RSS FeedIslamophobia in Canada: A Primer
by Fathima Cader and Sumayya Kassamali
Ten years after September 11, 2001, the term “Islamophobia,” once largely obscure, has become all but inevitable when discussing contemporary politics. As Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden became household names, Western fear of the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims has also grown. Canada has been no stranger to this phenomenon. Despite its reputation as a haven of multicultural tolerance, one 2011 poll showed that 56% of Canadians believe Western societies are in “irreconcilable conflict” with Muslim societies. 40% of the 1500 respondents approved the profiling of airplane passengers who appear Muslim. As Canada enters its seventh year of Conservative rule, how are progressives to understand and respond to this trend?
Islamophobia relies on characterizations of Islam and its adherents as uniquely prone to certain things, such as violence and sexism, and uniquely hostile to others, such as democracy and secular government. It includes discrimination based on perceived religious identity, such that non-Muslims, including Sikhs and Arab Christians, have also been targets of anti-Muslim violence in cases of “mistaken identity.” Meanwhile, Muslims in North America who do not appear to come from the Middle East or South Asia, such as Muslims of European or East Asian descent, have been less centrally targeted in this blurry overlap of religious and racial discrimination.
In this primer, we do not attempt to cover every instance of Islamophobia in Canada in the past decade. Rather, we provide an overview of its broad assumptions, particularly focusing on two themes that have proven central to discussions about Muslims: sexism and violence.
In offering this analysis, we stress that responses to Islamophobia must be placed within the context of Canada’s ongoing conservative political shift — from its increased military engagements around the world to its anti-immigrant policies at home, and from its vast cuts in social service funding to its ever-increasing levels of state surveillance. While numerous civil liberties and human rights organizations have reported on the rise of anti-Muslim hate crimes in Canada, we emphasize that Islamophobia is not just interpersonal: it is systemic. In fighting it, therefore, we must engage with the many other forms of oppression that also organize Canadian society.
Stripping of citizenship, contd
Father was never charged with war crime, family says
The family of Helmut Oberlander says he was never a Nazi and he has not been charged by the federal government with any war crime.
Stripping of citizenship
Accused war criminal wins chance to keep citizenship
An appeal court has ordered the federal cabinet to revisit its decision to strip accused Nazi war criminal Helmut Oberlander of his Canadian citizenship.
The fight begins
Len Edwards, the deputy minister of foreign affairs, insisted yesterday that standing up for the rights of citizens abroad was “a rule” and “a work ethic” within the department.
Charkaoui: the name every Canadian law student knows
Charkaoui, however, is the legal star of the five. He’s won two Supreme Court challenges and, as he gradually demolished Ottawa’s case against him, managed to make the government look like an idiot.
Patterns
2nd Canadian stranded in Kenya?
The network says when she tried to bring Mohammed back to Canada through Kenya three years ago, she was told the person with her was not her son because he didn’t look like his passport photo.
Full disclosure
Released Canadian’s lawyer clamouring for client’s case file
He added he fears that Ms. Mohamud is the victim of a “whisper campaign” from federal officials who are leaking unverified claims to the news media.
“My client is being defamed, and they can clear it all up by giving me the file,” Mr. Boulakia said.
The government refused to comment on the matter yesterday, saying it is waiting for an internal report on the events.
Suaad Mohamud
She is back in Canada now. Here are all our posts and essays on her trials and tribulations.
Exclusive interview with Suaad Mohamud in Nairobi
Video (Toronto Star)
See also:
No fear
- Experts vindicate woman trapped in Kenya
- DNA test proves identity of stranded Toronto woman
- Whose fault is it?
- ‘This nightmare will be over’
- Canada ignores desperate Mohamud — again
- McGuinty hammers Ottawa for ignoring stranded woman
- Ottawa’s shameful `imposter’ case
- Official identity loss
Many trash the government for hanging Suaad, our fellow Canadian, out to dry when she desperately needed help. By all means, the government deserves that. Trash hard.
But don’t forget another lesson of this story. When government officials have leeway, no one knows what’s on their mind. No one knows why they decide one way or another. No one can tell for now what on earth moved that low-level hack in our High Commission in Kenya to throw Suaad to the wolves. We should learn that when our life, rights, liberties, and security are at stake, government officials in charge must have no such leeway. They must follow precise rules.
There is a legal term for this freedom of maneuver, this leeway that officials have in making a myriad decisions that they make. It’s called discretion. The rule of law means, whenever possible, officials must follow the law rather than their own discretionary whims. Specific legal rules must bind Canadian officials who have the power to accept or reject our passport in some foreign country.
The world is so small now. Canadians should not fear international travel because our government can randomly dump us without justice and without hope. We should know exactly what the government will be obliged to do if anyone questions our passports. We should be guaranteed justice. We should have no fear.
Breaking news: DNA test proves identity of stranded Toronto woman
The breaking news about what was obvious for such a long time: a 31-year old Canadian woman is exiled in Kenya by our government.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/679116
Bring Suaad back home.
Respect the Canadian passport
Woman stuck in Kenya seeks help for stress
Mohamud will see a doctor today in Nairobi to treat stress arising from, among other things, being jailed with killers at Langata Women’s Prison.
Coming back home to her son would be a great and much desired victory for Ms. Mohamud.
But an even greater victory for all of Canadian citizens would be getting the Federal Court to clarify the law.
The Court should order the government to respect the Canadian passport as proof of Canadian citizenship. The government should be allowed to reject the passport only in obvious cases: photos clearly not matching the bearer’s face in gender or race, or when the difference is beyond any reasonable doubt. This will protect the public interest in three crucial areas: citizens should not bear inordinate unnecessary risks of foreign travel, foreign states should give proper respect to the Canadian passport, and no Canadian should be barred from coming back home.
The right to return home to Canada is one of the most valuable rights of a Canadian citizen. There is a simple word for a breach of this right. It is exile. It robs the citizen of her home and her job, cuts her off from her family and from the Canadian society, and puts the citizen in peril in a foreign country. In some ways, it’s worse than a criminal charge and a prison term in Canada. You don’t get a hearing, you don’t know when you’re coming back, and it’s a lot more expensive to get help.
Exile is almost always illegal and unconstitutional. It’s hard to think of a case when it would be fair to block a citizen from coming back to Canada. Only a catastrophic risk to public health comes to mind. The state can properly send a citizen to face justice in another country, but that’s not exile. It’s extradition. And unlike extradition, exile is one the most vile acts the state can do to its own citizen. Mixed with risks to the citizen’s life outside of Canada, exile is an abject assault on our most basic human rights.
No doubt passport fraud happens. No doubt look-a-likes can try to take advantage of genuine Canadian passports. Of course, when they succeed they harm public interest. But the harm from exiling just one Canadian citizen whose passport the government mistakenly rejects is far greater. We protect the criminally accused with the beyond-reasonable-doubt standard of proof. A bearer of the Canadian passport who doesn’t “look like their picture” according to a petty consular bureaucrat should enjoy at least the same level of protection.
The government is free to investigate people suspected of passport fraud. But if the passport is genuine and not obviously misused, consider the bearer a Canadian citizen and let him come back to Canada. Then investigate him under Canadian law. The cost of prosecuting, convicting, and deporting a fraudster from Canada is always less then the risk of mistakenly exiling a Canadian citizen. And with the move to biometric passports, it will be next to impossible to misuse a genuine Canadian passport. More importantly, low-level bureaucrats will not be making life-and-death decisions touching on our most basic rights anymore.
