*Wikipaka preroll music*
Herald: We're very happy to have Robert Tibbo with us on the channel for his fifth
year in a row here, speaking at the Chaos Communication Congress. Today's lecture,
Robert Tibbo, you probably know him as a lawyer involved in the Snowden case. His
lecture today is called The Continued Erosion of International Law and Human
Rights and a Global Pandemic. And and, yeah, let's hear it. And we will be here
later for Q&A.
Robert Tibbo: Good evening. I'd like to thank the Computer Chaos Congress again
for having me speak at the convention this year, even though due to the global
pandemic, it's by remote. But as you may be aware, I'm the lawyer for the snowden
refugees. And also I'm introducing another one of my clients, Ibraham Hussein, who is
a refugee and journalist from Somalia. And just to inform anyone who's unaware at
this stage, the Snowden refugees were a group of refugees from South and Southeast
Asia who provided shelter, food and compassion and humanity to Edward Snowden
when he was in Hong Kong in 2013, when Mr. Snowden made the disclosures on the NSA's
electronic mass surveillance program. And also to provide an update on my role as a
lawyer for the Snowden refugees, I continue to act for them as a barrister in
their Hong Kong cases. And within Canada, I was granted special authorization to act
for the Snowden refugees who still have refugee claims at the Canadian government.
And just briefly, I have a slide up with the Snowden refugees sitting together in
Hong Kong, on the left side is Vanessa. She's from the Philippines. Her daughter
is below her, that's Keana, born in Hong Kong, stateless, and is still stateless
today. Beside Vanessa is Ajith, the former soldier from Sri Lanka. And beside him is
the family of four: Nadeeka, Supun, both from Sri Lanka, and their two children,
Sethumdi and Dinath , also born in Hong Kong, stateless. Out of the seven Snowden
refugees, two of them actually succeeded in their cases in 2019 and this is a photo
I have of myself meeting with Vanessa and Keana at Pearson International Airport,
Toronto on March 24th, 2019. A year ago, I talked about the decline in human rights
around the globe. Nothing has changed since a year ago. And with the Covid-19
global pandemic, things have just gotten a lot worse. Governments have been
empowered, emboldened to continue to attack those who dissent, who are critical
of government around the world. And what has made matters worse are the people's
inability to go out and exercise their right to freedom of expression,
association and assembly and protests because of covid and for public safety
reasons. And the government has used that to their advantage to abuse civilians in
society. The media as well has been consumed, in my view, by the global
pandemic, as well as other significant global news stories such as the US
elections and Donald Trump. What this has done is it's taken the media away,
journalists away from other important human rights stories around the world. So
those whose cases are, the circumstances are not high profile. A lot of these
stories are not being reported anymore. They're not being investigated anymore,
which is adding to governments being aware that they can continue to commit human
rights violations around the world with impunity. Now, I have a client a region
from Somalia. He's a journalist and I'm introducing him to the public in this
presentation because he fled persecution as a journalist in Somalia and he found
himself in Hong Kong for a period of time in an untenable situation and had later
found his way to the European Union to seek refugee status there. And I'd like to
go into that. And basically, Mr. Ibrahim had covered news stories in Mogadishu and
across Somalia. And he was targeted by both the government and al-Shabaab. It was
a situation that he... and there's two quotes here which I'll read out, which
really encapsulate the circumstances on the ground. Ibrahim has stated: In the
morning, we hugged our family like we might never see them again, because every
day in Mogadishu, journalists may be killed in the crossfire or murdered by al-
Shabaab. And he also stated: For a big story, we would bring two or three
cameramen to record the scene together in case one was wounded or shot. As the
lawyer for Ibrahim, I've actually seen footage that they've recorded of, you
know, people on the front lines there with being shot dead and. This is a horrific
situation for any journalist to be in and to report in. The situation for Ibrahim
came to a crossroads in 2009 when he was kidnaped by al-Shabab. He'd been targeted
by the government as well, the police and also officers at the Ministry of
Information and Culture. But it was al- Shabab who grabbed him, tortured him,
threatened him, threatened to kill him with a knife, gun to his head and demanded
a ransom of 18000 US $, which fortunately his family was able to secure. And after
six days as a hostage, he was released. Now, Ibrahim had worked for universal
television in Somalia during two periods and he had fled Somalia for a period of
time to try to find refuge in another part of of Africa, which didn't work and then
tried again where he found himself in South Sudan, which was, there was no
durable solution there for him. So in September 2013, he fled to Hong Kong and
he sought asylum there. His thinking was that Hong Kong had a reputation of
civility and rule of law. But upon his arrival, he, you know, he realized that he
had been seriously mistaken. Immediately, he was arrested and detained at the Castle
Peak Bay Immigration Center for short. We call that CIC and it's basically Hong
Kong's version of a gulag. And there's an award winning human rights story by Olivia
Chang from Hong Kong called The Invisible Wall. I provided the link on the slides.
