with those who had or were perceived to have any financial links to Iran (whether personal or business), due to the supposed legal risks. This even resulted in the closure of the bank accounts of Iranian-Canadians, including Canadian citizens, for no reason other than their nationality.

In his opinion piece, Petrou also sorely understates the economic benefits of re-engagement with Iran. Canadian businesses at large have not been able to access Iran’s untapped market of 80 million people. This is no small figure. A 2016 study found that Canada lost between 1.18 and 4.69 billion dollars in the years between 2010-2014 in exports as a result of sanctions on Iran. In the meantime, Canada’s G7 and NATO allies have been re-engaging with Iran both politically and economically since the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was put into effect by the P5+1 and the EU. As sanctions eased on Iran, many international businesses, especially European companies, entered the Iranian market, while Canadian companies have been lagging behind due to our lack of relations and the uncertainties surrounding SEMA. For example, in the first nine months of 2016 alone, the European Union's trade with Iran has increased by 63 per cent. Several major contracts have been signed over the past 12 months, including major deals with Boeing and Airbus, worth billions.

Petrou also claims that re-engagement with Iran cannot help Canada “hold Iran to account on human rights.” It is quite clear, however, that without establishing diplomatic and economic relations, Canada cannot achieve any of its goals in Iran. Nader Hashemi, Director of the Center for Middle East Studies, University of Denver (March 29th, AEFA Committee), states that sanctions “prevent Canada from playing a more constructive role in terms of supporting Iranian civil society and the pro-democracy movement within Iran.” The Iranian Canadian Congress therefore maintains its position that to advocate for human rights in Iran and around the world, Canada must implement a policy of constructive engagement through diplomacy. In order to be effective, Canada must be fair and unbiased in promoting respect for human rights around the world; singling out countries like Iran for human rights concerns through the imposition of sanctions and diplomatic isolation while ignoring the human rights violations of other countries, including close allies, weakens Canada’s influence and image abroad.

We also ask that you publish this letter in the same manner as that of Mr. Petrou in the interests of journalistic fairness and balance.

Sincerely,

Public Relations Chair of the Iranian Canadian Congress (ICC) Tayaz Fakhri

Election Committee

The following individuals have been appointed to the Election Committee for the upcoming AGM and Board Elections on May 28, 2017. The election committee will administer and monitor the online voting process from May 20-27 and the voting process on May 28th. 

Pantea Jafari, Emily Hoody, and Pouyan Nahrvar.

All three members have previous experience with election administration. We are grateful for their help in this process.   

Legal Counsel

Here you can find info about proxy voting in the upcoming AGM on May 28, 2017:

Proxy Voting

Any member who cannot attend the Annual General Meeting in person may vote through a proxy by filling out the proxy form and attaching a copy (digital or paper copy) of his/her photo ID to the form. The proxy holder shall present the signed form along with the copy of the photo ID of the person he/she is representing to the election officers at the Annual General Meeting. 

Click here to download the 2017 Proxy Form. 

Shabnam Assadollahi alleges that the Iranian Canadian Congress (ICC) is a lobby group for the Iranian government. These accusations are false and defamatory. The ICC is a non-profit, non-partisan, and non-religious grassroots organization that serves to safeguard and advance the interests of Iranian-Canadians.

The Iranian Canadian Congress is supported by a large community of Canadians from Iranian background who believe in the power of diplomacy and peace. Despite Assadollahi’s claim that only a small number of Iranian-Canadians oppose Bill S-219 and support economic and diplomatic engagement with Iran, a parliamentary petition initiated by the Iranian Canadian Congress received nearly 16,000 signatures from Iranian-Canadians nationwide imploring the Canadian government to re-establish formal diplomatic relations with Iran. In recent months thousands  of our community members have contacted their senators and demanded that they vote against Bill S-219. The strong opposition towards the bill in the community is fueled by the intention to establish diplomacy, peace and reengagement between Iran and Canada.

Furthermore, sanctions and diplomatic disengagement from Iran will primarily harm Iranian-Canadians. An estimated 300,000 Iranian-Canadians will be deprived of consular services and representation by Canadian officials in Iran, and exposed to further discrimination by financial institutions in Canada.

A lack of diplomatic engagement in addition to sanctions on Iran will also prevent Canadian businesses from benefiting from the enormous business opportunities that exist in trade with Iran. For example, in the years between 2010-2014, Canadian businesses lost between $1.18 and $4.69 billion due to sanctions on Iran.

The Iranian Canadian Congress maintains its position that to advocate for human rights in Iran and around the world Canada must implement a policy of constructive engagement through diplomacy and dialogue. Additionally, Bill S-219 ignores the universal nature of human rights and our obligation as a member of the international community to be fair and unbiased in promoting respect for human rights around the world. Bill S-219 ignores gross violations of human rights by other countries in the region and around the world, some of whom have violated multiple UN resolutions. Respect for human rights is a universal obligation and should not be affected by political bias or become a currency for special interests and political maneuvering. Additionally, passing Bill S-219 will create a legislative precedent that may lead to subsequent bills for imposing similar sanctions on other human rights violators, some of which are Canada’s allies and trade partners in the region. This action will have significant and lasting impacts on Canada’s relations with its partners around the world and its impact has to be considered and analyzed thoroughly.

The ICC believes that in order to achieve peace, safety and prosperity for all Canadians, and to safeguard the interests of Canada in the Middle East, Bill S-219 should be rejected..

We ask CIJNews to post this response in the same manner in which Assadollahi’s piece was posted in order to fairly represent the voices of Canadians from Iranian heritage, the vast majority of whom justifiably oppose Bill S-219. We also ask that the CIJNews editorial team take special care not to publish defamatory and baseless accusations and negative portrayals of ethnic minority communities and the non-profits that advocate on their behalf. This type of divisive rhetoric causes disunity in Canadian society and threatens the multicultural nature of our country.

Sincerely,
 

Tayaz Fakhry

Public Relations & Communications Chair of the Iranian Canadian Congress

Attention: Gatestone Institute editorial board, President Nina Rosenwald, Contributor Majid Rafizadeh

 On Thursday, April 27th, 2017, an opinion piece by Majid Rafizadeh was published by the Gatestone Institute. In this piece, Rafizadeh makes dangerously discriminatory and xenophobic statements, questioning the loyalty of Canadians of Iranian descent to their countries and undermining the sanctity of their citizenship, while also making defamatory comments about the Iranian Canadian Congress (ICC).

 The Gatestone Institute’s publication has the possibility of stoking discrimination towards individuals of Iranian heritage as a whole. Furthermore, it is a clear case of defamation against the Iranian Canadian Congress and disparages the reputation and character of its board of directors. We ask that the Gatestone Institute refrain from publishing defamatory material against our community and our organization and take greater care in the future as to what it publishes on its channels. We also ask that the Gatestone Institute act more responsibly and assure that it does not publish discriminatory pieces which jeopardize the safety of minority ethnic groups by ostracizing them and questioning their belonging in the bodies-politic of their countries.  

Sincerely,
 

Tayaz Fakhry

Public Relations & Communications Chair of the Iranian Canadian Congress

Click here to send an email to Rona Ambrose and tell her that you are against sanctions on Iran.

 Canada’s decision to ease sanctions on Iran came as a result of the multilateral nuclear agreement between P5+1 countries and Iran or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and its ratification in the UN Security Council. According to UNSC Resolution 2231, all UN member states shall comply with the terms of the agreement and lift nuclear related sanctions on Iran. In February 2016 the Government of Canada under Prime Minister Trudeau followed its international obligations under the terms of the JCPOA and lifted some of its sanctions on Iran. Since then, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has consistently found that Iran has fully complied with the terms of the JCPOA, most recently in February 24th, 2017. Therefore, your remarks on April 11th calling on the Government of Canada to restore its sanctions on Iran are in contradiction with Canada’s international obligations.  

 As a responsible member of the United Nations and a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Canada must not only comply with the JCPOA but must also play a leading role and encourage all parties to respect the nuclear agreement, an agreement which has significantly allayed the potential for conflict and nuclear proliferation in the Middle East region.

Iranian-Canadians have suffered disproportionately in the years after the former government broke diplomatic relations with Iran, closed the Canadian embassy in Tehran and, against all international norms, expelled Iranian diplomats from Ottawa. When relations were broken in 2012, Iranian-Canadians suddenly found themselves unable to access consular services and were faced with considerable difficulty when attempting to acquire visitor visas for their relatives still living in Iran. A formal parliamentary petition asking the federal government to re-establish diplomatic relations with Iran has gathered nearly 16,000 signatures from across Canada, while a counter petition sponsored by MP Peter Kent advocating for continuation of the policy of disengagement and withdrawal gathered only 600 signatures.

 For Canada to be a constructive player in the world, it needs to promote respect for human rights, peace and stability through dialogue and engagement. Disengaging from Iran effectively eliminates any positive influence Canada might be able to have in Iran and significantly reduces our influence in the region.

