Photo: press conference in Ottawa on the 10th anniversary of the Mine Ban Treaty with (L to R): Tun Channareth, Sylvie Brigot, Lloyd Axworthy, Paul Hannon and Jody Williams.

A who’s who of mine action advocates descended on Ottawa this week to attend a series of events in celebration of the 10th anniversary of the signing of the Mine Ban Treaty.

Lloyd Axworthy, former Liberal foreign affairs minister and current president of the University of Winnipeg was reflective, sad, and upbeat – not only about the treaty – but about Canada’s place in the world.

“I think today is a very important day for Canada, because it is time to renew our foreign policy and regain the influence that we have lost around the world, simply because we have forgotten what we do best,” said Mr. Axworthy.

Ten years ago, Mr. Axworthy was one of several people who pushed forward a diplomatic initiative that ventured outside the conventional way of doing business.

The Ottawa Process, as it became known, was initiated by civil society – not in the corridors of power.

It was the failure of the international community to agree to a ban on anti-personnel mines using the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) that triggered Mr. Axworthy’s now-famous challenge to the world to sign a comprehensive anti-personnel landmine treaty in 1997.

Today, 156 State Parties have signed the treaty and even many of those who have not signed on adhere to the conditions set out in the treaty.

While there is much to be happy about, delegates are well aware of the many challenges that lie ahead.

“There is still a lot of work to do (to rid the world of landmines), that is why anniversaries are so important,” said Mr. Axworthy. “They make you rejuvenate a little bit.”

According to Sylvie Brigot, executive director of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), only two states continue to use anti-personnel landmines: Russia and Burma.

While there are many positives, the ICBL will need to address the fact that 14 countries will be seeking an extension to their treaty obligations because they will not meet their 2009-2010 deadlines for being mine free.

To make matters worse, several Canadian and international NGOs are operating at less than capacity. Many more landmines could be cleared now than are being cleared.

“It is very appealing for some people to say, ‘let’s write some big cheques to some big organizations or multilaterals or through the United Nations,’” said Paul Hannon, executive director, Mines Action Canada (MAC). “We know, if you put the money into NGOS doing humanitarian mine action, you not only have a much more cost-effective use of your money, you have more accountability for your money. That is the big challenge for the donor; to make sure the money is going to make a difference on the ground. We (MAC) have always advocated for more funding going through NGOs,” said Mr. Hannon.

Finding long-term funding for demining will be critical in the years ahead, but equally important is caring for the 473,000 landmine survivors around the world.

“Only one per cent of mine action funding goes towards direct victim assistance,” said Jody Williams, founding co-ordinator of the ICBL and a member of the Nobel Women’s Initiative.

“I find it a little curious, given the fact that States say the whole reason this (Mine Ban Treaty) happened was out of humanitarian concerns. If that is truly felt, how do you justify only one per cent for survivors?”

Many NGOs not only help landmine survivors – they also employ them.

“There is nothing more powerful than employing people with disabilities,” said Fiona Gall, a technical advisor for the Swedish Committee for Afghanistan. Nine per cent of her NGO’s staff is disabled.

Ms. Gall, who lives in Kabul, was in Ottawa to attend the symposium put on by Handicap International. The meeting was organized as a way to bring NGOs and governments together to discuss better ways to implement and link mine action and development.

“What I have learned from this meeting is that you should always be looking at how things are done in other countries, you should always compare, and learn lessons from each other,” said Ms. Gall.

Ms. Gall says she will return to Afghanistan and try to create linkages with other mine action experts in order to try to reach out to landmine survivors and other people with disabilities in a more efficient way.

While the ICBL was busy celebrating the achievements of the first 10 years of the treaty, the federal government held a press conference of its own.

Bev Oda, minister of international co-operation, announced an additional C$80 million over four years for mine action in Afghanistan.

While the announcement was welcomed, many Canadian NGOs struggling to keep their own mine action programs afloat in countries other than Afghanistan, were disappointed to learn the funding was only for that country and would be administered through the United Nations.

Photo: Canadian Council for Refugees press conference announcing the "proud to aid and abet refugees" campaign.

It’s not often a roomful of church-going, middle-age men and women say they approve of breaking the law, but that is exactly what happened at the opening plenary at a recent Canadian Council for Refugees meeting.

Hundreds of delegates from around the country came to the three-day retreat in Ottawa to discuss immigration and refugee issues and to launch the national “proud to aid and abet refugees” campaign.

At the end of the formal presentations, one audience member after another got up, gave their name, church or NGO affiliation, and proudly announced they would continue to help those people who they believed were fleeing persecution in other parts of the world.

The campaign grew out of last September’s arrest of a U.S. human rights worker at a Canada-U.S. border crossing.

Janet Hinshaw-Thomas, the 65-year-old director of a church-based group called PRIME – Ecumenical Commitment to Refugees – was taken into custody by Canadian border officials and charged with people smuggling.

She was charged under section 117 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

The Act states that “No person shall knowingly organize, induce, aid or abet the coming into Canada of one or more persons who are not in possession of a visa, passport or other document required by this Act.”

Her crime: she had come to the border to accompany 12 Haitians who wanted to make a refugee claim in Canada.

Although the charges were later dropped, the fact that a human rights worker was arrested made headlines around the country.

Many people at the conference felt that Canada has traded off human rights for security and were quick to point out that refugees are not terrorists. In reality, they are the first victims of terrorism.

“Our work at the Canadian Council for Refugees (CCR) is to remind the government that refugees have rights,” said Elizabeth McWeeny, president of the CCR. “Without liberty, we cannot have security.”

Human rights advocates have called for an amendment to the Act and have made proposals to the government.

Peter Showler, director of the Refugee Forum at the University of Ottawa, says the Act needs to be amended in three ways: to remove the Attorney General’s right to delegate power to charge persons under section 117; to require the Attorney General to give his or her written consent to use the Act; and to include the words “and for material benefit.”

The change in wording would clearly differentiate human rights workers from criminals who are trying to smuggle people into the country for profit.

“We are not opposed to the government arresting those who are trafficking in people and making a profit,” said Francisco Rico-Martinez, former CCR president and co-director of FCJ Refugee Centre in Toronto.

Being able to distinguish the good from the bad was one of the conference’s main talking points.

“Canadians should be proud (of their immigration system),” said Jahanshah Assadi, UNHCR’s representative in Canada. “There is a perception that the system is a free for all, but that is not the case. The truth is, Canada has a functioning system that is able to determine who is a refugee and who is not,” he said.

Canada admits about 250,000 immigrants per year – 10 per cent of whom are refugees.

The current problem for the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) is dealing with the backlog of refugee protection claims, which currently stands at just over 34,000. It takes an average of 14 months to settle a claim.

According to the IRB, of all the claims finalized, 46 per cent are accepted.

Mr. Assadi cautions Canadians to put that into perspective.

“Canada takes in the same number of refugees per year as we have living in one refugee camp in Chad,” he said.

Mr. Assadi – who has spent most of his professional career working with refugees – says immigrants have much to offer Canada.

“They have a deep appreciation for Canada. They want to work hard and contribute,” said Mr. Assadi.