So you'll be able to to read an English version of that story. Now, after being
locked up for three months, he was released on recognizance, which is, I
mean, it's provided with a paper that typically foreign criminals are provided
with. And on the outside, he faced destitution and racial discrimination. And
he was constantly racially profiled by the police, stopped all the time, threatened
and Hong Kong society itself just basically ignored him. It's like, it's as
if he didn't exist. He had no food or money for the five months after he had
been released from Detention and International Social Services, the Swiss
organization with a branch in Hong Kong, provides humanitarian assistance as a
contractor for the Hong Kong Social Welfare Department. But still, for five
months, he was destitute. No food and no money. And in 2013, on my slide there is
an error, it is 2014, but in late 2013, Ibrahim showed up at my office with
another one of his colleagues who had worked for him in Somalia. And they were
wearing bedroom slippers and used clothing and they were starving. And I immediately
took up their cases with the UNHCR in Hong Kong. And subsequent to that meeting in my
office, my wife took both of them down to out of her own pocket to purchase shoes
for them, running shoes and also to buy them some food. Now, he is what I would
describe as a victim of constructive refoulment, and I'm going to go into the
law on that in a few minutes. But basically, the Hong Kong government has a
legal policy framework that's designed to break down the mental health and physical
health of asylum seekers, basically through social isolation and deprivation
of sufficient humanitarian assistance so that they don't starve. And he described a
situation a few days ago looking back: After the asylum seeking community
protested and occupied social welfare and international social services offices in
2013, protesting not having enough food or rent money to survive, I felt like my mind
was breaking. I felt I would die in Hong Kong. Ibrahim's mental and physical health
declined in Hong Kong to the point where it was a choice between not surviving in
Hong Kong or, you know, trying to get to another country. The South China Morning
Post reported his situation as a journalist and reporter stated: An
experience of the worst in humanity was not what Ibrahim Mohammed Hussein expected
when he touched down in Hong Kong eight months ago, fresh from persecution in
Africa. Now, I mentioned Constructive Refoulment, and this is a framework and a
strategy that's implemented by the Hong Kong government and professors at Chinese
University have described it as follows: given that a necessary consequence of the
government's policies is social exclusion and destitution, there are major concerns,
particularly for the mental health of refugees. This is especially the case
because refugees stranded in the territory faced indefinite periods while claims are
processed, all the while plagued by uncertainty. Such concerns not only raise
the issues of compatibility with the ICESCR and ICCPR, but also place the
individual concerned at risk of returning to the source of danger, thus offending
the doctrine of constructive refoulment. So Hong Kong has prohibited from returning
anybody who is seeking asylum in Hong Kong until after the cases are screened and
rejected. But the Hong Kong government in parallel with, you know, with that policy
that they have to follow the law, they have to follow to screen refugees or
asylum seekers, is they make their lives so miserable, so difficult, that these
asylum seekers' mental health deteriorates to the point where they give up and they
they would rather return home to die there. Ibrahim left Hong Kong, but under
international law and Hong Kong's policies, they sent him back to Somalia.
He was quickly targeted again and over a number of years, he sought internal flight
relocation alternatives within Somalia. It didn't work. And then he finally left
Somalia and found his way to the European Union, ending up in Greece. The first camp
he was put in was the Moria refugee camp, which Ibrahim describes as a place of
violence. There was violence on a daily basis. There was a lack of resources,
food. The conditions were inhuman and degrading. And Ibrahim himself and the
people in his makeshift structure where they stayed, were attacked on seven
occasions during that time. And the other thing that Ibrahim has stated is that the
police just stood by and watched. They allowed that to happen. They acquiesce to
the violence against other refugees. And the plus side of Ibrahim making it to the
European Union, was there was a screening process that proceeded quickly compared to
Hong Kong. And the second plus is that the screening system in the European Union
countries actually grants refugees status if they can make their case that they have
a well-founded fear of persecution. In Hong Kong, the acceptance rate was zero
and Hong Kong not being a signatory to the UN convention relating to the Status of
Refugees. You know, even if you succeeded, you could not obtain refugee status in
Hong Kong and you could not resettle there. And this is a picture of Ibrahim at
the Moria refugee camp, there was an arson and a large fire at the camp, which left
him five days on the streets outside the camp, and then he would be sent to the
Lesbos refugee camp thereafter. Now, with his acceptance as a refugee in June 2020,
he was still stuck in the camp. And here's another photo of Ibrahim when he went to
the Lesbos camp. There are no toilets, now showers, lack of resources and in late
2020, the Greek government moved, allowed Ibrahim to leave the camps, and he's now
living in a Greek community, supported only for a limited period of time by the
government. In January 2021, mistake on my slide - 2020 should be 2021 - he'll have
to fend for himself. And I've brought up, introduced Ibraham here to everybody today
because he's been in both Hong Kong and he's found his way to the European Union.