 We therefore ask you and your party to take the above into account, reconsider your policies towards Iran and cease advocating for demonstrably failed policies which have harmed Canadian businesses, Iranian-Canadians, and Canada’s international standing.

President

Notice is hereby given to all members of the Iranian Canadian Congress (ICC) that the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the ICC will be held on Sunday May 28^th, 2018 at 2PM in North York Civic Centre, Council Chamber in North York, Ontario (5100 Yonge Street) to conduct the following:

• Provide a report about the annual activities and performance of the organization.

• Election for 4 new board members for the ICC Board of Directors.* 

According to the procedure provided in the bylaws the ICC is facilitating online voting this year from May 20 to May 27^th. For more information about the nomination process and voting procedure please review this email carefully and send us an email at info@iccongress.ca if you have any questions. 

Nomination Procedure: ICC members interested to run for a position on the Board of Directors shall follow these steps:

Step 1: Review the eligibility requirements for board nominees (as per the ICC by-law):

Must have been a member in good standing for at least one (1) year immediately preceding the AGM;

Must be 21 years or older;

Must be a Canadian Citizen;

Must have lived in Canada for at least 5 years in aggregate;

Must pass a criminal background check.

Step 2: If you meet the eligibility requirements, to announce your intention to run send an email to info@iccongress.ca and submit all required nomination documents before May 4^th, 2017, 11:59PM. To meet the bylaw requirements all nominees shall submit the following documents to the ICC together with their nomination email:

• A biography and/or nomination statement in maximum 300 words. English bio is required, Farsi bio is optional. Please provide your bio in a word file.  
• A passport size photo in digital format. The photo has to be passport style - clear and formal. 
• A certificate of police clearance. 
• Proof of Citizenship. 

Membership cut-off date

ONLY members of the Iranian Canadian Congress are eligible to attend at the Annual General Meeting and vote for the election of new Board members. Therefore, those who become member of the ICC by the end of May 18^th,2017 (11:59PM) are eligible to vote for the online election and those who become member of the ICC by the end of May 25^th, 2017 (11:59PM) are eligible to vote in person on May 28^th, 2017.

Membership Registration

You can sign up for ICC membership or renew your membership only in one of the two following ways: 

1. Online at www.iccongress.ca/joinicc or
2. In person with the secretary of the board. For in person registration please email us at info@iccongress.ca.

Proxy Voting 

Members who are unable to vote themselves can assign a proxy representative to vote for them. We will send you the proxy form and instructions in a separate email in the next few weeks.  

In the coming weeks we will provide you more information about the online voting procedure and the upcoming AGM including early voting hours on the day of the AGM.

Federal Registration 

The Board of Directors of the ICC hereby is providing notice to all members that during the coming AGM the board will be introducing a motion to the AGM requesting approval from members to register the organization at the federal level to facilitate the expansion of the ICC in regions and provinces outside of Ontario. While the ICC is a national organization based on its by-laws, the organization was originally registered provincially in Ontario. In the last 12 months the ICC has expanded its activities and has recruited local volunteer teams in major cities and provinces across Canada including BC and Quebec. To facilitate this expansion we are aiming to register the organization at the federal level as well. During the AGM you will have a chance to vote on this issue. 

The Iranian Canadian Congress has expressed its concerns about Bill S-219 since the bill was first introduced to the Senate. We have explained how Bill S-219 would harm Iranian-Canadians, Canada’s economic interests, and Canada’s standing in the world.

We have also consistently asserted that this bill directly contradicts the Government’s stated intention to re-engage with Iran by placing legislative and diplomatic hurdles before this process. In a recent letter to members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Global Affairs Canada has agreed with our position regarding S-219.

Unfortunately some of the members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee ignored the opinion of Global Affairs Canada and other expert advice provided against S-219 and voted for the bill*.

With the opposition already formed in the Senate against S-219 we have a golden opportunity to block this bill at the Senate Chamber. Currently we are contacting all Honourable Senators to once again ask them to take into account all evidence and expert advice provided in opposition to the bill and vote against Bill S-219 when it comes for a vote at the Senate Chamber. We need all supporters of peace and diplomacy to help us and take action against these proposed sanctions on Iran. In the next few days we will issue an announcement about next steps that can be taken by community members.

If you’d like to support our advocacy campaign, please consider donating to the ICC or joining us as a member: www.iccongress.ca/fundraising

• ICC has launched an advocacy campaign against the new proposed sanctions bill in the Senate of Canada.
• Donate to the ICC and help us to advance the interests of the Iranian Canadian community.

Over the past few months, we have organized an effective advocacy campaign against the new proposed sanctions bill on Iran. The ICC believes that the proposed bill will block the path of re-engagement between Canada and Iran and also further complicates the problems ordinary Iranian-Canadians encounter due to sanctions on Iran, including not having an embassy in Ottawa. Click here to learn more about our position on S-219.

We were able to mobilize thousands of Iranian Canadians from across Canada to take action and contact their Senators to ask them to reject Bill S-219. Through the grassroots support and the hard work of our policy associates and advisers we have been able to persuade several ranking members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee to publicly stand against the proposed bill. Click here to watch the video of members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee speaking against Bill S-219.

• Expand our grassroots campaign and mobilize a greater number of Iranian Canadians against Bill S-219.
• Connect with stakeholders in Ottawa. 
• Provide Senators with expert opinions against the proposed sanctions bill. 

Senators, during this morning's meeting we will continue our examination of Bill S-219, An Act to deter Iran-sponsored terrorism, incitement to hatred, and human rights violations.

Here with us are Mr. Bijan Ahmadi, President, Iranian Canadian Congress; and Mr. Pouyan Tabasinejad, Policy Chair, also from Iranian Canadian Congress.

Welcome. Thank you for being with us today. We will hear your presentation and then the members of the committee will ask questions.

Bijan Ahmadi, President, Iranian Canadian Congress: Honourable senators, we would like to thank you for inviting us today to discuss Bill S-219. Given that this bill will disproportionately affect Iranian-Canadians, it is important for our community to be part of the consultation process. This is why we appreciate being here with you today.

The Iranian Canadian Congress, or ICC, is a grassroots, non-partisan and non-profit community organization that seeks to safeguard and advance the interests of Canadians of Iranian heritage, a population estimated at 300,000 nationwide.

My colleague and I are here on behalf of the ICC to present to you our views and concerns regarding Bill S-219, the non-nuclear sanctions against Iran act, and explain why the Senate should reject this bill in its entirety.

The ICC is deeply concerned about this bill, which we see as not only contrary to the government's stated policy of re-engagement with Iran but also an obstacle to Canada meeting its international obligations. Make no mistake, if enacted into law this bill will kill any possibility of re-engagement with Iran.

The present government has repeatedly stated its intention to re-engage with Iran and to reopen the Canadian mission in Tehran in a step-by-step approach. To this end, former Minister of Foreign Affairs Stéphane Dion repeatedly stated in the House of Commons that “we'll engage with Iran step by step with open eyes.”

After more than a year of delicate and difficult negotiations with Iran, our diplomats are beginning to make some headway in re-engagement with Iran. These are extremely challenging negotiations for our diplomats and both sides have concerns that need to be addressed. Canada requires assurances from Iran about the safety and security of our diplomats and Iranian officials have stated that they require assurances from Canada regarding the judicial immunity of their diplomats and common diplomatic assets.

Instead of aiding in these difficult negotiations, Bill S-219 is a step in the wrong direction. This bill not only leaves in place current obstacles in the path of re-engagement but also raises more barriers by introducing more legal and bureaucratic complexities to the process. This is not the time for our legislature to impose seemingly ideological and symbolic restrictions on these negotiations. We must allow our diplomats to negotiate freely instead of forcing parameters and restrictions on already delicate diplomatic talks.

The merits of diplomacy with Iran have been well proven. Another potentially catastrophic war in the Middle East was averted when world powers concluded the nuclear deal, JCPOA, over a year ago. Canada must play its part and give diplomacy a real chance and its full support.

However, the deleterious effects that this bill has on our country's diplomatic processes are only one part of why this bill is not in Canadians' best interests. Bill S-219 endorses sanctions and a lack of diplomatic relations with Iran, the negative effects of which on both Canadian businesses and Iranian-Canadians have been well-documented. We will now go into some of these issues.

Iranian-Canadians have suffered disproportionately in the years after the former government broke diplomatic relations and instituted strict sanctions on Iran. When relations were broken in 2012, Iranian-Canadians suddenly found themselves unable to access consular services and were faced with considerable difficulty when attempting to acquire visitor visas for their relatives and family members still living in Iran. Ironically, Iranian-Canadians have had to travel to Washington D.C, where Iran maintains an Interests Section, to access consular services, an option which opens them up to President Trump's travel ban. Most importantly, the absence of a Canadian diplomatic mission in Iran has left Canadians visiting Iran vulnerable and without access to consular services in times of need.

