FAIT Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES ÉTRANGÈRES ET DU COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, June 2, 1998

[English]

• 1129

The Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham (Toronto Centre—Rosedale, Lib.)): I would like to call this meeting of the committee to order.

I welcome Minister Boudria, who will kindly give us a report on the experience of his trip to Algeria. He is accompanied by the members who attended with him, Senators Comeau and De Bané.

Madam Alarie, welcome before the committee.

• 1130

[Translation]

Ms. Folco, you prefer to sit among the accused rather than with us, the members of the committee. You are abandoning us, Ms. Folco? Allright. Minister, you have an impressive influence over your colleagues.

Minister, you have the floor.

The Hon. Don Boudria (Government House Leader in the Commons, Leader of the Canadian parliamentary delegation to Algeria): I thought I was on the witness bench and not the prisoner's bench, but since you are conversant with the law, I'm sure that you're familiar with that nuance.

First of all, I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade for allowing us to make this presentation here this morning. I know that you had invited us twice before, if memory serves. However, since your meetings are generally held on Tuesday morning, at the same time as the Cabinet meetings, that presented a challenge. Luckily for us, since it allows us to appear here today, the Cabinet meeting will take place on Thursday this week, which makes this meeting possible.

From February 28 to March 4 of this year, the witnesses appearing before you today had the great privilege of visiting Algeria. This mission was both ministerial and parliamentary. In my role as minister, I had the pleasure of acting as representative of the government, but in addition, we had an excellent group of parliamentarians with us who are accompanying me here today.

I would like to say a few words about that for two or three minutes. On the one hand, as you know, Senator Pierre De Bané is the first Canadian of Arab origin to sit in the Parliament of our country. Therefore, during that visit, the fact that we had former minister and Senator De Bané with us helped us a great deal with this mission.

Secondly, Ms. Hélène Alarie once lived in Algeria. As she told us during the trip, one of her daughters was born in Algiers. In fact, she informed the mayor and governor of the city of Algiers of this, because Algiers is both a province and a city.

Ms. Raymonde Folco, MP, was also part of the group. In addition to being a member of Parliament representing the Liberal Party in the province of Quebec, she's a former judge with the Immigration and Refugee Board. She was an important part of the group, given that she's very familiar with many of the difficulties Algeria is facing.

Last but not least, we had Senator Gérald Comeau. Senator Comeau is an economics professor, as we all know, and economic issues are very much part and parcel of the current situation in Algeria.

For my part, this was my second trip to that country, the first having taken place in December, 1996, when I was Minister for International Co-operation and Minister responsible for the Francophonie. So that ends my introduction.

I would now like to describe some of the details of my visit. First of all, in Algeria, we met the prime minister, five ministers and numerous government officials. We met with 50 members of the People's National Assembly and 12 senators who are members of the Council of the nation. This was the first time that most members of the Council of the nation met a foreign delegation since the Senate held its inaugural assembly while we were there.

We met separately with the six parties who sit in the House of Representative's and with journalists representing nine independent dailies. We did not meet with any independent journalists in our hotel. We chose to visit them at the press building which was bombed a few years ago.

• 1135

At this site, we were shown a place where the bodies of journalists killed by the Algerian terrorists were laid out. We took in the whole scene, and at some point we may have caused some concern for those in charge of security, but we wanted to meet people on site and not just have the perspective you get when you see a country from your hotel room.

We had meetings with 22 associations of civilian society, many of which are dedicated to helping the victims of terrorism and their families. These included organizations for widows, representatives of children with special needs, children who were victims of violence and orphans of people who were killed. Moreover, we met on site with the main union of Algerian workers, the UGTA. We went to their facilities. We climbed the stairs used by their late Secretary General, who was himself assassinated not very long ago. Therefore, we met with a good range of people.

We had frank and direct discussions with all those we wanted to meet. We were not subjected to any prohibitions, and no one attempted to prevent us from visiting anyone. We were able to see the people we wanted to see where we wanted to see them. Given some of the criticism that has been levelled, it is important to add that point, especially when you're talking about visiting Algeria.

[English]

We did as well meet with Algerian parliamentarians and we were very impressed with the calibre of people sitting in their parliament, their training and their views on various issues. When we met with them, we met totally secular organizations. We met, shall I say, fundamentalist political parties such as Hamas and Ettahaddi and other groups like that, which had much stronger religious affiliations than others we had the opportunity of meeting.