There are serious problems on both sides of the globe, but he is grateful that the
proper screening is apparently happening in the European Union and he's now safe.
In my view, he's an extraordinary person, extraordinary journalist, and there are
very few journalists like this on the planet with his commitment and willingness
to have taken the risks, risking his life to report, do reporting in Somalia.
Ibrahim would like to continue working as a journalist again. He's just slamming on
his feet in Greece right now and waiting for his formal documents, all his formal
documents to be issued. But he's looking to continue to work as a journalist. Now,
I'm going to go, I'm going back to Hong Kong and I'm going to be returning to the
Snowden refugees, but I'd like to provide a quick update on what's happening in Hong
Kong. And the slide I have up here now basically shows from 2014 to 2019, the
rapid decline in human rights in Hong Kong and in particular, rendition, enforced
disappearances, ill-treatment, torture, and even attempted extrajudicial killings.
And from 2004 to 2019, you know, Hong Kong has become authoritarian. And to review
what happened last year, Carrie Lam, the chief executive of Hong Kong, had wanted
to bring in an act into law, an extradition bill which would allow
rendition of individuals from Hong Kong into mainland China. There would have been
a formal legal mechanism to do that. Hong Kong people and lawyers in Hong Kong are
very well aware that mainland China judiciary is not independent. It's like
any other government department under the executive, it's policy and politically
motivated in terms of how judges in mainland China try criminal cases, due
process rights are limited in China and the Chinese criminal justice system and at
times do not exist. And I'm going to mention the case of Michael Spayor or
Michael Kovrig, two Canadians who were detained in December 2018. Innocent
Canadians who have done nothing wrong, arbitrarily arrested, detained, and this
year, earlier this year, charged with crimes in mainland China and the mainland
Chinese government has effectively admitted that they've, they're holding the
two Canadians hostage as a bargaining chip to pressure the Canadian government to
bring an end to the extradition proceedings against Meng Wanzhou of the
hallway Chinese telecom group. Out of significance, so I'm mentioning this
because the two Michael's cases in China highlight, you know, the deficiencies, the
clear deficiencies and shortcomings of the criminal justice system in China. In Hong
Kong, people, you know, were not prepared to accept that they would face justice or
accused of a crime and have to go through a criminal justice system in China,
mainland China. So protests broke out. People in the millions went in the streets
from June 19 2019, onward. And it was in September 2019 that Carrie Lam, the chief
executive of Hong Kong, announced that the extradition bill would be withdrawn. So
that was a great success. Now, with Covid-19, human rights violations in Hong
Kong have just continued on and they've become worse, and the Hong Kong government
recognizing that millions of people would not be going out into the streets to
protest under Covid-19 because nobody, everybody understood this is a public,
serious public health risk and people don't want to get sick. So there are
limited protests, but Hong Kong and Beijing calculated that you wouldn't have
the millions of people on the streets. And they introduced a bill, no Beijing
actually did this through their own legislature, enacting a constitutional
provision under the new net under Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law, which is
Hong Kong's constitution, basically bringing in new crimes against the state.
And I've put in the slide those crimes: secession, subversion, terrorism,
collusion with foreign forces. That legislation is a constitutional provision.
It's ambiguous, it's poorly written, and it can be interpreted in a way, because of
its ambiguity, interpreted and used in an arbitrary way and used to violate the
rights of any civilian in Hong Kong. I'm going to go into the scope of this law. If
one is arrested, if a person is arrested under the new national security law,
there's no presumption of bail anymore. The defendant actually has the burden of
proof on them to seek bail. Indefinite detention. If bail is not granted, that
person could be sitting in remand in a jail for months or years before trial. The
trials are going to be held behind closed doors. The judges are actually selected by
the executive branch of government. They select judges from the judiciary. But it's
not the chief justice of the Hong Kong court. That choose selects the judges to
be on that list that the government chooses. In this law, anyone is accused of
a national security fence under Hong Kong's basic law can be renditioned to
mainland China to face justice there. So what the Hong Kong authorities were not
able to achieve in 2019, they've now, Beijing has now achieved so that anybody
in Hong Kong who is accused of committing a national security crime can be brought
into mainland China and face justice there. Extraterritorial criminality.