The other policy endorsed by this bill, the sanctions imposed by SEMA, created often insurmountable barriers for honest and hard-working Iranian-Canadians. Many business owners who were dependent on the trade between Iran and Canada for their livelihood suddenly found their legitimate business activities rendered illegal. Additionally, banks refused to deal with those who had or were perceived to have any financial links to Iran, whether personal or business. This even resulted in the closure of the bank accounts of Iranian-Canadians, including Canadian citizens, for no other reason than because they hold Iranian citizenship as well.

For example, the bank account of an Iranian engineering student in Quebec was closed with only $700 in the bank account. When he approached the bank he was only told that his account was closed because he had an Iranian passport.

Even today, after the government eased some of it sanctions on Iran in February 2016, some financial institutions are still applying the same rules and we have received several reports from ordinary Iranian-Canadians who have been subjected to discrimination by banks.

Bill S-219 essentially endorses and seeks to perpetuate the policies that have caused so much suffering in the Iranian-Canadian community. Not only will it derail diplomatic negotiations between Canada and Iran, depriving the community of the benefits of consular services and diplomatic representation, but it will also increase uncertainty and risk for financial institutions, further complicating the problem of banking discrimination and increasing the numbers of Iranian-Canadians denied fundamental banking services.

It is because of the suffering caused by these policies that an official parliamentary e-petition initiated by our organization asking the government to re-establish relations and re-engage with Iran has gathered nearly 16,000 signatures from across Canada.

It is widely known that Canada has disagreements with Iran over its regional policies and has concerns over human rights conditions in Iran, and these concerns have been reaffirmed countless times by Canadian officials. Therefore, Bill S-219 does not add any value in terms of informing the government of human rights concerns they have not already committed themselves to discuss with their Iranian counterparts.

One major concern the Canadian government has in terms of human rights is the status of Canadian dual nationals arrested in Iran. In this respect, engagement allows Canadian diplomats to voice our concerns with Tehran and advocate for our citizens directly.

For example, following former Minister Dion's meeting last September with his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Zarif, and through the involvement of Italy and Oman, countries that both have diplomatic relations with Iran, Dr. Homa Hoodfar was released and returned to Canada. This case shows how diplomacy and constructive engagement are the only ways in which Canada can effectively represent and protect its dual nationals. In fact, in a panel discussion in Toronto last week, Dr. Hoodfar herself stated that she supports the re-establishment of diplomatic relations between Canada and Iran. Having an embassy in Iran, she said, “is an important factor for protecting dual nationals and also for having a channel of communication with Iran,” adding, “I want to add my voice to those who support having an embassy in Iran.” Dr. Hoodfar emphasized that if the Canadian embassy was open at the time of her arrest, it could have helped to resolve her case more quickly.

We still have a Canadian-linked prisoner in Iran, Saeed Malekpour, a Canadian permanent resident who has been in prison for the past eight years. Through re-engagement with Iran, Canadian diplomats will have the opportunity to directly advocate for Mr. Malekpour's release with the Iranian authorities.

Pouyan Tabasinejad, our policy chair, will now talk about the effect of sanctions and lack of diplomacy on Canada's businesses and its international standing.

Pouyan Tabasinejad, Policy Chair, Iranian Canadian Congress: Thank you for having us here. I'll just pick up where Bijan left off.

Sanctions and the lack of diplomacy have not only harmed Iranian-Canadians, as my colleague stated, but also Canadian businesses at large, which have not been able to access Iran's untapped market of 80 million people.

To give you a sense of the amount of opportunity the Canadian economy is losing as a result of this policy, a 2014 study found that Canada lost between $850 million and $2.7 billion a year in exports as a result of these sanctions on Iran. In the meantime, Canada's G7 and NATO allies have been re-engaging with Iran both politically and economically since the JCPOA was put into effect.

As sanctions have been eased on Iran, many international businesses, especially European companies, have entered the Iranian market, while Canadian companies have been lagging behind because of our lack of relations and the uncertainties surrounding our sanctions regime, otherwise known as SEMA.

For example, in the first nine months of 2016 alone, the European Union's trade with Iran has increased by 63 per cent. Several major contracts have been signed over the past 12 months, including major deals with Boeing and Airbus, worth billions.

After Canada eased sanctions on Iran in February 2016, Canadian business leaders and representatives, including the President of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, have shown considerable optimism towards trade with Iran. There are opportunities for Canada in Iran in a variety of sectors, including aerospace, railroads, oil and gas, and technologies. These are all sectors where Canadian businesses excel and can benefit significantly from trade with Iran.

This fact has been corroborated by Canadian companies themselves. By way of example, in an interview with the Canadian press in October 2016, the CEO of Bombardier said that the Montreal-based plane and train maker sees opportunities to sell rail services and jets, including the C Series airliners, to Iran.

Canada must encourage its businesses to enter the Iranian market rather than legislating against these activities with Bill S-219, which only increases uncertainties and puts our companies at legal risk. Re-engagement with Iran will not only benefit Canadian businesses, but it will also increase Canada's influence in the world.

As we enter, perhaps, the most challenging international environment since the Cold War with the election of the new U.S. administration, our country has the unique opportunity to position itself as a global leader by playing a part in solving perhaps some of the most important challenges in international relations today; namely, nuclear non-proliferation and stability in the Middle East. By pursuing a path of diplomacy and engagement with Iran, Canada can position itself as an unbiased diplomatic broker in the world and gain influence beyond that accorded to it by its status as a middle power.

In sum, we repeat that this bill is nothing but an attempt to derail the process of re-engagement. It is endorsing the same failed policies which have harmed Iranian-Canadians, Canadian businesses and our international standing as an impartial promoter of dialogue.

We therefore ask honourable senators to reject this bill in it is entirety and safeguard the interests of Canadians and Canadian businesses, and build Canada's international standing and advance the cause of world peace.

The Acting Chair: Thank you, Mr. Ahmadi and Mr. Tabasinejad, for your presentations.

Senator Housakos: Thank you to the witnesses for being with us today.

First and foremost, I want to highlight the tremendous contribution and success of the Iranian-Canadian community in Canada. We're very fortunate to have the few hundred thousand Canadians of Iranian descent who have made a great contribution in science, academia and business. They are Iran's loss and our gain.

I listened attentively to your comments. Before I get into my question, I want to highlight my point of view that, as far as I'm concerned, the biggest harm to the Iranian-Canadian community is an extremist Islamic fundamentalist government in Iran.

Canada has had a long history of engagement with nations and individuals that don't share the same values that we do, but in this particular instance, you're talking about a government that has systematically abused and disregarded fundamental human rights. The list is long. They have no respect for the fundamental rule of law. They have continuously been belligerent in a region that is already explosive in supporting state-run terrorism. They have called for the destruction of the democratic State of Israel on an ongoing basis.

When you take that into context, where is the silver lining you see of the potential between us engaging in a diplomatic relationship with a country that has shown no impetus to respect the rules and way of life that we respect, not to mention the fact that they don't believe in fundamental freedom of religion? We cherish fundamental freedoms in this country.

You talk about the economic risks, the economic losses to the Iranian-Canadian business community and our business community at large, but where do you draw the line? How far do we go in compromising the beliefs and fundamental principles of human rights and other fundamental rules of law that we respect as Canadians? Where do we trade in our principles for commercial gain?

We do it on a regular basis, I agree. There are a number of countries that don't share our values, yet we engage in trade. Where do you place that line with Iran and Canada?

Mr. Ahmadi: Thank you, honourable senator, for your question and also for your remarks recognizing the contributions of the Iranian-Canadian community to Canada's multicultural society.

That's a great question. Honestly, if we only talk to those people who agree with us, agree with our values, look at the world from our perspective and respect those values, we will end up talking to very few countries. Let's not forget that even during the Cold War we maintained our relations with the Soviet Union.

Having diplomatic relations, as former Minister Stéphane Dion had repeatedly mentioned before as well during his time, it does not mean that Canada and Iran agree with each other.

There are concerns, as you mentioned, regarding regional policies and human rights issues and by no means are we talking about compromising our values. What we're talking about is that engagement is a better way, is a better strategy to address these concerns. Whether it is about human rights issues or regional policies of Iran that we do not agree with, it is better to re-engage with Iran diplomatically to create a channel of communication with that government so that we can sit directly across the table from them and talk to them about these disagreements that we have.

Senator Housakos: I appreciate that. As I said, engagement is fundamental, but you have to have check marks along the way. So when you set those check marks from a Canadian perspective, and we're a Canadian parliamentary committee, where do you draw that line? We are going to show goodwill by engaging, but what are our expectations and what are the timelines of those expectations, when it comes to issues of democracy, human rights, of imprisoning prisoners in Iran without due process, not to mention just brutal physical abuse of people who oppose the regime?

