GoC: No evidence Canadian Made LAVs Used in Saudi Civil Conflict

By: Melanie Marquis, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- The federal government has not been able to determine with any certainty that Canadian-made light-armoured vehicles sold to Saudi Arabia were used by that country to suppress the Shiite minority in the eastern part of the country.

A Canadian Army LAV III deployed in Afghanistan in 2010. 

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland confirmed Thursday that officials from her department did not find conclusive evidence that the Canadian-made vehicles have been used in human rights abuses.

That independent opinion from public servants was communicated to her after a "rigorous investigation" launched last August at her request.

"Officials at Global Affairs Canada found no conclusive evidence that Canadian-made vehicles were used in human rights violations," Freeland told members of the Commons foreign affairs committee.

"That was the independent, objective opinion of our public service and the advice given to me as minister."

At the time, Freeland said she was deeply concerned by reports last summer in the Globe and Mail that Saudi Arabia had used Gurkha armoured personnel carriers, made by Newmarket, Ont., based Terradyne Armoured Vehicles Inc., against its own people.

She vowed to "respond accordingly" if that was the case, but wanted to ensure a through investigation so as to act on credible, trustworthy information.

According to a report in Montreal's Le Devoir last month, since opening the probe, a Global Affairs spokesman said Ottawa suspended all arms exports to the Saudi kingdom last summer.

That included a contract for armoured vehicles designed by General Dynamics Land Systems, which won a $15 billion contract in 2015 that the Liberal government honoured by issuing export permits a year later.

Freeland's office did not respond to a query about whether Thursday's finding meant the shipments have already resumed or would begin anew.

The government is being questioned about the issue of exporting arms to nations with spotty human rights records after another deal concluded between Bell Helicopter and the Philippines has raised concerns.

Freeland is expected to announce during testimony at the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development later Thursday that the government is proposing two amendments to Bill C47 on export and import acts when it comes to licensing weapons.

The toughest of the measures is the legal requirement for the Canadian government to consider human rights, peace and security risks in any pre-export licensing assessment.

In the future, if the government finds there is a "substantial risk" the conditions could be violated, the law will require that export be refused.

The proposed amendments, approved Tuesday in cabinet, are not retroactive and won't apply to General Dynamics Land Systems, based in London, Ont.

On Wednesday, the government ordered a review of a 2012 deal between Bell Helicopter and the Philippine government after similar concerns surfaced.

The government is concerned about the use of the choppers by the government of President Rodrigo Duterte, who has been accused of extrajudicial executions in connection with a war on drug traffickers and terrorists.

The helicopters are manufactured in Mirabel, Que.

A senior member of the Philippine military said the aircraft would also be used in "internal security operations," prompting a review.

On Thursday, the Philippine defence said Thursday that the military would not use 16 helicopters being bought from Canada to attack insurgents, as had been feared by Canadian officials.

Defence Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said the Philippine government could buy elsewhere if Canada decides to scuttle the sale of the Bell helicopters, which he said would be used to ferry supplies and troops, including those wounded in combat, and to respond to disasters.

The office of International Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne said those comments do not change the government's plan to order an assessment of the deal with Canadian Commercial Corp.

-- with files from The Associated Press.

Dion: Canada still has leverage in Saudi LAV deal

By: TONDA MACCHARLES, Ottawa Bureau reporter The Toronto Star 

OTTAWA—Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion insists Canada still has leverage over the controversial contract to sell light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia despite the Star’s revelation that the federal government could be on the hook for a multibillion cancellation penalty.

“Each time you break a contract, there is always the danger of penalties,” Dion said Monday. “I always said that, but this is not the issue, because we’re not — we’ll respect the contract.”

At the same time, Dion insisted Canada’s hands are not tied when it comes to ensuring “that the military equipment that any Canadian company is selling abroad is not used against human rights and the interests of Canada and our allies.”

Dion said the arms “export permits allow Canada to be sure that military equipment . . . sold by Canadian companies is not misused by the country that received them.”

The Star on Saturday reported the cancellation penalty is in the multibillion-dollar range, under the contract signed by the previous Conservative government.

Cesar Jaramillo, executive director of Project Ploughshares, said his greater concern is Dion has made up his mind that the contract will continue despite valid questions about the human rights implications of proceeding with the deal.

In signing export permits for the vehicles, said Jaramillo, Canada has already given up “leverage.”

“They speak of evidence, but the threshold (for export approval) is neither certainty nor evidence, it is reasonable risk” the weaponized vehicles might be used against unarmed populations, he said. “The practical difference is if you use ‘evidence’ — this is something that takes place after the exports have taken place and after the human rights violations have occurred.”

Project Ploughshares joined Amnesty International and other groups in writing an open letter to the Liberal government asking it to halt the sale on the grounds that there is “reasonable risk — the threshold for Canadian export controls — that Canadian-made goods will be used against civilians by Saudi Arabia.”

The sale of an unspecified number of weaponized vehicles, to be built by General Dynamic Land Systems in London, Ont., was signed between Saudi Arabia and the Canada Commercial Corporation, a Crown corporation.

A briefing note for Finance Minister Bill Morneau, released under Access to Information and shared with the Star on condition the source not be identified, states clearly there is a question of liability for the government.

While the international trade minister has direct responsibility to Parliament for the Crown corporation that is the contracting party for Canadian suppliers, the document flags to the finance minister that it is he who approves the corporation’s borrowing plan and also has a direct role in approving CCC’s involvement in large capital projects.

The document, which contains redactions, identifies CCC’s signing of “a record $14.3-billion contact with Saudi Arabia for the sale of light armoured vehicles produced by General Dynamics Land Systems, and says “fees from transactions like this help maintain CCC’s financial viability.”

Liberal MP John McKay, the parliamentary secretary to the defence minister, said in an interview that if there were any move to stop the Saudi contract it would have to involve “very, very serious consideration.”

“There’s reputational damage, there’s financial damage, there’s employment damage and at the end of the day what did you actually accomplish? It’s not if the Saudis wouldn’t be able to buy LAVs. They can buy LAVs. So in an ideal world you wouldn’t have to be discussing this but this is not an ideal world.”

Members of the former Conservative government adamantly defended the contract in interviews with the Star last week. On Monday, Conservative foreign affairs critic Tony Clement clarified previous statements he’d made questioning whether the Saudi regime’s cross-border military efforts in Yemen should result in the contract’s cancellation.

Clement said “if the situation on the ground is the same as when we signed the contract, ie., that the LAVs are going to be used against terrorists, I’m in favour of implementing the contract. If there’s something different on the ground that indicates that the LAVs would be used to crush legitimate internal dissent that’s a different story.”

He now says the issue in Yemen is more complicated than when he suggested the contract should be shelved.