Anybody who writes something, says something, does something that is critical
of the Hong Kong government. If the Hong Kong authorities feel that this is an act
of secession or subversion, they can seek the extradition of that person, let's say,
in Canada or in Germany or another country. So this new national security law
has a global reach. Consequence of this is countries in Europe, including Germany,
the United States, Canada, New Zealand, the U.K., Australia, have all either
suspended or terminated the extradition agreements, treaties that they have with
Hong Kong. The reason being is the new national security law is a de facto
backdoor for Beijing to extradite people from around the world. Very few countries
have extradition treaties with mainland China because of the shortcomings in its
criminal justice system. And then I've put up a slide just listing a few countries
that have suspended treaties. And now, within the Hong Kong legal government
itself, three branches of government, the executive branch, legislative and
judiciary, it's quite clear that Beijing now has firm control over the executive
branch of government. Carrie Lam, you know, loyal to Beijing, you know,
following through on directions from Beijing. Also in 2020, we saw officers
from mainland China now working in Hong Kong side by side with Hong Kong civil
servants and basically advising and directing the legislature. A number of
pro-democracy legislators were removed actually by Beijing and new legislation
was imposed by Beijing that anyone who is viewed as a risk to national security
without trial can be removed from the legislature. They were supposed to be
elections for the legislature in earlier this year. They were canceled because of
Covid. And with the new law imposed by Beijing, there was a mass resignation by
the pro-democracy legislators in Hong Kong. So effectively, Beijing has taken
control of Hong Kong's legislature, the last or third branch of government, the
judiciary. There's been a number of cases where judges have brought in their
political opinions. Most significantly, a nonpermanent judge of the quarterfinal
appeal, Australian Justice Spigelman resigned in September this year from the
quarterfinal appeal, citing the new national security law. Freedom of
expression in Hong Kong has frozen. Freedom of association, assembly and the
ability of severely diminished. Hong Kong was ranked 18th in the world in terms of
freedom of the press and journalism, but in 2020 it fell down to 80th place. In the
news right now has been the arrest of Jimmy Lai, the founder of Apple Daily
under the national security law. Bail was denied, but he secured bail last week from
the High Court. The Department of Justice, Director of Public Prosecutions, has filed
an appeal to that, to the court, a final appeal to seek that the bail be revoked
for Mr Lai. There's also other examples of journalists like Choi Yuk-Ling of RTHK.
What the Hong Kong authorities have been doing the last year is if they cannot find
a basis to arrest an individual journalist or activist or politician under the new
national security law, they use some draconian laws or try to find some
technicality to, you know, arrest somebody for something that's not even related to
their work, simply trying to shut up or stop the media from speaking and writing
their stories. In 2017, there's been an exodus and en masse from Hong Kong. It's
been quiet. It's been steady. But that exodus accelerated in 2019 and accelerated
even more in 2020 with the new national security law. And talking to clients and
colleagues, the shipping and freight companies in Hong Kong are overbooked.
That data indicates that there's large numbers of people leaving Hong Kong. They
do not see a future in Hong Kong. Now, Canada started accepting refugees earlier
this year, and in September, Canada started granting refugee status of Hong
Kong people who have been politically persecuted because of their participation
in protests or they voiced their opinion. Cong Pei Wu, the Chinese ambassador to
Canada in Ottawa spoke out and I'll quote what he said: We strongly urge the
Canadian side not to grant so-called political asylum to those violent
criminals as refugees because it is interference in China's domestic affairs
and certainly will embolden those violent criminals. That was on October 15, 2020.
And what is interesting here is that China is actually a signatory to the UN
convention relating to the Status of Refugees. And the refugee convention forms
part of China's constitution, and part of that is to respect and recognize that
other countries will screen asylum seekers and grant them refugee status if they show
a well-founded fear of persecution, whether it's religion, ethnicity, race,
nationality, political opinion or other social group. And what's also interesting
is that under the Refugee Convention, under Article 1F and 33.2, but 1F in
particular, that if anybody had committed a serious violent offense, let's say, in
Hong Kong, even if they were granted recognize as a refugee, they would not be
granted refugee status because of that violence. So the Chinese ambassador to
Hong Kong apparently doesn't understand the law and doesn't understand or respect
that Canada will be looking at whether any asylum seekers have committed offenses
that would exclude them from that protection. Over the last year, we've seen
legislators, former legislators, members of political, opposing political parties,
flee the jurisdiction. What Hong Kong authorities in Beijing have been trying to
do is to find a basis or whether they're found well founded or not on evidence, but
to arrest them, put them into the Hong Kong criminal justice system. And in
applying for bail, typically a condition is they hand over their travel documents.
So there are a lot of activists and politicians in Hong Kong who can't leave
because they don't have travel documents. Beijing and Hong Kong clearly want to
close the borders on anyone who is in, you know, expresses dissent against the Hong
Kong or Beijing governments. But there are, there have been legislators and
political activists who have fled. And I've put on a slide of. Ray Wong and Alan
Li had fled in 2017, about that time, and were granted refugee status in Germany.