We met with all these people and discussed everything from the condition of the economy of the country to what was needed to make security and otherwise better in Algeria. Without exception, everyone told us that the crimes in question, the assassinations, were committed by terrorists, usually terrorists they knew personally. In other words, once they know the people who had perpetrated the crimes in their own villages, of course they disappear immediately after the crimes are committed.

No one has indicated to us directly or indirectly that either the military or the government had participated in acts of commission or omission with regard to the crimes in question.

[Translation]

Nevertheless, we did observe several things. First of all, it must be admitted that there are many instances of what is referred to there as excess, or as I would put it, abuse of human rights. We met with the Observatoire national des droits de la personne, an organization which is more or less affiliated with the government, and we met with other organizations that are much further from the government. All agreed that there are abuses. Of course, those who are closer to power say there is less in terms of numbers and those who are further away say there is more. That is to be expected.

In many cases, we were told of young soldiers who arrest individuals or catch in the act a person who has committed crimes or killed members of their families. They are tempted, even though this is not right, to administer sometimes very summary forms of justice.

• 1140

The government provides weapons to villagers. They are called patriots. Many of these villagers who are armed to defend themselves against acts of terrorism have no judicial training or police training, etc. Of course, here again, the administration of justice sometimes entails actions which may be understandable if we put ourselves in their shoes, but that are certainly not proper.

I would like to ask my colleagues who are members of the delegation to add a few points. However, before I close, I would like to relay two or three comments that were made by people in Algeria.

The people of Algeria—I'm referring mainly to young people, children, teenagers, young artists, intellectuals, but especially the young that we met with—feel that reports from the international community don't always portray their country very realistically. A young artist who came to a meeting in the home of the widow of the former president told us: "On television, they show Algerians who are dying, Algerians who are crying, but never Algerians who are just getting on with life." That's an important observation.

The young also told us that one of the most serious problems in their country is the lack of investment, unemployment, especially among the young, etc. As long as the international community is not interested in investing more in that country... I think that we in Canada can contribute a great deal, because we are already major trading partners with that nation and can thus create employment to help the youth of that nation. Others will be referring to this. That is the comment I wanted to make about Algerian youth.

It is also important to note that the independent Algerian media, as well as government media, more or less share the same opinion about the way in which their country is portrayed. It's not that they don't want people in other countries to know the truth about the major difficulties that they're experiencing, but that is no reason to present facts that are not always true about the country.

With regard to the initiative of the UN Commission on Human Rights—and I think I'll be generous by putting it that way—the idea does not stir up a great deal of enthusiasm in Algeria. In fact, there is virtually none. There is none among the people that we met with; there is none among the unions; there is none among workers' groups; nor political parties, the government, the opposition, etc. Not did I see any in civil society.

According to some views, if we tried an Algerian initiative supported by international stakeholders, we might have a better chance of success and we might make a better contribution to the search for common ground in that country.

Those are some of the points I wanted to make. I am sure that the others will have things to add. I've forgotten a lot. After all, we spent many days in that country and we met all the people that I've just mentioned.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Minister. Other members of your delegation might like to add something, after which we will go directly to questions. As you know, we lost a half hour of our time together. Therefore, Perhaps we could limit our comments.

• 1145

Senator De Bané.

Senator Pierre De Bané (De la Vallière, Lib., Member of the Canadian Parliamentary Delegation to Algeria): A few years ago, when your committee conducted a study of the fundamental thrust of a new Foreign Affairs policy, one of the things that it recommended was that Canada, through its foreign policy, promote our values, one of which is democracy.

I must say that when we went to Algeria, I had the most moving experience that I've ever had as in 30 years of parliamentary life: on the one hand, a population that is trying to establish a democratic system and, on the other hand, people who are determined to prevent democracy from taking root in their country.

As you know, despite the threats of terrorists, the constitution was approved by a significant percentage of the population and, despite the terrorist threat, voter participation rates in the referendum were very high.

After that, the president was elected. Here again, over 76 per cent of the population took part in this election which was supervised by, among others, international organizations in which Canada had six observers.

As the Minister was saying, we met with all political parties in that country. The RND, the president's party, has 156 seats. The MSP has 69; as a matter of fact, the presidential candidate for that party was here a week ago. The FLN has 62 seats, the Ennahda, 34; the FFS, 20; the RCD, 19; the independents, 11; and the Trotskyist Labour Party, 4; lastly, certain small parties have 5 representatives . That's a total of 380.