Time and time again you see international figures and Iranians who stand up for fundamental human rights and freedom of speech in Iran being persecuted and tortured. It's hard to engage with a nation that is as brutal as that. So if we start the process of engagement, and the government has already taken that position, you as a Canadian, especially of Iranian descent, where do you draw the line? What are your expectations from Iran's point of view?

Mr. Ahmadi: Our expectation is first for our government to change the policy of the past, which was to isolate Iran and not to talk to them at all, and to re-engage with Iran. The alternative is to maintain the status quo. That approach, that strategy, it's now evident that it hasn't produced any positive results with respect to human rights, with respect to regional disagreements that we have with Iran.

So what we expect our government to do is to re-engage with Iran. The issue with this bill is this bill will block that opportunity of re-engagement with Iran. So instead of imposing, through parliamentary restrictions, these bureaucratic and legal complexities to a process that is already difficult with Iran, we better leave this with our diplomats in Global Affairs Canada to allow them to talk directly to Iran and actually put in place those benchmarks and conditions that you are talking about, and ask for those assurances and reassurances that we need about safety of our diplomats and our dual nationals, about all these issues.

These issues have to be addressed in these negotiations directly by our diplomats instead of specific restrictions imposed on these negotiations by Parliament. This bill will impose these restrictions and will only derail the negotiations that are already ongoing.

 [Translation]

Senator Saint-Germain: I must join Senator Housakos in congratulating you for your vitality as a community, and I too want to welcome you here this morning. I heard what you have to say, and have been touched by the example of the young Iranian student’s meager savings of $700 being frozen due to the abusive over-application of the rules. This example, which, regrettably, is a real one, is not due to the sanctions imposed by Canada, but rather to the fact that Canadian institutions and organizations are ill-informed. I think the issues here are related to a need for better information regarding the presence of the Iranian community, and Iranian-Canadians. Could this problem not have been fixed by something other than legislation? In other words, the example you give is, in my opinion, not related to the legislation. That would be my comment on that.

As for the second case, regarding the diplomatic channels and resuming trade, practically speaking, the issue at this time is to find a solution that would ensure that Iranian-Canadians and Iranians in Canada do not have sanctions imposed on them. Do you not believe that diplomacy, in this respect, is very limited?

[English]

Mr. Tabasinejad: I will answer the banking question. Your question was, if I understand correctly, whether Canadian institutions are merely misinformed. That's the main issue here.

We have been in contact with Canadian banks about why exactly they're rejecting Iranians. It's happening on a daily basis. We're talking about Canadians who have been here almost all their lives and they're still having these issues and for very small sums of money.

There is obviously the issue of misinformation, and they don't know, unfortunately, exactly what the rules are. The problem is there is a lot of uncertainty. From the bank's point of view, it's about risk, legal and financial risk, which is tied together.

We believe that this bill introduces more uncertainty. As the banks might be reconsidering allowing Iranian-Canadians to be banked again, reversing the process of de-banking, this bill introduces more uncertainty and more risk from that perspective. It's not about human rights. It's about business and money, and it's all about a legal risk from them. So from our perspective this bill introduces more legal risk for Iranian-Canadians and opening them up to more discrimination by banks.

Mr. Ahmadi: I will try to answer your second question. I have to repeat what I mentioned about the previous question. There are two ways in front of us: One is to re-engage with Iran and through diplomatic means and channels we address the concerns about dual nationals, about the human rights conditions in Iran and about disagreements over Iran's regional policies. The second approach is the approach that we have been taking about in the previous years under a former government that was established to isolate Iran and not to talk to Iran and not to have any diplomatic dialogue.

Our European allies are following the first route. The United States, for the nuclear agreement, followed the first path and talked to Iran and that resulted in the nuclear agreement. There were the sanctions, but if there were no long-term negotiations between the P5+1 countries, it would not have resulted in the JCPOA, the international agreement. Therefore, what we are suggesting here is that the only path that will result — because we tested the other path, the path of trying to isolate and not talk. So we have to give the other path now a chance as well and see how that will help. We believe, based on what our EU partners are doing, that we will have better and more positive results.

If I may add one more thing, it's about Iran's human rights record. It is significant that we do not ignore completely any improvement, very slow but promising improvements and steps that have been taken by modern factions in Iran towards improving human rights conditions in the country. Unfortunately, many times these small steps are being ignored.

The proposal of a bill of citizens' right by President Rouhani and ongoing efforts in the Iranian Parliament to remove the death penalty for drug-related crimes are examples of attempts by moderate forces to improve respect for human rights in Iran. These improvements have been confirmed by Ahmed Shaheed, who was the Special Rapporteur for Human Rights at the United Nations. Therefore, if we allow the path of diplomatic engagement, if we give it a chance, it may result in better improvements. We will have a chance to sit across from Iranian authorities and address the differences and the concerns that we have on different issues.

Senator Saint-Germain: A small question: Will it be enough? Can we add other means? If it's not legislation, it might be something else. In the meantime, people will continue to have their human rights infringed. Isn't there more that can be done at the same time?

Mr. Ahmadi: First of all, let's not forget that we are already doing a major action with respect to human rights, which we have been doing for several years now, and that is through the UN path, basically addressing some of the human rights concerns with Iran through the UN resolution that Canada introduces.

However, if that is not completed or complemented with negotiations, with engagement and talks, it will not bring a positive result. It will just be an action in the UN, and then there is no talk by Canada with Iran to ask for improvements so that the issues raised in that UN resolution can be addressed. That, I believe, is the next action.

However, the bill in front of us is not about these actions. It's about legal complexities attaching more conditions to SEMA sanctions, which — and this is a very important point — may actually make us non-compliant with UN Resolution 2231, which was passed in the United Nations Security Council after the JCPOA was signed.

So it is only asking for conditions to be added to those SEMA sanctions, and this bill will essentially derail any path of re-engagement, and that's our main issue. We do not have disagreements about benchmarks or addressing human rights concerns, but these issues can be addressed through diplomatic means and through Global Affairs Canada instead of through restrictions from Parliament.

Another important issue I would like to address is that we believe our parliamentarians should be very concerned about the precedent or kind of double standard that this bill will create. The conditions or issues that are mentioned even in the name of this bill, or under the specific provisions, are actually issues and concerns that you can find in many other countries besides Iran.

In the region, let's bring up the example of Saudi Arabia. We actually closed, I believe, a $15 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia.

Therefore, it's very dangerous and risky to put together a bill that other countries with which we have friendly relations — not only relations, but friendly relations — meet some of these violations and concerns that are in the bill. If we actually want to pursue this bill, I believe we have to rewrite it and include all those other countries besides Iran that meet the same issues. Otherwise it is a double standard; it will set a precedent that in the future we may actually be required to put forward the same kind of bill and impose the same kinds of restrictions on other countries as well.

I say again that we have friendly relations with many of these countries; it's not only that we have diplomatic relations with them. Here we are trying to establish relations, not just diplomatic relations, with Iran. Thank you.

Senator Woo: Thank you very much for your presentations. I'm from British Columbia, and Vancouver in particular. I live on the North Shore, where there's a very large community of Iranian-Canadians, so this bill is an issue that they will be watching very closely.

I want to make a clarification and see if you agree. Many of the problems that Iranian-Canadians face currently, of course, have to do with the current implementation of the SEMA regulations. This bill is an addition to those regulations; it increases the number of prohibitions and the number of identified organizations that would be affected. We can't solve all of the problems that you have identified, even if we reject this bill in its entirety. Just a point of clarification.

I want to get to the nub of the issue. I'm a big fan of engagement, and your central point is this: If we pass this bill, we will jeopardize — in fact, we will jettison, we will totally sink the ship of engagement with Iran. I want you to tell us in more detail and with more reasoning why you believe this is the case.

Can we not walk and chew gum at the same time? Is it not possible for us to poke the Iranians in the eye with this bill and still have them come to us and say, “Yeah, we'll open an embassy both ways and we'll continue to have this path of diplomatic re-engagement”?

Mr. Ahmadi: Thank you for your good question, Senator Woo. We actually received a couple of communications from your constituents from British Columbia as well. There's a large Iranian-Canadian population in British Columbia, and especially in Vancouver, and they were concerned about this bill specifically.

With regard to your question, I would like to mention a couple of points. Maybe some of them I'm repeating, but I will make some clarifications.

The ongoing negotiations are difficult and there are already barriers in front of these negotiations, based on public information that is available from both governments. On one side, Canada, we have concerns. Specifically, if we want to reopen our mission in Iran, we have concerns about the safety of our diplomats. On the side of Iran, this past week the spokesperson for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said that they are open to re-engage with Canada, but they have concerns about the judicial immunity of their diplomats and any diplomatic asset that they need to bring to Canada, for example, to reopen the embassy or a consular office.