Baggio Leung recently fled to the US. Simon Cheng, Honques Lao, Sunny Chou, Ted
Hui, Nathan Law, Wayne Chan, Samuel Chu, all left Hong Kong. And they're all
seeking asylum, political asylum in Western Europe or North America. Now
coming back to the Snowden refugees and what I'd like to do before going into the
situation with one Snowden refugee in Hong Kong, I'm just going to give you a quick
update on Vanessa and her daughter, who are now resettled in Montreal. They've had
a hard time of it during the pandemic in Montreal. And I've put up a photo from
September 2020, which really shows, you know, really projects the feeling, you
know, after almost a year of having to practice social distancing and every other
safe practices so they don't get infected or infect others. A nonprofit, just to
update everybody, a nonprofit was set up in June 2020. The previous private
sponsors in Montreal had stopped providing support to Vanessa and Keana in April
2020, which put this single mom and her daughter in a terrible situation without
any food or or rent. And the last of the money that was provided by the private
sponsor was provided in early May. So as of June, this family had nothing to
survive on. So I contacted people I know in the Montreal community and they stepped
forward and they set up a nonprofit organization called helpvanessa.com.
Oliver Stone, Academy Award winning director, Shailene Woodley, who starred in
the Snowden film, also an Oliver Stone film, stepped forward and advocated to, in
support and to ask for donations for Vanessa and her daughter. And today, we've
raised more than fifty thousand Canadian, which now allows Vanessa and her daughter
to remain safe and secure during the pandemic and also to continue their French
language studies. And this is a photo of them in November 2020, last month. And
this was Christmas Eve: Keana is on the left, Vanessa in the middle. And the third
person is Minh Tam Tran, who's the founder of the nonprofit "Help Vanessa & Keana".
I'd like to quickly mention him. He's the son of a refugee family originally from
Vietnam after the war in 1975, finally resettled in Montreal and he was born in
Montreal. He's a pharmacist and executive director of the Association professionelle
des pharmaciens salariés du Quebec. He founded the nonprofit "Help Vanessa &
Keana", and he's also founded a new nonprofit called helpajith.com. I'm going
to go into Ajith's situation. This is 2017. I've put up a photo of Ajith at the
removal assessment section of the Immigration Department, and this was
before, a week before Immigration rejected Ajith's asylum claims. And just briefly,
Ajith was injured in the Civil War, protecting his fellow soldiers. He was
denied medical assistance under the Geneva Convention by the Sri Lankan army. And he
was put in an untenable situation where he's looking at losing his life. So he
fled. He was a military deserter. He was caught a few years later and tortured.
There was an attempt to execute him, but he managed to flee the military camp and
he fled to to Hong Kong in 2003, leaving behind his wife and a newborn baby girl.
This is, I put up a photo of Ajith in 1993, so you can see the young man that he
was. And in Hong Kong, similar to Ibrahim, the Somali journalist, from 2003 onward,
Ajith has been subjected to systemic racism and discrimination by the Hong Kong
government and its institutions. He's been denied sufficient humanitarian assistance
and I took on his case in 2012 and he's constantly been subjected to racial
profiling, even not showing up to conferences, law conferences that I was
holding because the police had stopped him on the street as he was trying to get to
my office. There's been discrimination by the, you know, by the police immigration
against him, and also there's been attacks by the government against myself with a
view of removing me as his lawyer. This is a photo of Ajith a couple of years ago,
and he's had a very difficult time in Hong Kong. For 17 years, you know, he was
subjected, he's been subjected to discrimination, as I've described, and all
of this has had an enormously adverse impact on Ajith and that his mental
condition has collapsed a number of times. And he's just wanted to give up. And he's
been what I would describe as a victim of constructive refoulment. But fortunately,
we were able to convince him and we have recently tried to get him some help. He's
been suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder since before he left Sri Lanka.
Untreated. And only recently we've been able to get him a little bit of help.