What struck me over there was to see that since these elections, there is now a new generation of Algerian politicians in the two Chambers. Many are very young and tell us Canadians: "You have an old democracy and we need your help."

Indeed, if ever by some misfortune, the terrorists were successful in that country, then clearly all the other countries of the Maghreb as well as the 22 Arab countries would fall into totalitarian fundamentalism, which has nothing to do with religion, with sincere faith. Rather, this is a group that wants to establish a dictatorship. That's what the Algerian population is fighting against.

There has been a flood of information about what's going on over there and there's always a tendency to put the authorities and the killers in the same league. Of course, the public, of every political stripe, has spoken out vigorously against that kind of confusion, which tars everyone with the same brush.

Thus, I was extremely pleased to have been part of this delegation and I was very moved by

[English]

the resolve of the people we have met, their determination not to be overcome by those terrorists who have committed over 10,000 acts of terrorism in the last five or six years. They have killed children, women, journalists, doctors. They have burned over 1,000 schools, over 100 hospitals. I think it is our duty to do our utmost to help this new democracy strengthen in that country.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you, Senator De Bané.

We will now go directly to questions. Mr. Mills.

[English]

Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, Ref.): I think we all have a great deal of compassion for the people of Algeria and what they are going through with the terrorists.

I guess we were all surprised by the method with which this group was set up. The foreign affairs committee two hours ago dealt with Sudan and the problem there. Out of that hopefully will come further action. It seems strange to me at least that the foreign affairs committee found out about it by reading the newspaper.

• 1150

I wonder why the European Union parliamentarians had so much of a problem when they went there getting to the people and getting out of the capital. They literally flew home and said “It's hopeless; they won't let us do anything.”

I wonder if you were able to go out to the villages, if you were able to talk to the kids in the schools, people in the marketplace, people in the bars and restaurants of the smaller villages.

If they were that open to us, as you made it sound, Mr. Boudria, that's wonderful. I wonder now how we push the issue to help them deal with the rebel question. That is the problem. Innocent people are being killed. How do we deal with that issue? What can Canada do, and are we doing it?

Mr. Don Boudria: First, on the method for choosing the people who went, I was personally invited by a minister in Algeria. That invitation was then reiterated by the speakers of both houses of the Algerian parliament.

Following that, I consulted the House leaders of all parties in the House of Commons, starting with the official opposition. The objective was to have representatives of both houses, bipartisan in both houses and both genders in both houses. In the case of the Senate, the government leader in the Senate selected Senator De Bané. It took a little longer for the opposition to supply me with a name; finally Senator Comeau accepted.

In consultation with our own whip having then two men from the Senate, I thought it was important to have two women from the House. It was arranged for a delegation of five. Raymonde Folco was chosen by the government side and then I went to each opposition party. We had to go around twice to obtain a name from the opposition, Hélène Alarie, because initially I was given a name for the Reform Party and the person changed his mind.

In terms of European Union members, they did encounter difficulties when they arrived, but I think your analysis of their success is not accurate. Mr. Cohn-Bendit was not exactly friendly, I think I can say without fear of contradiction, toward the Algerian authorities when he arrived over there. Perhaps it was reciprocal. By the time he left he had said his opinion of his visit was considerably different.

Second, upon my landing in Paris after arriving from Algiers, I organized to have a meeting with Dr. Soulier, the member of the European Parliament who led that European delegation. I went through the list of what we had said and gave him a copy of our summary of findings. He said something like enfin quelqu'un qui a compris ce qu'on a vu. In other words, our results according to him were almost the same as his. We compared witnesses we met and we found out that, other than the parliamentarians, they were totally different people. Obviously with various political parties and their leaders, they are the same people regardless of who meets them. We arrived at conclusions that were similar.

On helping Algeria, a number of things have already been announced, and I think we are starting to do some good. Not that I want to have the pretension that our country has all the answers to helping those people, but we are in a privileged position as Canadians. We are not some of the larger colonial powers of days gone by in Europe in which there is that méfiance.

• 1155

Once you have been colonized by one European power for 132 years and that process was followed by 30 years of dictatorship, you are naturally a little reticent toward anyone from a foreign soil telling you what they think is best for you.

There is that méfiance on the part of the Algerian authorities and almost everybody. Nevertheless, because we come from perhaps far away, perhaps because we share a common language, perhaps because we have never invaded anybody, and I think because of the Canadian way and Canadian interest, perhaps because of our commercial ties, they listen to what we say and they don't feel insulted.

