FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 27, 2019
Abuse Survivors Seek Jody Wilson-Raybould's Assistance to Resolve Their Cases;
Women Seek Reconsideration of Former Attorney General's Extradition Orders, Signed on Behalf of Abusive Ex-Spouses
In response to today's announcement that her run as an Independent in the Fall 2019 federal election will represent a new way of doing politics – and in answer to Jody Wilson Raybould's invitation to hear from Canadians – two Canadian women affected by the former Attorney General's decisions have responded.
The two Canadian women, who escaped their abusive ex-spouses in the U.S. and U.K., respectively, have sent an open letter seeking the assistance of former Minister of Justice and Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould in ending the threat they face of being forcibly removed from Canada based on what appear to be vindictive and baseless charges.
MM and KT – whose names are subject to court-ordered publication bans – are both sought for alleged interference in child custody arrangements under Canada's notorious Extradition Act, whose low standards and vulnerability to political bias have come into sharp focus in Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou's case as well as in the case of Ottawa university professor Hassan Diab. Dr. Diab, who spent over three years in French detention without ever being charged, returned to Canada last year, following which media investigations revealed political interference at the Justice Dept. on behalf of the French government.
In an open letter to Wilson-Raybould, KT and MM write that they are "women whose lives are in peril because of decisions you made in both of our extradition cases during your tenure as Justice Minister and Attorney General. You had the power to accept or reject the extradition requests of our abusive ex-spouses, who still seek to have us forcibly removed from Canada to face potential jail terms based on vindictive, trumped up allegations. We don't know whether you went through the details of our cases before you signed off on them or whether you trusted the word of the Justice Dept.’s International Assistance Group, whose record on ramming through weak and politically-motivated extradition cases has drawn a good amount of well-deserved criticism."
The women state that "having witnessed your powerful testimony and truthtelling regarding SNC-Lavalin, we were bolstered with the hope that perhaps, no longer shackled by the limitations of your former position, you would take a fresh and critical look at our cases. Having heard your eloquence at the Justice Committee hearing, and being moved at your reference to being 'a truth teller in accordance with the laws and traditions of our Big House,' we found it hard to believe that it was you, personally, who ignored our pleas (and those of our children) when you had the power to reject our extraditions."
According to Matthew Behrens, a member of the support group Women Who Choose to Live, "Having worked on a number of such cases over the years, it appears that the Extradition Act is open to being used as a back door bludgeon by vindictive ex-spouses who take advantage of the very low standards to continue punishing the women who have escaped their violent grasp. I am aware of at least half a dozen cases of Canadian women who feel trapped in the cycle of abuse because any move they take to protect themselves and their children from abusive fathers and husbands who live in other countries could make them subject to extradition requests, forced removal from Canada, and overseas detention."
Two petitions on behalf of MM and KT – originally addressed to Wilson-Raybould but now being sent to her replacement, David Lametti – detail problems with the cases and affirm that the extradition cases should be stopped because they "shock the conscience" of Canadians. They have garnered over 5,000 signatures. The MM case has an extensive history that includes a trip to the Supreme Court, where a 4-3 decision against her was deemed "Kafkaesque" by the dissenting justices.
"It is our sincere hope that Ms Wilson-Raybould will apply the same standard of truthtelling she brought to the SNC-Lavalin case to the cases of these women, as well as the gender-based analysis that seems completely missing from the reasons she originally provided for rejecting their cases," says Behrens. "We believe it would be the right thing to do for her to publicly call for an end to the clouds of uncertainty and fear that continue to hang over the heads of these women and to demand that the extradition requests be cancelled."
A petition calling for an end to the cases is available to sign at https://www.change.org/p/don-t-send-canadian-abuse-survivors-mm-and-kt-to-foreign-jails-to-face-baseless-vindictive-charges-from-abusive-ex-spouses
+++++++++++++++++++++
An Open Letter to Jody Wilson-Raybould: Help Two Canadian Survivors of Violence Against Women Whose Cases You Summarily Rejected as Minister of Justice
May 27, 2019
Dear Ms Wilson-Raybould,
We write to you as two Canadian women whose lives are in peril because of decisions you made in both of our extradition cases during your tenure as Justice Minister and Attorney General.
You had the power to accept or reject the extradition requests of our abusive ex-spouses, who still seek to have us forcibly removed from Canada to face potential jail terms based on vindictive, trumped up allegations.
We don't know whether you went through the details of our cases before you signed off on them or whether you trusted the word of the Justice Dept.’s International Assistance Group, whose record on ramming through weak and politically-motivated extradition cases has drawn a good amount of well-deserved criticism.