Going to his role with Mr. Snowden. In 2013, when Mr. Snowden arrived, Ajith,
despite all the terrible things that have happened to him, the persecution, his
discrimination he suffered in Sri Lanka and Hong Kong, he just stepped forward and
he was more than willing to help Mr. Snowden shelter in 2013. And in 2016,
because of Ajith's story coming into the public domain, the Hong Kong government
targeted him because of his assistance to Mr. Snowden and targeted myself. And in
2018, Ajith was left without the support of the duty law service. But myself and
then another lawyer found a solicitor willing to instruct us privately to
continue his appeal. Now. In parallel to all of this, I advised Ajith to apply to
Canada for refugee status, private sponsor was found in Quebec and Ajith's refugee
claims were filed in January 2017. And while all of this was happening, the Sri
Lankan police, aware that Ajith is in Hong Kong, sent police officers to Hong Kong in
December 2016 looking for him. The Hong Kong police, instead of investigating the
Sri Lankan police, made a decision to investigate myself and my client's. Now,
Ajith's cases were rejected by immigration in May 2017, and I filed an appeal in the
Torture Claim Appeal Board. And this is a major update on Ajith's situation in Hong
Kong in that his appeal was heard by an Australian adjudicator, a barrister, Adam
Moore, who took up, who was the adjudicator in this case in 2017, heard
his full appeal in June 2018. And no decision has been handed down in three and
a half years. From 2018 to November this year, Adam Moore had not handed down a
decision and there is no explanation for that. And then suddenly in November 2020,
the TCAB announced that Mr Moore was no longer the adjudicator without giving any
reason. And now a panel of three adjudicators would hear Ajith's case and
start that process all over again. This is a process that's been delayed and, in my
view, abused by the Security Bureau and the Torture Claim Appeal Board. There's no
rational basis why the Torture Claim Appeal Board did not hand down a decision
on an Ajith's case years ago. And this is an example of how this part of the
judiciary, there's a lack of transparency and accountability. And the second
significant event is that one of the three adjudicators is an Australian adjudicator
named Fraser Syme, and he's one of the three, on the new panel for Ajith's
appeal. Mr. Syme was also the same adjudicator in the appeal of the other
Snowden refugee family of Suppun and Nadeeka and the two children. And Mr. Syme
rejected their appeals and now the Torture Claim Appeal Board has found it proper to
appoint Mr. Syme, who's already predetermined. Decided refugee grounds for
supporting his family that are the same grounds for Ajith's case, so there's an
adjudicator on the new TCAB panel, that has already predetermined the appeal
against Ajith, at least on certain refugee grounds, so there's an appearance of bias,
there's clearly a conflict of interest. Making matters worse is judicial review
leave application was filed in the high court in January 2019, challenging Fraser
Syme's rejection of supporting this family's refugee claims. So the Torture
Claim Appeal Board has put in Mr. Syme knowing full well that his decision on the
exact refugee grounds for support and also Ajith, those common grounds may be
overturned by the High Court. So it's quite clear with years of delay,
inordinate delay and the removal or disappearance of Adam Morse, the
adjudicator, and, you know, the constitution of a new tribunal after so
many years with Fraser Syme on there, that he's not receiving a fair process here, a
fair hearing. Now, in terms of a Ajith's mental health situation, the 2019 pro-
democracy protests and the police crackdowns, Ajith saw firsthand how the
police were acting arbitrarily and attacking innocent bystanders, protesters
and this retraumatized Ajith. These are the same scenes in the same conduct of
police in Hong Kong that he witnessed in Sri Lanka when he was in Sri Lanka. The
new national security law, similar to the Prevention of Terrorism Act in Sri Lanka,
is another factor which has traumatized Ajith and he is in fear for his life.
Making matters worse, there's an immigration amendment bill that's just
been brought into the legislature and mind you, the legislature has no opposition.
It's basically pro Beijing controlled. And in this new legislation, immigration
officers will now be able to carry guns and steel batons when dealing with
refugees. This is simply going to re- traumatize my client and other refugees.
There's now powers to detain asylum seekers, effectively indefinitely, when
they're in Hong Kong. There's new provisions where the immigration officer
will decide effectively if interpreters are needed. And it'll be the immigration
officer's view whether a person's screening interviews or appeal should be
conducted without an interpreter. The other issue that is shocking, in my view,
is after the first stage of immigration screening, if the cases are rejected,
there are now powers for immigration officers to go to foreign consulates to
obtain to start the process of obtaining travel documents. That should never happen
until after all appeals are exhausted. So what's happening is that all these asylum
seekers, contrary to U.N. guidelines, their identities are being exposed at the
first stage to foreign governments that they fled from, fled persecution from.
Usually, a hearing could not be held before 28 days in the Torture Claim Appeal
Board. Now, the limit is seven days, which again... Now, how do I view all of all of
these changes to the immigration legislation? It's just a legislative and
policy framework that is going to put more pressure on asylum seekers and it
violates, in my view, the doctrine of constructive refoulment, where we've set
up, Minh Tam Tran in Montreal set up the nonprofit helpajith.com and we're asking
for donations. Ajith needs support. During this time he is waiting, as with the other
Snowden refugees, the outcomes of their asylum cases in Canada. But pending that
time, Ajith needs help. And we'd ask that if you can go to the website and donate.