I believe one minister told Senator De Bané, “You Canadians tell us the same thing that others can tell us, but when you say it, it doesn't sound the same for us”. In other words, they don't have a natural or unnatural fear of us, however it may be.

What have we done so far as a country, not we as this delegation, although we contributed to it? First of all, we tried to increase the link between our two parliaments. Senator De Bané has described this beginning of a democracy like a tree with no roots. If it is to develop roots we have to assist it. Last week we had visiting us in Canada a former minister who signed a protocol regarding human resources training with our government.

Second, we are having a delegation to Canada led by none other than the speaker of their Senate from June 8 to 13.

Third, we have had the formation in Canada of a parliamentary friendship group with them. We may think in our country that a parliamentary friendship group is kind of a nice thing to have, but believe me, from their vantage point it's better than that. It's better than just a nice thing to have. It is a very important initiative that demonstrates caring on the part of another country.

Then we had a trade initiative on the part of Canadian business people in Algeria and a return one which I think will occur in September and which will be chaired by my colleague in cabinet, Minister Sergio Marchi. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Axworthy, announced a number of initiatives, including assisting organizations within civil society, to help victims of violence over there, orphaned children and so on. Some $ 300,000 was announced there. There is partnership between Le Devoir and the journal El Watan. Canada is also developing with Norway a project to assist psychologically affected children, victims of violence. The Prime Minister last January sent the first personal emissary of any country after the elections to have this first meeting with Algerians. Those are all Canadian first initiatives and there are a number of others.

[Translation]

The Centrale de l'enseignement du Québec prepared a very interesting report on terrorism and Algeria. This group even spoke of certain changes that are taking place in that country and of Canada's contribution. I could speak to that at greater length, but I think I've already given a few examples of the difference we've made and especially that we can make as Canadians. I think that this demonstrates that Canadian parliamentarians representing our country in this kind of initiative are listened to by the people of countries like Algeria and others, and that we can make a difference through our contribution.

The Chairman: Thank you very much. Ms. Folco, do you have anything to add?

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib., Member of the Canadian Parliamentary Delegation to Algeria): With your permission, I would like to add my own comments to those made by Minister Boudria on the question that the member has just asked, that is why Canada managed to enter Algeria and meet with all the people it asked to meet.

• 1200

I can tell you that we met with three human rights organizations in Algeria, including an official organization of course, but also—and this is more unusual—with an individual who has acted as a lawyer for Islamic terrorists. We met him in private, alone, without the presence of police or members of the government. That's an important point. We also met with a third group of advocates for the rights of victims of terrorism. I wanted to add that point.

To get back to the member's question, Canada is not perceived the same way as older European countries, not only France but also other countries such as Great Britain and Belgium. Their role in Africa, as we know, was for decades, if not centuries, a traumatic one, whereas we were never a colonial power there. It must also be said that when the Algerian war broke out and Algeria declared its independence from France, a significant number of Algerian and French nationals returned to France, are still there and in some cases play a rather significant role vis-à-vis the Algerian state.

Algeria had also asked European delegations to examine the role played by certain groups in what I would call the militant Islamic diaspora—and I do say militant—in countries like Great Britain, France and Belgium, groups that organize terrorist networks who most likely send money and weapons to Algeria.

To my knowledge, we do not have this kind of large and well- organized terrorist group in Canada, and the fact that we play a much more neutral role had a great deal to do with the acceptance of our presence in Algeria and the type of people we were able to meet.

Some of the people that we met were almost considered persona non grata by the government and yet, we were able to meet with them alone and they were able to express their views openly and candidly.

The Chairman: Mr. Turp.

Mr. Daniel Turp (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ): First of all, Minister, as you know, I was eagerly awaiting your visit and that of the members of the delegation before this committee. I think the wait was excessively long. You tabled a report and held a press conference on March 11. And you're appearing before this committee on June 2. I know that the Minister is very busy, but I think that this was excessive.

Should you preside over other delegations, I hope that you will bear in mind the importance for a committee like ours of meeting members of a delegation quickly so that they can have full recall of the events that they've witnessed and the comments that they've heard, even though that seems to be the case here today.