This bill sends the wrong signal, and that's the main issue. It sends the wrong signal to these negotiations. Simply, the message to Iran is that instead of trying to resolve the barriers that already exist — these barriers already exist through some of the restrictions imposed by, I believe, a previous Parliament. Instead of that, we are imposing further and additional barriers. That is one issue.

The other issue, which I touched on briefly, is that attaching these additional sanctions that are suggested in Bill S-219 will make our SEMA sanctions non-compliant with UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which is another problem that Iran will have with this bill. I can get into more detail about that if you would like.

The third point is that I wish we had more leverage in these negotiations with Iran, but we should not overestimate our leverage with Iran. If Canada had more leverage, we would be able to impose more restrictions or ask for more, but we don't have it here.

The international community is engaging with Iran, politically and economically. Iran is doing business with our European allies, so they are not dependent on business with Canada. Therefore, they can afford to continue with the status quo without relations. In fact, I warn that we should expect Iran to suspend negotiations if this bill is passed, because they can afford to actually play this a bit tough and basically make an example that if these restrictions happen, we do not want to engage with a country.

Senator Cordy: Thank you very much for being here. I think I quoted you yesterday at the meeting regarding a letter, when it was actually written by Maziar Sairafi, who at the end said, “For your information, here's the name of the president,” and I said the letter was from you. But basically, you've said the same things that he said.

Thank you very much for being here. It's helpful to hear from the Canadian-Iranian community and the ramifications that you feel would be brought on them if this bill is in fact passed.

Our witness yesterday made an excellent point in that there's a big difference between the Iranian people and the Iranian government, which supports terrorism and certainly commits human rights violations, but don't extend that to punish all the Iranian-Canadians or all the Iranian people. Thank you very much for what you've told us.

Our witness yesterday, who was personally tortured in Iran, also felt that closing of the embassies was very harmful to helping people in Iran, so she certainly made the same point that you've made.

Will this bill make it more difficult for Iranian-Canadians? You've already said it will block re-engagement. You've already said that Iran already has dealings with a lot of other countries, so if Canada is left out, then they will not get that concerned about it, but it will certainly hurt Iranian-Canadians. So how do we find a solution — and this is a follow-up to Senator Woo's question — to the human rights violations by the Government of Iran without causing difficulties for the people of Iran and for Iranian-Canadians?

I'll just ask another question. This committee dealt a few weeks ago with the Magnitsky bill, which was drawn up because of an incident in Russia, but the bill itself is not specific to Russia. It actually talks about human rights violations overall whereas this bill is specific only to Iran.

Do you feel that the Magnitsky bill would, in fact, cover any of the people in Iran who are committing violations?

Mr. Ahmadi: Unfortunately, I'm not aware of the details of the — I believe it's called the Corrupt Foreign Public Officials Bill. I'm not fully aware of all the details, but again the main concern we have with this bill, Bill S-219, regardless of each of the provisions — and there are actually concerns with each of the provisions, at least some of them — however, in entirety our issue is that this will block re-engagement.

If we cannot re-engage with Iran, we have to continue with the status quo, with the strategy that the former government implemented, and that strategy definitely did not address the concerns that, for example, the witness yesterday brought up and all the concerns about the human rights conditions in Iran and regional policy disagreements.

Another issue I would like to add is that a lot of times they say that the Iranian government and the Iranian people are different. Well, these re-engagements, these relations are between the governments. There are ways, through cultural exchanges, through university and research exchanges, for people to communicate, but even those, when there is no at least diplomatic relationship, at least diplomatic communication between those two countries, those areas are affected significantly as well.

So at least there has to be some level of engagement between these two governments so that then people can actually talk to each other more and engage with each other more.

We have many Iranian students here, not dual nationals, but Iranian national students here in Canada. Those are good ways to engage with people of Iran. Cultural exchanges are very good ways to engage with Iran, with the people of Iran, but there has to be some level of diplomatic engagement with Iran.

With respect to one issue that you mentioned about human rights, we believe that Prime Minister Trudeau, when he travelled to China, the approach that he was talking about — I don't remember the exact quote — in China about addressing the issues of human rights is the path forward, and not to address not only about Iran, but about all countries, Saudi Arabia, other countries, many countries that have human rights violation issues.

First of all, I believe that we need to address this double standard because it actually hurts our opportunity and our power in influencing change. So that's one thing.

Prime Minister Trudeau said it very well, that we have to recognize that there are human rights issues even in Canada and then communicate our human rights concerns with these countries: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and many other countries that have human rights violations.

So we believe in that approach. We believe that engagement and communicating these concerns are the best way moving forward.

Senator Cordy: I wonder if you could expand a little bit. You touched on that if this bill is passed it wouldn't be in compliance with a UN resolution. I don't remember the number of the UN resolution, but I wonder if you would expand on that a little bit.

Mr. Ahmadi: Sure. Remaining sanctions on Iran under SEMA, according to information from Global Affairs Canada, are aimed at restricting Iran's access to sensitive goods from Canada, especially with respect to nuclear technology and the development of ballistic missiles.

Based on information provided from Global Affairs, these restrictions are based on UN-Iran regulations. After UN Security Council Resolution 2231 approved the implementation of JCPOA, Canada followed its international obligations and modified its sanctions on Iran in February 2016.

This issue was actually brought up by some of the witnesses before as well. Canada was not involved in JCPOA negotiations between P5+1 countries; however, there is an issue, and that is the nuclear agreement was confirmed by UN Security Council Resolution 2231 in July 2015. As it states in the resolution:

Member states are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations to accept and carry out the Security Council's decisions.

UNSC calls upon all member states, regional organizations to implement, basically, the provisions of JCPOA and refrain from actions that undermine implementation of commitments under the JCPOA.

Whether the remaining sanctions, even those that right now exist, even these remaining sanctions, whether or not they are fully in compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 2231 is a matter that may actually require further investigation. I know there is a review of SEMA, I believe it was either completed recently or is still ongoing, and it may require legal experts to look at it. However, it's evident that based on information from the Government of Canada that each of the remaining sanctions under SEMA are based on requirements of the UN Security Council decision about nuclear or ballistic missile technology. Therefore, additional conditions that are proposed under Bill S-219 to be attached to SEMA sanctions are not compliant because they are not in UNSC 2231.

Senator Beyak: Thank you, gentlemen, for being here. I want to say that I share all of Senator Housakos's comments about the Iranian people. The people are completely different from the government, and I think every Canadian recognizes that.

A prominent Liberal, Warren Kinsella, wrote an amazing column two days ago about the anti-refugee, anti-immigrant sentiment that's sweeping the planet and how we have to have objective debates. I would encourage everyone to read his column. It says we need to talk; we need to not make it political. Let's be people.

He said there are three questions that we have to ask, and I would like to ask your organization, with full disclosure and no controversy, do you want sharia law in Canada, yes or no? Do you believe in the equality of men and women in Canada under the Charter, yes or no? And do you believe in the State of Israel? He says it's imperative that Canadians, two thirds of them, want us to be more vigilant in who we talk to, how we associate with nations who support terror and have human rights problems, and whether we want those values to come to Canada.

Please read the column. And those answers are a yes or no. I understand sharia law, I understand the Charter, and I support the State of Israel. So your answers are a yes or no. Thank you.

Mr. Ahmadi: Could you please repeat the three questions? I want to write them down.

Senator Beyak: Do you believe in sharia law in Canada? Do you believe in the equality of men and women in Canada under our Charter? And do you support the State of Israel? Thank you.

Mr. Ahmadi: Honourable senator, this is a very surprising question that has nothing to do with the proposed bill, but I will gladly answer that.

I believe this is not an issue even for our organization to respond. It's a very personal question. Our organization believes in the law that we have in Canada, so it's not sharia law. We believe in the Canadian legal system and Canadian law.

About equality of women and men, definitely, there is no question about that. It is actually in the constitution of our organization that we believe in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It's in the constitution of our organization, the Iranian-Canadian Congress. And your third question was supporting Israel?

Senator Beyak: Yes.

Mr. Ahmadi: In what respect do you mean that question? That's a very general question.

Senator Beyak: As a state, the State of Israel.

Mr. Ahmadi: The State of Israel is recognized by international organizations, United Nations. We do not have any agenda or mission to even question that. Do I as a person support all the policies of the current Government of Israel? I cannot even say that about the Government of Canada, my government, that I support all the policies of the current Government of Canada, while I agree with many of them, and definitely I will answer this as an individual, not as our organization.

I do not agree with some of the policies of the current Government of Israel, but your question is about the State of Israel. There is no question about that. Yes, the State of Israel is recognized under international law.

Senator Beyak: Thank you. It was relevant, chairman, to the bill that we're looking at today because of the feelings of Canadians in Mr. Kinsella's column, that two thirds of Canadians want us to be more vigilant about the organizations that we speak with, whether their values and beliefs are shared by Canadians and whether this kind of a bill helps or hurts the belief of the people that we are talking to.