You know, no matter how big or small the donations are, Ajith needs help. Thank
you. Ibrahim Al Hussein: Hi, everyone, my name
is Ibrahim Al Hussein, I would have said I'm a journalist from Somalia, but the
Somali government and al-Shabaab targeted me. I had been kidnaped and tortured. The
reason I was not killed is because of my family and friends bid ransom money to
spend my life. I flew to Hong Kong only to be treated like a criminal and subjected
to racism as I lived in a poverty degraded and treated inhumanly. My life in Hong
Kong was like a slow death. I was sent back to Somalia and once again had to run
for my life and could not even see my family. I then found my way to Europe and
Greece. I found myself in two refugee camps fighting again to survive. The
communites were inhuman and degrading. Many refugees were violently injured and
killed inside the camp. What saved me was the refugee screening, which proceeded
rapidly. Human rights in Hong Kong do not exist for refugees, but I was lucky to
have a human rights lawyer, Mister Robert Tibbo. Without his help, I would not be
here today. Thank you very much, guys. Vanessa: I know about Ajith's torture
claim appeal in Hong Kong has been for three and a half years, and I know that
the adjudicator of police appeal has disappeared and there is no decision in
his appeal after three and a half years. I know that the appeal board is now starting
his appeal, start all over again. Now with the three judges hearing his appeal, I
think this is so *incomprehensible* to Ajith. He has waiting for 17 years for his
case to be decided. After almost four years, the appeal process him to start all
over again. Is the Hong Kong government causing all this delay? From my own
experience in Hong Kong appeal boards, the judge was unfair and I feeled traumatized.
For Ajith, to again, have to go through, another appeal will be a real trauma for
him. He will be forced to dare historical experience again. And it will give him
nightmare.
Herald: This is WTF International and you have just seen a recording by Robert
Tibbo, who is the lawyer of Edward Snowden, and he's now connected. Hello,
Mister Tibbo!. Robert Tibbo: Welcome. Thank you for
having me here. One thing I had failed to mention in the prerecorded video
discussion is that two of my clients would have done short videos to introduce
themselves to the public. So one thing I'd like to just mention here, as I mentioned
at the end of the video, is that Ajith is still in Hong Kong, one of the Snowden
refugees who protected Mr. Snowden when he was in Hong Kong in 2013. And he does need
help. And one way you can help is by donations.
Herald: All right, thanks for the... We are now taking questions for Mr. Tibbo,
you have several over... Q&A during our live program. Some of you have asked us...
and if you go into the streaming window below that, you've got several tabs,
one... the chat window. And if you click on that, you can see the hashtag, #R...
which we'll monitor on Mastodon and Twitter. And you can also join the... on
hackend and the IRC. So far, there haven't been any questions in... the shell, but
Mr. Tibbo, are there any other ways... and watchers who have just seen what you've
presented them and the very personal messages by ... voice is heard in order to
foster the cases of those people, you... Robert: Yes, as I mentioned, the primary
way to support my clients, in particular Ajith at this time, is to is to make
donations. There's a website, helpajith.com, where you can make
donations various ways, from credit card to bitcoin. The other issue is awareness
and discussion. There's a lot of talk about, you know, the role of
whistleblowers, particularly in today's world. But there's been less talk about
the protection of whistleblowers and the Snowden refugees did the extraordinary by
stepping forward, making their decisions of conscience to provide shelter and food
and compassion to Mr. Snowden when he was in Hong Kong in 2013. And in all the
Snowden refugees cases, one of the grounds for refugee protection is the clients have
a well-founded fear of persecution based on political opinion and that they make
decisions to help Mr. Snowden. And so that forms a social group, those who help or
protect whistleblowers. And I think that, you know, there needs to be more
discussion about the importance of people in society who... and the courage that it
takes to step forward and to help somebody, particularly for high profile
cases. It's easy to help somebody or a group of people when it's a popular person
or a popular cause or if it's a low profile cause. But it's extremely difficult
for an individual to step forward to help another when even though the cause is the
most just cause. But it's unpopular. So there are legal and moral and ethical
issues, and I think that should be part of the discussion that everyone should be
having. Herald: Thank you for that, and there's
been the question on the chat, which I need to rephrase, because... The question
is how to build a global consciousness against... and to to join up forces both
from a lawyerly and scholarly... groups that believe more in direct action.
Robert Tibbo: You'll have to repeat that again, the signal came through a bit
choppy. Herald: Question on the chat, whether
there's any efforts to build a global kind of state oppression, more or less, and
coordinate between teams that take a more... steadily more direct action.
Robert Tibbo: I think what's happening is you're seeing this kind of action with
nonprofits, lawyers through protests, and you're seeing it within communities,
within cities, within whole jurisdictions. But I think what's happened with the covid
situation is that's basically compelled everybody because of the public health
issues, self-isolating, social distancing, masks, we've had to take a step back to
think, OK, how do we communicate now? How do we interact and exercise our
fundamental rights and freedoms? So I think we're in a dangerous period where,
you know, we're still struggling how to connect globally to cooperate and bring
this kind of awareness about. The second issue is to do that, you need to be able
to get the message out through advocacy and activism. Right now that the covid
pandemic consumes the media reports. I've been told about 75% or 85% of the news
coverage in a given media organization,75% to 85%. At the same time, governments are
using the cover of covid, the global pandemic, to suppress freedom of
expression and to strip away fundamental rights and freedoms. So I think the
question is a great question, and I think it's a matter of... you know, when doing
this through encrypted means, doing it where you have your privacy for global
groups to consider. How do we connect up together, what messages we want to get
out? But then the real challenge will be getting the message out through to the public
because of the current global pandemic. Herald: Are there already... to go ahead
and prepare all the messaging to come out of the pandemic if and when the...