I personally wanted to avoid that long an interval for the Chiapas delegation, of which I was part. It will be heard by this committee on Thursday, in two days, while the mission ended barely ten days ago. That's one comment I wanted to make, because I had emphasized to you on many occasions that this meeting should take place quickly after your return from Algeria.

I also have questions about the way you operated, to shed light on this for me personally and to clarify for the committee how things will be done when other delegations go to foreign countries on fact-finding missions, as was the case here, and perhaps even to help those of us who must continue our work on Chiapas, since for the Minister of Foreign Affairs the way to go seems to be to create such delegations or parliamentary and ministerial missions.

With regard to the makeup of the delegation, I understand what you've told us. With regard to the report that you tabled March 11, I would like to know how it was prepared. Was it done in consultation with other members of the delegation? How did you do this?

• 1205

How did you present your conclusions to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, since the date of the report coincides with the press conference during which the Minister announced a series of initiatives? Therefore, I would simply like to know how you did this, from a procedural standpoint, to see whether your mode of operation should be used for other missions, and whether you yourself have any recommendations to make about how such delegations should proceed and how such missions abroad should be followed up.

I have three substantive questions, first of all on the delegation of the European Union. I have read Mr. Soulier's report and the comments made by Mr. Cohn-Bendit upon his return. He said something quite interesting about the massacres and I would like to know what you think of that.

In a statement made by Mr. Soulier before the European Parliament, he said that with regard to the massacres in Algeria, he had noted that apart from one or two exceptions, all the people he spoke to in Algeria had no doubt whatsoever that the massacres had been the work of terrorists. I would like to know if you heard about these exceptions.

My second question is about the media. You touched briefly on the media, their situation and their independence. In his press release Mr. Axworthy stated that measures would be considered to encourage the independent Algerian press. Therefore, I would like to know your assessment of the state of independence or dependence of the Algerian media. It is my understanding that the press can only publish if it is authorized to do so. The government must authorize the publication of newspapers.

My third and final question deals specifically with a commission of inquiry. Before you went to Algeria, we had discussed the possibility of an international commission of inquiry, as had the Europeans and the Americans, that is the American Department of State.

After your delegation returned and during discussions with Ms. Alarie, we were made aware of the fact that most people in Algeria don't want that kind of commission. You yourself just raised the possibility of an internal commission with international observers that might be acceptable to the government. I would like to know if there was any follow-up on that, and in light of the fact that there have been other massacres—there were more again last week—this issue must be of concern to us.

In conclusion, I would ask you for suggestions about the questions we should ask the parliamentarians who will appear before our committee in one week, I believe. I would like to hear your suggestions about that.

Mr. Don Boudria: First of all, I indicated at the outset that I was sorry about the long time that elapsed between our visit to Algeria and our appearance here today, a delay that was caused by several factors. On the one hand, as I stated earlier, your meetings are held at the same time as Cabinet meetings. Secondly, your committee undertook a project that has something to do with the nuclear issue. I don't have the details. Apparently, that led to some complications for at least one date. There were two or three postponements like that. But that has been noted.

With regard to future delegations, it is difficult for me to answer on Mr. Axworthy's behalf. In my case, it was an invitation. Earlier I explained the origins of the mission. First of all, an invitation was issued for one minister initially, last December, an invitation made to Senator De Bané and myself. Later, it was confirmed by a letter from the chairmen of the Assemblies. This is how all this started.

• 1210

You stated that the Minister of Foreign Affairs will be inclined to create parliamentary missions. Well then, you'll have to ask him that question. I can't tell you any more, other than to say that in general, the whips or parliamentary leaders are consulted on the makeup of delegations. That was the case when I was chief government whip before I became a minister. That's the usual way to proceed, but I can only answer you in general terms.

With regard to our group's report, we prepared it in Algeria. Before we even left the country, we had two meetings if memory serves me: one to discuss a draft report and another to adjust or correct the content when necessary, etc. Later we held a joint press conference all together in Algiers. We already knew everything we wanted to say before we even set foot on Canadian soil.

After I came back, I contacted my colleague, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, to describe what we had observed and it's at that point that he decided to announce measures immediately, measures which in certain cases have already been successful.

With regard to Mr. Soulier's comment, we met one person who was very close to the FIS. I think it would be fair to describe her that way. When we asked her if the government or the military could be guilty of anything, that person said: "that can't be ruled out" or something to that effect. That person did not accuse the government either. No one else used that kind of language. The others may correct me if they can think of examples that are better than that one. That's the only one that comes to mind.

