On Dec. 14, 2004, as most of the Ukrainian Canadian community was gearing up for the run off elections in Ukraine, Judy Sgro, then Minister of Citizenship & Immigration, was instructing the Clerk of the Privy Council to place the Wasyl Odynsky matter before Cabinet as she was recommending the revocation of his citizenship. Odynsky's family received the letter on Dec. 24 - Christmas Eve.
The timing of this event is of course consistent with the sadistic schedule that Max Wolpert of the War Crimes Unit appears to delight in. Consider that in the last few years, Wolpert has chosen the Friday before the Victoria Day weekend in 2002, Christmas Eve in 2002, the day before the Canada Day long weekend in 2003, the day before the Labour Day long weekend in 2003 and Christmas Eve again in 2004, to harass the Odynsky family with notices that this matter is proceeding to Cabinet or to demand further written submissions from his counsel. Just in case he had nothing to harass the Odynsky's with on the remaining family holidays, he would dispatch the RCMP to their home with surprise visits presumably to check if Odynsky still lived at the same address, but more likely to harass and frighten an elderly and ill man and his wife.
Sgro's actions fly in the face of statements made by her in meetings with representatives of the Ukrainian Canadian community wherein she acknowledged that the current process of denaturalization and deportation was inherently flawed and that at a minimum, the decision to revoke citizenship should be a judicial, not a political one.
Sgro is also on the record in the House, most recently on Nov. 23, 2004, when in response to questioning by David Anderson on the work of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration she stated:
"Certainly, in terms of a revocation process, I want to make sure it's transparent, it's open, and that people understand that it's an open, fair, and just process. And that's part of what our new legislation, frankly, is going to move forward in that direction."
Her actions are all the more incomprehensible in light of the recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Oberlander v. Canada (Attorney General), released on May 31, 2004, wherein the Court examined the standard of review applied by the Governor in Council/Cabinet in the Oberlander matter, a case not dissimilar to the Odynsky case, and found it wanting in three respects.
First, the Court found that the denaturalization and deportation proceedings against Oberlander were commenced contrary to the government's "no safe haven" policy which stated that the D & D proceedings would only be used in cases of suspected war criminals. In the case of Oberlander (and Odynsky) there was no evidence of war criminality and therefore, the Court ruled that Cabinet had to justify why the case was commenced in the first place.
Second, the Court held that Cabinet failed to consider the humanitarian and other mitigating grounds which were raised before Cabinet - advanced age, family ties, health, good character and exemplary contribution to Canadian society - all of which were noted by the hearing judge and which were the subject of further submissions to Cabinet, at the specific invitation of Cabinet. In Oberlander, having invited these submissions, Cabinet did not make any reference to them in the Order revoking Oberlander's citizenship, and the Court sent the matter back with instructions to consider these factors, thus signaling that these are important mitigating factors.
Finally, the Court pointed out the obvious - that the Ministers of Citizenship & Immigration and Justice cannot be both judge and jury and they had no business being at the Cabinet table on the day Oberlander's citizenship was revoked.
But most compellingly, how can any right-minded Canadian, imbued with a respect for the rule of law, agree that Odynsky should be deprived of that most fundamental right, that of citizenship, when in March 2001, Justice Andrew MacKay found that Odynsky was:
This irony is that this is a family that was doubly victimized, as Mrs. Odynsky was also a victim of the Nazi regime, having been rounded up as a young girl and press-ganged to perform forced labour for the Nazis.
It is clear that the former Minister of Citizenship & Immigration signed the Odynsky letter in a last ditch attempt to save her political hide in the wake of the so-called Strippergate Scandal. Not much of a scandal, but she was targeted for her unwillingness to cooperate with the scam that is Canada's war crime unit. But Judy should have known that ultimately, she would be sacrificed on the political altar of expediency and that it would have been better to stay true to her principles and not send this ill-conceived case back to Cabinet.
As her successor, Joe Volpe, has yet to be briefed on this matter, we will give him the benefit of the doubt for now, but hope that he makes the morally right decision.
Let's take a closer look at the track record of Canada's war crimes unit.
The 5th Annual Report of the War Crimes Program states that: "In 1985, the government established the Desch�nes Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals which produced three lists of suspects containing 883 names. The principal recommendation of Mr. Justice Desch�nes was that the RCMP and the Department of Justice be mandated to carry out investigations of these suspects". The reality is that the Desch�nes Commission recommended that 622 of those 883 cases be closed immediately. This is a far cry from the thousands of war criminals alleged by Sol Littman to be hiding in Canada - the infamous "400 per cent exaggeration."
The Report further states that the War Crimes Program deals with "alleged war criminals and persons who have committed crimes against humanity." In fact, the Government of Canada has been unable to convict one single Canadian of committing war crimes or crimes against humanity during WWII. In 1995, to save face and appease the Jewish lobby, the government introduced a new strategy of denaturalization and deportation. Under the guise of dealing with the issue of alleged war crimes, D&D proceedings only address the issue of whether a Canadian citizen had obtained citizenship through misrepresentation.
The Report perpetrates two basic myths which are essential to the War Crimes Industry: that there are thousands of war criminals amongst us and that the War Crimes Unit is successfully prosecuting them. Neither is true, but those who dare to say so are often labeled as anti-Semitic for exposing the fact that the emperor has no clothes.
The Ukrainian Canadian community calls not only upon Volpe to make the right decision, but also upon Prime Minister Paul Martin, to personally review this matter. We cannot believe that the same man whom we know to have a profound respect for the rule of law and who unequivocally supported the democratic process in Ukraine, can now face the million strong Ukrainian Canadian community and tell them that he supports a process which violates the Canadian Charter of Rights.
We call upon the Prime Minister and his Government to do the right thing.