But having witnessed your powerful testimony and truthtelling regarding SNC-Lavalin, we were bolstered with the hope that perhaps, no longer shackled by the limitations of your former position, you would take a fresh and critical look at our cases. Having heard your eloquence at the Justice Committee hearing, and being moved at your reference to being “a truth teller in accordance with the laws and traditions of our Big House,” we found it hard to believe that it was you, personally, who ignored our pleas (and those of our children) when you had the power to reject our extraditions.
In the beautiful spirit of sisterhood that you appear to share with Jane Philpott and some other MPs, we are asking you to expand that circle of solidarity and look into our cases.
We believe that if you were to take a fresh look at our cases, you would agree that the low standards of Canada's Extradition Act are being used as a back door bludgeon by abusers to continue persecuting women who have escaped their grasp.
By way of background, you – and thousands of Canadians who have signed petitions in our support – know us as Canadian citizens MM and KT (both names protected by publication ban).
It shocks the conscience that as survivors of male violence against women – who have acted in the best interests of our own safety and that of our children – we are still exposed to extradition proceedings in which the Canadian government and, specifically, your former ministry, is acting on behalf of our overseas abusers.
It shocks the conscience that your prior pursuit of our cases sends an insidious message to other women in Canada who feel trapped in the cycle of abuse: any move they take to protect themselves and their children from abusive fathers and ex-spouses who live in other countries could make them subject to extradition requests, forced removal from Canada, and overseas detention.
Because these cases shock the conscience, and also because Section 44a of the Extradition Act allows the current Minister of Justice to reject any request that is "unjust or oppressive having regard to all the relevant circumstances," we are asking you and your colleagues to join us in our call to stop the extradition cases against ourselves: MM and KT.
As you know, the Justice Minister can also stop these cases under Section 44b of the Extradition Act, which states "the request for extradition is made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing the person by reason of their race, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, language, colour, political opinion, sex, sexual orientation, age, mental or physical disability or status or that the person’s position may be prejudiced for any of those reasons."
It is clear that we are being sought by ex-spouses because we are women who have escaped our abusers. Indeed, in both cases, the abusive fathers would not see the return of their children under the Extradition Act. It would only serve to punish and further harm us: the women they are targeting.
When you were elected, your government pledged to engage in an across-the-board gender-based impact analysis when it comes to creating and implementing policies, yet in these specific extradition cases, your former ministry failed two women who have broken no laws that would leave them open to prosecution here had the alleged offences occurred in Canada.
In MM's case, it has been clear since her ordeal began in 2010 that she was protecting her children from an abusive father in the US. Eight years on, there would clearly be no justice in uprooting MM and sending her to a US prison, where she could spend decades behind bars for a charge that, were it considered in Canada, would provide her with an adequate defence and high likelihood of acquittal. As Supreme Court of Canada Justice Rosalie Abella notes in the MM case: “the defence of rescuing children to protect them from imminent harm does not exist in Georgia [and] the mother will not be able to raise the defence she would have been able to raise had she been prosecuted in Canada."
In the case of KT, no legal violation occurred that would allow for an extradition to the United Kingdom. She left the UK to visit Calgary with her kids, who intended to return within the 28-day period stipulated in a custody order. But the ex-husband initiated court action before that 28-day period had expired to, without any rationale, forcibly return the children to the UK. Ironically, it was only the father's intemperate legal intervention that has kept the kids here in Canada, where they have decided they wish to stay.
As noted by the B.C. Supreme Court, KT imputes to her ex-husband "a goal of wishing to harm her, using the extradition proceedings and a potential prison sentence as a bludgeon." Like you, the court has dismissed as "irrelevant" proposed evidence about the best wishes of the children (who clearly do not wish to be forcibly returned to the father). Also dismissed was KT's affidavit, documentary evidence of bruising, and U.K. police reports that illustrate a history of assaults that include being hit by her ex-spouse's car.
In the MM case, Supreme Court Justice Abella was clear: "At the end of the day, there is little demonstrable harm to the integrity of our extradition process in finding it to be unjust or oppressive to extradite the mother of young children she rescued, at their request, from their abusive father. The harm, on the other hand, of depriving the children of their mother in these circumstances is profound and, with respect, demonstrably unfair."
A similar standard must apply to the case of KT, who committed no crime and who only finds herself in the legal crosshairs of her ex-spouse because of his own abusive actions.
As we state above, we salute your courage in standing strong under challenging circumstances. This proved to us that you have a great capacity for courage and truth.
Although you are no longer the Minister of Justice, we ask that you and your colleagues in a self-identified feminist government call upon your successor at the Justice Department to reconsider our cases and put a stop to them.
Because these cases shock our conscience and are unjust or oppressive having regard to all the relevant circumstances, we call on you to do the right thing and raise the questions needed to immediately drop the extradition cases of MM and KT.
We look forward to hearing from you through the support group which continues to work with us, Women Who Choose to Live (613-267-3998, tasc@web.ca)
Best wishes
MM and KT
