#rC3 - The continued erosion of International law and human rights under a global pandemic

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!