With regard to the media...

Senator Pierre De Bané: With your permission, Minister, when we met with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Attaf, he told us that 73 unfortunate mistakes by law and order representatives had been the subject of sanctions. That's the expression he used.

Mr. Don Boudria: With regard to the media and the independence of the press, we spent almost two hours in conference at the press building. I must tell you that we were not very comfortable, given that this place had been bombed. Canada bought computers and other equipment to rebuild this facility, which is the press building for the independent Algerian press. We asked them: "What can you write? Where is the bar set?" That's the language that kept coming up. A journalist told us: "Listen, a year ago, if I had written what I wrote today, I would undoubtedly have been thrown in jail. Today, I write things that I couldn't write then." We know that there is a line drawn somewhere, but we had difficulty finding it at that time, because it changes constantly. That limit or bar is constantly changing. In other words, they're given greater freedom of expression.

Several of them had previously been imprisoned for writing articles. They told us that although they could write almost anything they wanted, there did remain some concern. They said that at one time it was easy, they knew that if they reported a particular crime or used a certain type of language, they would be punished. Things were clear. They merely had to avoid this kind of thing, it was clear and easy that way. Now they are worried because there is a new degree of openness but the parameters are not clearly indicated. In other words, it's a lot freer than it used to be, but according to them, the situation is changing constantly. Perhaps the others can elaborate on this point.

• 1215

I'll conclude with a comment on the internal commission. There's no certainty that an internal commission would work, but in my opinion, and I think it's widely held, an internal commission led by Algerians would be far more acceptable to them than a commission led by someone outside the country in view of their 132 years of colonialism, the 30 years of totalitarianism, etc.

You asked me to suggest some interesting topics of discussion for your upcoming meeting with the parliamentarians. An interesting point would be the new Parliament, particularly the Senate, the Council of the Nation, that is in the process of carving out a place in the governing structure. They know that parliamentary committees are necessary and they are examining what exactly they can expect such parliamentary committees to do.

I think that will be an interesting subject. I think that we as Canadians could promote this cause by underlining that the work is not only interesting but also of great value to Algerians and the international community who would like to see a better system of accountability put in place in Algeria. So I think it would be a very interesting matter to raise during this meeting.

I'd also like the others to elaborate on the freedom of the media and other matters.

The Chairman: Ms. Alarie had something to add. There's also the need to promote the existence of the Senate, I believe, Ms. Alarie. That is the purpose of your—

Ms. Hélène Alarie (Louis-Hébert, BQ, Member of the Canadian Parliamentary Delegation to Algeria): The National Assembly is made up of six parties that are almost always... There is a coalition. So they're all keeping watch on each other. There's very lively debate in the National Assembly.

They have opened things up. There was a televised debate on terrorism at seven o'clock in the evening. It's the first time that this kind of debate took place on television and it seems that there were as many people watching as during the World Cup.

They are all competing. When we were there, there were lots of party conventions. For me, this kind of situation would have been unthinkable not so long ago.

When I lived in Algeria 25 years ago, there was one newspaper, el-Moudjahid. It was the official newspaper. It is still in existence. There have been as many as 120 newspapers, they told us, but that was too much. At the present time, there are about 20, about 10 of which have a wide readership, at least as far as the newspapers in the capital are concerned. That is also a major change.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Ms. Folco, very briefly.

Ms. Raymonde Folco: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to add something to what was said by the Minister in reply to Mr. Turp's question about the kinds of questions we could ask. I'm speaking here as a member of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

The status of women in Algeria is a very complex one. Under the Constitution, women are entitled to vote. On the other hand, there is a family code that does not acknowledge a woman's right to ownership and puts her under the legal guardianship of a male member of her family. The family code is in the process of revision or at least that was the case when we spent a few days in Algeria.

We met a number of civil groups, including several women's groups who attempted to speak to us. We asked lots of questions. As I see it, the relationship between the family code and the situation of women according to the constitution is not a very clear one. Since this code is still under discussion or has just been approved by the government, I think that the situation of women in relation to the constitution and the male members of their family would be an important subject to raise with the parliamentarians.

The Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Folco.

Mr. Paradis.

Mr. Denis Paradis (Brome—Missisquoi, Lib.): Mr. Minister, colleagues who were members of the delegation, first of all I'd like to congratulate you on your work and thank you for your report.

• 1220

You say, Mr. Minister, that the new democratic institutions are now in place and that they are starting to work. In your report you talk about the political system. You also refer to what we can describe as the fourth power, the press.