Senator Marwah: Thank you again for coming to speak to us. You certainly provided a different perspective, particularly from the view of Iranian-Canadians.

I have two questions, so maybe I'll just go over one first. What percentage of Iranian-Canadians does your organization represent? Would there be another point of view amongst other Iranian-Canadians?

Second, in recent periods it's obvious at least to me that Iran has been moving on a continuum to re-engage with the world and re-engage with the West in particular, maybe not the world but certainly re-engage with the West. You are a lot closer to what's happening on the ground in Iran. As Iranian-Canadians, do you see a shift in human rights? You mentioned some very modest shifts in human rights, but do you see other shifts in their rhetoric, in their recognition of rule of law? Do you see any other changes in whichever direction or do you see no change?

Mr. Ahmadi: About your first question, same as all different communities, our community is not a monolithic community as well. There are different perspectives and different views. The Iranian Canadian Congress is the political advocacy organization in the Canadian-Iranian community that aims to advance the interests of the community. There is no way for us to say exactly by percentage point what is the percentage of people we represent, but we can say that we are one of the major organizations and the only organization that works with respect to advocacy for the rights of Canadian-Iranians in Canada.

There was a parliamentary petition that we prepared and submitted to the House of Commons. A copy of it is with, I believe, the clerk of the committee. The copy can be provided to you. That petition is about the specific issue of re-engaging with Iran, re-establishing relations, and it outlines these issues we talked about of how the policy of isolation has affected our community.

We received nearly 16,000 signatures, and that put us in the top 10 electronic petitions of the House of Commons, all of them that exist on the website of the Parliament of Canada today. Those signatures are from all across Canada, so that shows how this request, how this action has huge support in our community. A large number of Iranian-Canadians support this policy, and we have been able to reach out to them and ask them to take action regarding this issue.

There was a second question, I believe, as well.

Mr. Tabasinejad: We also undertook a series of open consultations with members or leaders of the community on non-profit organizations, academics, et cetera. What we found — and it spurred us on to make this petition — is that in every single consultation this issue was the first issue, as far as they were concerned.

We didn't make this petition willy-nilly. We wanted to make sure this was something that was supported by our community and by our constituents. What we found consistently when we talked to large numbers of Iranian-Canadians is that they supported this action. I think the number of signatures of this petition received in the end kind of speaks for itself, because this was a petition that was only sponsored through our own networks, Iranian networks, and it's more or less self-explanatory.

The Acting Chair: Thank you. I would like to let the members of the committee know that the petition to the government from the organizations represented by Mr. Ahmadi and Mr. Tabasinejad is available to us here only in English. We are supposed to have bilingual copies so that we can distribute to all members. Members, if you want it, let us know and then the page will give you the petition.

Senator Ataullahjan: I want to get back to what Senator Housakos said and your response to him where you say that we should let the diplomats and the bureaucrats handle the talks that are going on.

As parliamentarians, there are things that we can say and we can do that the diplomats and the bureaucrats might not be able to. Is it my understanding that we should start talking to Iran without having any conditions attached? I agree with you that we should be raising those issues with countries that we're friends with who have similar issues, because we are Canada and known throughout the world for our stance on human rights. Is that the sense I'm getting from you?

Mr. Ahmadi: We believe that this bill will basically block any opportunity of re-engagement with Iran. That's what I have repeated a couple of times, and the reason is that is the main reason why we are against this bill and why we're requesting you to reject this bill. It will not allow us to move forward anymore and to re-engage with Iran.

With respect to the conditions, the Government of Canada, Global Affairs Canada, they have the powers and the authority needed under current law and regulations to address the issues, to bring up these concerns that we have with Iran in diplomatic conversations. They do not need any more restrictions. There is no special authority that this bill is providing to the Government of Canada that they are, for example, even asking for it or that they need to be able to re-engage with Iran.

So step one is to re-engage with Iran, to communicate these concerns that we have with them. We have very capable diplomats. They have the authority. They have the power they need under current regulations and laws, and they will be able to address these issues in these negotiations.

Senator Ataullahjan: In regard to Senator Beyak's question about sharia law, don't you feel it's a dead issue? As a Muslim, I don't know anyone who wants sharia law, especially the women. We are very happy with the laws of the land. In the community, I don't think there's that conversation taking place anywhere. That's my sense. I don't know what your sense is. I just want to put that on the record.

Mr. Ahmadi: Did we say anything that was about sharia law that brought up this question?

Senator Ataullahjan: No, Senator Beyak had asked about sharia law. I want to put it on the record that, as a Muslim, it's a dead conversation. I don't hear anyone asking for sharia law in Canada. Is that your experience also?

Mr. Ahmadi: That is our experience. Our organization, we have to note, is a non-religious organization, so we do not get engaged in conversations and issues that are related to religion. Especially in the Iranian-Canadian community that we interact with, we do not see any sort of appetite for sharia law and for this issue.

Mr. Tabasinejad: I'm not saying that there was any ill intention behind the question, but it makes me uncomfortable when these types of questions are asked from people that come from Muslim communities. It comes from certain strains of Islamophobia, et cetera. It makes me uncomfortable when such questions are asked.

Senator Beyak: I would like to respond. I just wanted to respond to that, because I agree with you. I have three best friends who are Muslim, a woman and three men, four of them all together, who told me those three questions are absolutely pertinent to the discussions that we have to have in Canada, the objective discussion, because there is a huge commitment to sharia law still in Canada. It went to the Government of Ontario just a couple of years ago. They voted on it, and they say the reformed Muslims who want to come to Canada and be Canadians don't want sharia law in Canada. So it's a very important question. I'm very pleased that Senator Ataullahjan put it on the record. Thank you, senator.

Senator Bovey: I want to thank you very much for coming and for your presentation. I have to say I was pleased to hear you talk about cultural and university exchanges. It won't be a surprise to anybody in this room that I feel those are very beneficial and indeed Universities Canada has been here in Ottawa this week. Many of them I spoke to spoke of the importance of global exchanges like this.

That said, I want to take our question and flip it another way. You talked a bit about the human rights issues. If Bill S-219 was approved, what do you think the sanctions might really achieve? Would they serve to improve the situation for citizens in Iran? If you could address this, I think it would give the other side to today's conversation.

Mr. Ahmadi: If this bill is enacted, as we said, we believe that the path of re-engagement with Iran — that's the first achievement — will be blocked and most likely we will not be able to re-engage with Iran.

In terms of sanctions, we know that sanctions are only effective when there is international consensus on any issue that that sanction is addressing. Therefore, even if we implement these sanctions, there is no international consensus at this point to impose sanctions on Iran. Therefore, as one of the previous witnesses in favour of this bill even mentioned, these are symbolic sanctions being proposed.

I do not believe it's only symbolic. I believe there actually might be an intention to block the path of re-engagement by bringing up these bureaucratic complexities and legal complexities, and it will basically block the path of re-engagement.

The other issues that will be created are the problems that have been created for Iranian-Canadians. Pouyan, my colleague, talked about the banking issue, about the access to consular services, both here for Iranian-Canadian dual nationals and for Canadians who travel to Iran to have access to consular services at times of need. If that path of re-engagement is blocked, we will not be able to provide the services and these issues will remain for our community.

With respect to the issue of engagement between people, universities and cultural exchanges, I will relate a personal experience I had. I was talking to a charitable organization in Canada that does work with different countries. As sanctions are now eased, I was trying to convince them maybe there can be some cooperation with charitable organizations in Iran. Many charitable and non-profit organizations are active in Iran. Iran has a very strong civil society that is active, and it has been around for a very long time, probably 100 years or more. The civil society has been active; the civic society has been engaged.

The charitable organization simply told me that because of all these restrictions that exist right now, even though those sanctions might not be specifically on humanitarian issues, the cost, the complexity of engaging with Iran is too high at this point so maybe we have to revisit it at a later time. So these are the issues and problems.

Mr. Tabasinejad: To answer your question directly about the effect of sanctions on Iranians themselves, I think most observers would agree it has been nothing but disastrous for Iranian civilians. It might constitute a human rights violation, and I'm citing a 2013 report by the International Institute for Peace, Justice and Human Rights that said that sanctions have disastrous effects on Iranian citizens and violated the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Access to medicine was reduced; prices went up very high to the point that it was unaffordable for large segments of the population. Just disastrous, horrible implications for Iranians, so we shouldn't fool ourselves in any sense that this is good for Iranian people because it's not.

Senator Cools: I would thank the witnesses for appearing before us, especially for the clarity of mind as well as their remarkable objectivity and dispassionate dialogue in the face of a bill which could be described as offensive.

I hate to tell colleagues, but I have no intention to support it, none whatsoever, and I'm not open to persuasion on this point.

I would like you to know, gentlemen, that I was brought to the Senate by Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Trudeau the elder. Like William Pitt the elder and William Pitt the younger, there is Trudeau the younger. I was brought here by the elder, and I had the opportunity of knowing this man and have deep respect for him.