Robert Tibbo: As far like I'm not aware of any concerted efforts globally, I mean,
there are some non-profits around the world who are trying to get messages out
or trying to get stakeholders so those affected in different jurisdictions. But
right now, I'm not aware of any organized, concerted effort to to try to have this
sort of global connection and being able to speak globally, but also locally, you
know, informing the global community what's going on. I think we are, it's just
a difficult time. One of the best examples is Hong Kong with the covid pandemic
there. There's been four waves. And in the midst of the second wave of the pandemic
in Hong Kong, Beijing imposed a new national security law, which basically has
stripped away fundamental rights and freedom of expression. So I think we're
just in a difficult time and it's going to be for different groups around the world
to figure out how to communicate. Hopefully the pandemic will come to an end
in the end of this year or next year and we'll see where we go from there.
Herald: There's one more question from the chat, and I think it's a softball pitch,
more or less... Free, autonomous press, free autonomous media as in decentralized,
probably... of getting the message out. Robert Tibbo: The signal is a bit choppy,
I missed the middle of your question, if you could repeat it.
Herald: Ok. Would you say that a free and autonomous press, autonomous media...
decentralized, probably unsensible would be a cornerstone of getting the message
out? Robert Tibbo: Absolutely. One thing that
I've talked about in past talks is that two things have happened, are happening at
this time and have been happening over the last decade. And that is journalism has,
mainstream journalism is being eroded, investigative journalists are few in
number today, and journalism has become more centralized in major urban centers.
And in smaller cities, towns, rural areas, there is no more journalism there at all.
In a lot of regions around the world. And when those things happen, you have poor
behavior of local government in terms of policies and public expenditure and also
abuses of human rights. We are really in desperate need of having independent,
autonomous journalists and journalism at this time, more than ever. But at the same
time, journalists who have the capacity and capability to do investigative
journalism. You know, the problem what's been happening the last five years, 10
years, is that the media that's centered in the major urban centers, they're not
picking up stories and speaking for the more vulnerable or those who are
geographically outside of the main areas. And that's a very dangerous thing. So,
yes, I agree there should be more autonomous media and there should not be
censoring on that media. Herald: So, in fact, if you if you look at
that, I mean, encrypted communication is well and everybody should use it
especially to exchange information with journalists. But in the end, for the
general public, independent media that is not centralized in some few conglomerates
might even be more efficient to get the message out to the broader masses, right?
Robert Tibbo: Absolutely. I think what needs to be done is you need more
autonomous journalism and journalists in smaller cities operating autonomously, in
the bigger cities, to be able to pick up stories. What you're seeing right now with
the mainstream media focusing on covid stories, for example, the US elections and
Donald Trump are that they're not picking up smaller stories. They're not picking up
low profile stories anymore. And governments are taking advantage of that.
They know that they can act almost with impunity because they know that the
smaller stories where somebody in your communities, fundamental rights are being
violated by the government or local authorities, it's not going to get
reported at this time. When the pandemic is over, the situation will be the same.
There's a lack of independent autonomous journalists. One of the big problems is
money. A lot of the money that used to go into advertising for mainstream media,
even local newspapers, is now going online. People are spending their time
looking at online media that has nothing to do with their local communities or even
their countries. People are spending their time on YouTube and Facebook, TikTok is
another example where all the advertising is going. So we have a situation where
enormous amounts of money are going to only certain media, some of the
mainstream, a lot of it to social entertainment online and infotainment. And
the money is disappearing from that. Money is disappearing and it's having an impact
on two things. One is the funding of investigative journalism. Number two,
being able to find and support autonomous local media in smaller cities, towns and
rural areas. And I've seen that here in North America. And I know the same thing's
been happening in Europe and also in Australia, New Zealand.
Herald: Alrighty, so this means subscribing to your local small town newspaper might
be even as well as a step in joining the revolution as using encrypted messaging.
Robert Tibbo: Absolutely. It's got to be a grassroots effort from the ground up.
Herald: Everybody can take their part. We do not have a stage, so you have to
imagine the applause that you're getting via IRC right now. Thank you again so much
for being with us, Robert Tibbo. Robert Tibbo: Thank you.
*Abspannmusik*
Subtitles created by c3subtitles.de in the year 2021. Join, and help us!