My question deals with the separation of powers in this new democracy that is starting to function. Is it too soon to raise this question? Has it reached the point where we can talk about the judiciary, for example? How does the separation of powers work? What type of judiciary system do they have? Is it independent? Have you had any consultations on this? Do they have a civil law regime or a common law one? Are we ready to provide them with assistance relating to the separation of powers, something that is very important for a fledgling democracy?

Mr. Don Boudria: As far as the legislative power is concerned, since we are talking about an institution that did not exist, it goes without saying that it has hardly gone beyond the embryonic stage. First, as I already said, the Senate held its first meeting when we were in Algeria. They don't even have any structured parliamentary committees. There's no question of having the former committee retain the power until the new one is created since they didn't even have any. So everything is beginning.

There's no doubt that not so long ago the military held almost all power but since then, the constitution has been ratified. This gives greater weight to democracy.

The president, who had been chosen ahead of time, was nonetheless confirmed in his function through a democratic mechanism. This strengthened the democratic roots I referred too. The House of Representives, the People's National Assembly, has been in existence for about a year and a half or perhaps even longer. That is the beginning of democracy. The Senate, elected indirectly by the main electors, is somewhat similar to the French one. That is not surprising since both countries have a great deal in common. It is just beginning to take its place. It is still too early to talk about the separation of powers between the executive and the legislative.

Let me make a comment. Senator De Bané has just drawn to my attention that we did have a meeting with Dr. Saïd Sadi, the president of the RCD. In our system, we would consider him the leader of the opposition. He is the leader of the party that came second in the last presidential election.

Mr. De Bané asked him whether he considered that the incumbent president had been democratically elected. His answer was: "Yes, of course" he was elected with almost 80% of the votes. He further noted that the fact that we were having a meeting and that he was able to talk to us without being put into prison is a significant accomplishment. The last time he took part in such a thing, he was sent to prison. He was sent to prison for three years as a result of a similar incident. I think that that is an interesting comment.

Perhaps the senator or someone else could address this question of the rule of law and the judiciary.

Senator Pierre De Bané: President Zéroual was quite categorical on this point, he wants Algeria to become a country which respects the rule of law. He greatly emphasized this point. I read one of his recent speeches where the Algerian judiciary was present and he stressed that the rule of law must be respected in the new Algeria.

• 1225

Mr. Denis Paradis: You refer to the judiciary. Is the judiciary independent from the State? Are they members appointed for life etc.? Is the system already in place or is it too early in their evolution for them to have made such arrangements? Secondly, I wanted to know whether they had a civil law system or not.

Senator Pierre De Bané: The judiciary is a matter that we did not examine in depth. Of course since it is a Muslim country, their legal system had to reflect the Muslim convictions of the population. I have no qualifications to talk about this but I was struck to see that in his speech, the president did say that the new Algeria must be founded on the rule of law. It was very clear. In our conversation with Dr. Saïd Sadi, at the meeting with different parliamentarians, we said that some people are cynical and claim that democracy here is not very serious but rather superficial. He answered that as the leader of the opposition party, he already spent three years in prison and noted that he was now a member of Parliament able to receive Canadian parliamentarians and criticize the government in power and that all of this indicated that there had been progress. He said that this progress had to be recognized.

Ms. Hélène Alarie: He's a very interesting man.

Senator Pierre De Bané: Very interesting.

The Chairman: It would be progress even in Canada, Senator.

[English]

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian (Brampton Centre, Lib.): My questions come from the Algerian profile from foreign affairs.

First it says “Government: Republic (Civilian government)” and then it says “Head of State: General”. Do you see a contradiction there, Mr. Minister, having a civilian government headed by a general?

My second question is on trade. We see that from 1989 to 1993 export to Algeria was decreasing and import from Algeria increasing. Is there a reason? Did you discuss this issue with them?

On the bottom of the first page: “In 1990 the first free municipal election was won by the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS). In 1992, following FIS election success at the second round, the election is nullified...”. Did you discuss this issue? Did they raise this issue with you? Was that a concern for them, or is it no longer a concern with the opposition parties and the army?

Mr. Don Boudria: We discussed all these things. General Zeroual, as I indicated a while ago, was not initially chosen democratically, he was a military leader. But what I indicated is that since then there had been a constitutional ratification and an election in which he was was confirmed democratically, as I refer to it. That is not as good as being elected democratically the first time, of course. I think everyone has to recognize that.