Whatever his failings may have been and whatever his shortcomings were, it does not matter. The world viewed Mr. Trudeau as an agent of international dialogue, and Mr. Trudeau personally believed that unless you keep doors open and keep conversations going, you will not be able to influence anyone, any other country.

I'm a lot older than you, and I'm older than most of you here, but I remember very clearly when Mr. Trudeau broke the barriers and opened the doors with China, and that was a huge issue at the time. Many were afraid and shocked. Maybe the Red Communists were going to come and take over Canada or something, but it succeeded and China has taken a good place, I believe, in the world.

I want to be crystal clear that I disagree with the previous government's termination of diplomatic relationships with Iran. I thought it was short-sighted and ill-considered, and I wish it had never happened.

Diplomacy is a strange animal. They say money is a coward; it flees in the face of challenges, but not diplomacy. Diplomacy is supposed to be there like a steady hand ready to reach out to the moment when there is an opportunity to dialogue because dialogue, at the end of the day, will avoid disaster and even wars.

This bill is troubling. When we get into the details of studying, that will become a lot clearer, but the major point I want to make on the bill is that this bill is not properly the subject of a statute of Canada.

The Acting Chair: Question, please. We have two more senators.

Senator Cools: Senator, I must tell you, I don't have to ask questions. Committee meetings and these hearings are not question and answer periods. They are for commentary as well, so I encourage you to be generous. Thank you.

I wanted to make those points to you. The Parliament of Canada is the Parliament of Canada, not the Parliament of the world. And in our constitutional system, these decisions are the exclusive purview of what we call the Royal Prerogative powers. This means that the foreign minister — the King or the Queen's Minister of Foreign Affairs, never mind the change to Global Affairs, they're all called foreign ministers — trenched on that prerogative and was, quite frankly, out of order, in my view.

I hope I haven't spoken too strongly, and I hope I haven't shocked some of you, but we must make it our business to stay on the ground that is ours, and our business. Our jurisdiction as the Parliament of Canada, is purely domestic. The Parliament of Canada has no jurisdiction internationally, and these bills are coming before us seeking international jurisdiction. We can't give it to them because we don't have it to give to them.

Senator Dawson: I was a member of Parliament with Trudeau the elder, so I totally agree with his approach. I agree with the witness that there is a double standard with this bill. If we start naming Iran, if we were to name every country with which we have questions of conflict, we'd have a long list. That being said, that's more a question not to you but to the chair.

 [Translation]

Basically, I have the electronic petition, because I asked for it. As far as I’m concerned, when a private organization appears before a committee, it does not show a lack of respect if its documents are distributed in one language only. However, when it’s a government organization, we must insist on bilingualism.

I do not want to speak on behalf of all of my francophone colleagues, but, for me, distributing a document can still be done even if the document is in one language only, when all committee members consent to it. I believe that you would have received consent in this case, especially since we are talking about an online petition which is already available on the parliamentary Website in French. I simply wanted to make this observation, because we often miss out on information. Honestly, we’re talking about a petition with 15,000 names, which is relevant to our discussion.

I also wanted to reiterate the fact that there is a double standard, and I find it worrisome that some people are going on about all of the countries for which we would think about adopting legislation. As Senator Cools said, that lies outside of Parliament’s mandate.

The Acting Chair: Thank you, Senator Dawson. We have taken your comments under advisement.

 [English]

Mr. Ahmadi: I agree with you. We printed the electronic petitions. They're available on the website of the Parliament of Canada in both official languages. My assistant was printing it. She was under the belief that it would print both languages, however when I brought it here, I realized that it's only in English and not available in French. However, I fully agree with you that it has to be available and has to be provided in both official languages. Thank you.

The Acting Chair: Thank you, sir.

Senator Gold: This committee has heard evidence that individuals supported by the government or its institutions have engaged in serious human rights violations. We have had this evidence.

We've also heard that, as a government, we need to engage and talk. Indeed, one of the victims of human rights violations was of the same view before this committee. Should Canada have the tools to take action against individuals who may have perpetrated serious human rights abuses against their citizens, Iranian citizens, in areas like their ability to come to Canada or visas to come to Canada or how we might deal with their assets, whether real property or other in Canada?

You'll appreciate I'm asking a question that is not directly addressed by the legislation. I want to know whether your organization, which represents Iranian Canadians, believes that those individuals in Iran who may have committed gross human rights violations should be immune or free from any possibility that Canada would limit their access to the country or the use of their assets once here.

Mr. Ahmadi: Thank you for your question. First of all, there is already another bill in front of this committee which addresses this question specifically. We're not aware of the details. We didn't study the details of that bill and we do not have the legal expertise that is required to say, for example, that international law already has some authority with respect to bringing people who have committed serious human rights violations to justice. There are already international laws with respect to that. But we do not have the legal expertise to comment on this issue that much.

I believe that the issue should be with the details. Any bill that includes your suggestion, we must look at the details. Is what we’re asking for evidence-based? Or is it only based on reports from a couple of non-profit organizations? If it's evidence-based and fact-based and if those actions, sanctions or bans, et cetera, are not going to affect the people instead of those individuals, then the answer can be yes. As I said, it really needs to be studied with all the details before we can really comment and provide our opinion.

Senator Housakos: From the beginning, throughout the process, I think a couple of senators have tried to get an answer to this question. You have not given one.

Your argument about the importance of engagement is understood. Can you tell me what your benchmark is? At what point do you decide to disengage with a party or a state when things are not obviously heading towards the direction that you think, that happy medium? When you engage with someone, you want to meet at a certain point. Can you define that point? At what point do you disengage?

Mr. Ahmadi: I understood your question completely, but I believe we need to think about that double standard with respect to your question. If we really want to talk only to people we agree with and meet our benchmarks and our values, then we have to disengage and break our relations with many of the countries that have serious human rights violation issues. That will be the first step if we want to follow the strategy that you're suggesting or the strategy that the former government implemented.

The benchmarks have to be decided by our foreign affairs ministry and our diplomats. In the negotiations, they will be able to set these benchmarks. Our European allies are already talking to Iran about human rights. They are having these conversations. Canada will have an opportunity to join our allies in these conversations about human rights and raise our concerns with them. We believe that is a better path instead of the status quo of not being engaged with Iran.

The Acting Chair: Thank you for your presentations Mr. Ahmadi and Mr. Tabasinejad. You can see that the honourable senators are interested in this subject. I thank all senators. The meeting is adjourned.

Kind Attention: Honourable Members of the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade

Date: March 28, 2017

Honourable Senators,

On Wednesday March 29^th, 2017 the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade is expected to commence clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-219, the Non-Nuclear Sanctions Against Iran Act. As has been brought to your attention in a previous letter by my colleague, several Canadian experts who have requested to present their views regarding S-219 were not provided the opportunity to testify, while the steering committee decided to invite 3 witnesses from a single American organization that has officially endorsed Bill S-219, the Foundation for Defence of Democracies (FDD). Unfortunately, the Committee Chair has rejected our request to delay clause-by-clause consideration to allow for the invitation of Canadian experts who have requested to present their opinions about this bill. With this in mind, on behalf of the Iranian Canadian Congress (ICC) I would like to once again ask you to vote against the entirety of Bill S-219 during the Committee meeting scheduled for this Wednesday, March 29^th, 2017.

As we discussed during our presentation to the committee on Feb 9, 2017, the ICC is deeply concerned about the consequences of Bill S-219. We believe that the proposed bill should be rejected in its entirety as it contradicts the stated foreign policy of the federal government of Canada, imposes unnecessary limitations on the authorities of our Foreign Affairs Ministry, and blocks the path of reengagement between Canada and Iran.

In essence, Bill S-219 seeks to continue the same failed policies of economic and diplomatic disengagement from Iran that the previous Canadian government under former Prime Minister Harper endorsed and enacted. The ICC’s position on this Bill S-219 can be divided into five main points:

1. Sanctions and diplomatic disengagement from Iran harms Iranian-Canadians, a population estimated at 300,000 countrywide, by: depriving them of consular services, exposing them to further discrimination by banks, and depriving them of representation by Canadian officials in Iran.
2. Sanctions and diplomatic disengagement from Iran harm Canada’s economy; Canadian businesses have lost a figure estimated at between $1.18 and $4.69 billion in the years between 2010-2014 due to sanctions on Iran.
3. Bill S-219’s prevention of economic re-engagement with Iran puts Canada outside of the mainstream of the international community and our allies. Specific provisions of Bill S-219 may even constitute a violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 2231 which formalized the Iran nuclear agreement. The UNSC resolution clearly states that countries shall lift sanctions on Iran in return for Iran’s compliance with the terms of the JCPOA.
4. The Iranian Canadian Congress maintains its position that to advocate for human rights in Iran and around the world Canada must implement a policy of constructive engagement through diplomacy and dialogue.
5. Bill S-219 ignores the universal nature of human rights and our obligation as a member of the international community to be fair and unbiased in promoting respect for human rights around the world. Bill S-219 ignores gross violations of human rights by other countries in the region and around the world, some of whom have violated multiple United Nations resolutions. Respect for human rights is a universal obligation and should not be affected by political bias or become a currency for special interests and political maneuvering. Additionally, our parliamentarians should be aware that passing Bill S-219 will create a legislative precedent that may lead to subsequent bills for imposing similar sanctions on other human rights violators, some of which are Canada’s allies and trade partners in the region. This action will have significant and lasting impacts on Canada’s relations with its partners around the world and its impact has to be considered and analyzed thoroughly.