There is a difference. I am only speculating here, but after the president has now been confirmed democratically and the parliament has been elected and the indirect election for the senate and the local elections and all these things, I think today if someone tried to remove President Zeroual from office it would be far more difficult from removing others from office before, because he has now that form of democratic sanction, as it were, that did not exist before. It is a matter of degree and depth of roots that we're talking about.

On trade, our two largest exports to Algeria are hard wheat and milk powder. There was a decrease in milk powder. There are plenty of other areas where we can increase our trade there, but I guess the issue of security has not done a lot of good in terms of attracting new Canadian investors over there.

Let's recognize that most of the exports from Algeria are oil products and therefore those products keep leaving the country and affect the exchange.

• 1230

In terms of the FIS and the elections, the process was roughly the following. The first rounds were held. The second one never did take place. After that, a constitutional amendment was put in place whereby any party that ran for office could not advocate destroying the democracy that got it elected. That was a change that occurred because FIS said if it came to power it would destroy the democratic institution that got it there. That was part of its program.

The constitution was amended to say that, and it's an irrevocable provision of the constitution. It can't be amended with two-thirds, it can't be amended at all from here on in, that portion thereof.

I don't know as a Canadian what I would do if someone in my country said they were going to run for office and if elected would destroy the democracy of our country. It's something for us to think about.

[Translation]

I know that Ms. Folco had something to add.

Ms. Raymonde Folco: If I may, I'd simply like to add that

[English]

certainly we in Canada are looking on this as foreigners, but if FIS had come to power in that country, as the minister has just shown, not only would it have got rid of the democratic process but there are a lot of minority groups and majority groups in terms of women and in terms of the Berber population and other minority groups that would have found themselves completely without the right to vote and without appeal for human rights. So we have to think in those terms as well.

It certainly is a very ambiguous question that by destroying the results of that you seem to destroy democracy. But you have to look at it long term, that if FIS had come to power, for sure democracy would have been destroyed for a long time to come.

Senator Pierre De Bané: Dr. Sadi, who was sent to prison for three years, was against letting FIS take over the country.

Algeria today is Canada's most important trading partner for Africa, the Middle East, and the Persian Gulf. The opinion of our Department of Foreign Affairs is that in the election that elected General Zeroual, 76% of the people participated. There were several candidates. He got 61% of the vote and they say in our opinion, as all other western countries, he was elected democratically.

Mr. Ted McWhinney (Vancouver Quadra, Lib.): There was a question on the nature and status of this delegation. There was a series of questions in the House and private communication by MPs to the minister expressing concern over the situation in Algeria. He raised it directly with the Algerian foreign minister on several occasions. The Government of Algeria at that time was very reticent about receiving visits, especially the European Union, but it did indicate it would receive a ministerial-led delegation.

Mr. Boudria, as minister for international cooperation, made a visit, I think a couple of months earlier. They received the delegation. I think a delegation of this sort sets in a way its own rules. It's sui generis. It doesn't have a necessary relationship to other parliamentary groups, and the evident success it has had is a tribute to that method.

But there is absolutely nothing to prevent, for example, a visit with the assent of the Algerian government by a Canada-Algerian parliamentary committee, which is apparently being formed, or by this committee. If the committee should decide we want to go, we would certainly press the Algerian government to receive us. We would have a different agenda and perhaps different perspectives and objectives from the Boudria committee.

I compliment the committee on its success in opening the door. It was a coup for us. I say this having twice in the 1970s as a non-politician visited Algeria in a technical capacity and lectured there. I would personally welcome this committee's deciding as a priority to get going. It would certainly complement and follow up the work of the Boudria committee.

The Chairman: I think I speak on behalf all the members of our committee to thank you, Minister, and your delegates. I would like to associate myself personally with Mr. McWhinney's words. I think it has been a remarkable achievement, and I hope we can follow it up with a success in the areas you indicated to us. Thank you very much for your work.

[Translation]

Before we leave, I'd like on behalf of Mr. Turp and all of us, I'd like to welcome three students from his riding who are attending as observers here today. They may become members of Parliament one of these days, who knows, if they are not too discouraged by what they have seen here today.

• 1235

[English]

We are adjourned until 3.30 this afternoon at room 701, where we will be hearing about the Atomic Energy Commission and controls on sales of atomic energy abroad.