For the reasons outlined above, on behalf of the Iranian Canadian Congress I request that you vote against Bill S-219 during the next session of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, and support a motion for the Committee to recommend that the Senate not proceed with this bill.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Bijan Ahmadi

President

Date: March 28, 2017

As we discussed during our presentation to the committee on Feb 9, 2017, the ICC is deeply concerned about the consequences of Bill S-219. We believe that the proposed bill should be rejected in its entirety as it contradicts the stated foreign policy of the federal government of Canada, imposes unnecessary limitations on the authorities of our Foreign Affairs Ministry, and blocks the path of reengagement between Canada and Iran.

In essence, Bill S-219 seeks to continue the same failed policies of economic and diplomatic disengagement from Iran that the previous Canadian government under former Prime Minister Harper endorsed and enacted. The ICC’s position on this Bill S-219 can be divided into five main points:

1. Sanctions and diplomatic disengagement from Iran harms Iranian-Canadians, a population estimated at 300,000 countrywide, by: depriving them of consular services, exposing them to further discrimination by banks, and depriving them of representation by Canadian officials in Iran.
2. Sanctions and diplomatic disengagement from Iran harm Canada’s economy; Canadian businesses have lost a figure estimated at between $1.18 and $4.69 billion in the years between 2010-2014 due to sanctions on Iran.
3. Bill S-219’s prevention of economic re-engagement with Iran puts Canada outside of the mainstream of the international community and our allies. Specific provisions of Bill S-219 may even constitute a violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 2231 which formalized the Iran nuclear agreement. The UNSC resolution clearly states that countries shall lift sanctions on Iran in return for Iran’s compliance with the terms of the JCPOA.
4. The Iranian Canadian Congress maintains its position that to advocate for human rights in Iran and around the world Canada must implement a policy of constructive engagement through diplomacy and dialogue.
5. Bill S-219 ignores the universal nature of human rights and our obligation as a member of the international community to be fair and unbiased in promoting respect for human rights around the world. Bill S-219 ignores gross violations of human rights by other countries in the region and around the world, some of whom have violated multiple United Nations resolutions. Respect for human rights is a universal obligation and should not be affected by political bias or become a currency for special interests and political maneuvering. Additionally, our parliamentarians should be aware that passing Bill S-219 will create a legislative precedent that may lead to subsequent bills for imposing similar sanctions on other human rights violators, some of which are Canada’s allies and trade partners in the region. This action will have significant and lasting impacts on Canada’s relations with its partners around the world and its impact has to be considered and analyzed thoroughly.

For the reasons outlined above, on behalf of the Iranian Canadian Congress I request that you vote against Bill S-219 during the next session of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, and support a motion for the Committee to recommend that the Senate not proceed with this bill.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Bijan Ahmadi

President

Kind Attention: Honourable Senator Raynell Andreychuk, Chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade. 

This letter is written on behalf of the Iranian Canadian Congress (ICC) to complain about the proceedings on Bill S-219, the Non-Nuclear Sanctions Against Iran Act. We believe that there has been a clear and consistent bias shown in favour of the Bill both in terms of the witnesses called before the Committee and the procedures leading to the clause-by-clause consideration.

Since Bill S-219 was introduced by Senator Tkachuk, multiple witnesses with pro-sanctions and anti-diplomacy views have been invited, while expert witnesses with opposing views were very limited. Particularly egregious is the invitation of three (3) members from one organization, the known hawkish American think-tank, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). The Iranian Canadian Congress is aware that a number of Canadian experts on foreign affairs and Iran with diverse views have requested to present before the Committee as witnesses but have not been chosen, while, as mentioned, multiple witnesses have been called from the FDD. This is an unacceptable course of action which deprives the Committee of expert Canadian perspectives while privileging foreign views which do not have Canadians’ best interests at heart.

Policy Chair

Iranian Canadian Congress

The motion was introduced by Mr. Khadir (Mercier), together with Mrs. Weil, Minister of Immigration, Diversity and Inclusiveness, Mrs. Poirier (Hochelaga-Maisonneuve), Mr. Sklavounos (Laurier-Dorion), and Mrs. Ouellet (Vachon).

Congratulations to the Iranian Canadian community in Quebec and the many activists and organizations who have advocated for the recognition of Nowruz in the QC Assembly. We also take this opportunity to sincerely thank members of the QC Assembly who have introduced the motion and all of the members for unanimously supporting this motion.

Celebrated by nearly 500,000 Canadians, Nowruz (the Iranian/Persian new year) is an occasion for revival, reconciliation, neighbourliness, and an appreciation of diversity, friendship, and unity among people and communities - all of which are among fundamental values of Canada's multicultural society.

Important note: If your membership has expired after May 15, 2016, you should renew your membership online or in person with the ICC secretary by end of March 14, 2017 for your membership to be considered continuous for the requirements of Article 5, Section 2 of the ICC by-laws. 

Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

We believe that this Bill is against the interests of all Canadians, especially those with dual nationality status from countries like Iran, under any circumstances, but especially so in view of the new US administration’s xenophobic rhetoric. According to our analysis, this bill will allow discrimination and unlawful detention of Canadians by US authorities at the border, and may especially affect immigrant communities from Muslim majority countries, such as the Iranian-Canadian community.  

This Bill denies Canadian Citizens and Permanent Residents the right to walk out of interviews conducted by border guards and return to Canada at their discretion. This means that border agents can ask deeply personal questions and conduct unreasonable searches of Canadians without any recourse for those individuals. Failure to answer such questions or submit to these searches will put travelers into undesirable and even dangerous situations, including detention by U.S. authorities. Such actions and the privileges given to U.S. border agents may even be considered a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which the Canadian government has a duty to safeguard and protect.

We therefore ask you and your Government to withdraw or amend the particular provisions of the proposed Bill C-23 that endow the above named excessive powers to U.S. border agents on Canadian soil and protect all Canadians’ rights and dignity at the border.

Sincerely,

 From all of us at the Iranian Canadian Congress, we would like to wish you a joyous holiday season and a Happy New Year! We had a great year in 2016 and we look forward to the new challenges and opportunities 2017 will bring.

As we approach the end of the year, we reflect upon the accomplishments of the Iranian Canadian Congress in the second half of 2016, since the last Annual General Meeting in May. Here we are happy to share few of the highlights with you:

1)      For the first time to identify and prioritize our activities, we launched a three-month community consultation process that provided us the input for putting together our list of priority policies and shaped our position on various issues that affect Iranian Canadians ever since.

2)      During summer of 2016, for the first time we launched a successful internship program. The program provided 6 Iranian Canadian university students the opportunity to develop their skills while helping their fellow community members.

3)      Held a forum for representatives of 20 Iranian Canadian non-profit organizations which resulted into collaborations between some of these organizations and the ICC. Collaboration of the ICC with Tirgan during the summer internship program and the support provided by multiple organizations for the Simorgh Gala are two successful examples in the past 6 months.

4)      Through a successful partnership with ASL19 a first of its kind web application was developed and added to the website of the ICC for monitoring news related to Iran in the House of Commons.

6)      To encourage the culture of volunteerism and community work, as part of the Simorgh Gala we recognized 7 community leaders and activists who have dedicated their lives to build a stronger Iranian Canadian community.

7)      With the help of local volunteers for the first time in the decade long history of the ICC we have established a local team in Vancouver and earlier in December we successfully hosted a first discussion session with our community members there. 

8)      By implementing a successful communication and outreach plan we have doubled our network of supporters in the past six months and significantly expanded our reach in Iranian Canadian populated cities outside of the GTA.

9)      Based on the community consultation process and our list of priority policies we planned and executed a strong advocacy campaign to urge the Government of Canada to reestablish diplomatic relations with Iran and facilitate reopening of the embassies in Tehran and Ottawa. As part of the campaign we met with members of parliament and officials at Global Affairs Canada, connected with Canadian media, and launched a formal parliamentary petition to the House of Commons that has so far received 12,000 signatures from across Canada.

10)   In the past six months over 50 volunteers have helped us in various events and initiatives. Their help strengthened the organization and helped us to achieve significant accomplishments.