Thoughts on the Global Affairs Canada “Voices at Risk” guidelines and the Export and Import Permits Act on “military goods”

Published by Brent Patterson on March 2, 2025

Video still of Nomadesc president Berenice Celeita speaking on a PBI-Canada webinar about Canadian arms exports, May 2022.

Amnesty International has highlighted: “191 cases of police violence during the first year of President Petro’s government (August 2022 to July 2023), a 59% decrease compared with the previous year. Forty-three cases occurred in the context of protests.” Colombia’s National Police is part of the Ministry of Defense. In 2022–2023, Canada exported almost $1 million of military goods to Colombia. During the CANSEC arms show in 2022, the PBI-Colombia accompanied Nomadesc tweeted: “Colombians do not want more weapons. Don’t send us any more weapons.”

Ottawa-based Quaker peace activist Murray Thomson co-founded Peace Brigades International (PBI) in 1981 and Project Ploughshares in 1976. PBI accompanies human rights defenders at risk of violence, while Ploughshares is a peace research institute with a focus that includes the arms trade and the protection of civilians.

We honour the legacy of Murray (who passed away in May 2019) by identifying shared concerns between PBI and Ploughshares.

Video still of Murray Thomson.

The Government of Canada’s “Voices at Risk: Canada’s Guidelines on Supporting Human Rights Defenders” was first published in 2016. The guidelines were then updated in June 2019 to “reflect Canada’s feminist foreign policy”.

This article suggests the guidelines could be further updated to reflect Canada joining the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in September 2019 just as it accordingly amended the Export and Import Permits Act (EIPA) that same year.

Global Affairs Canada says: “Under the Export and Import Permits Act (EIPA), the Minister of Foreign Affairs must deny export permits applications if he or she has determined that there is a substantial risk that the export would result in a serious violation of international humanitarian law or human rights.”

In its singular reference to human rights, the Act states: “7.3 (1) In deciding whether to issue a permit under subsection 7(1) or 7.1(1) in respect of arms, ammunition, implements or munitions of war, the Minister shall take into consideration whether the goods or technology specified in the application for the permit … (b) could be used to commit or facilitate (i) a serious violation of international humanitarian law, (ii) a serious violation of international human rights law…”

Steps the Government of Canada could take include:

1- Make a clear statement in “Voices at Risk” that state violence against human rights defenders is both “a serious violation of international humanitarian law” and “a serious violation of international human rights law”.

2- Develop and maintain a watch-list of countries where human rights defenders are under attack, specifically highlighting the countries where defenders experience violence from state security forces including the police and military.

3- Stop the direct sale of “military goods” to countries where there is evidence of state violence against defenders.

4- Sanction any transnational corporation that violates the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights by selling weapons used in the commission of violations against defenders.

5- Stop the export of components that put the lives of defenders at risk through indirect weapons sales and transfers through a review of the Defence Production Sharing Agreement (DPSA) between Canada and the United States.

The Government of Canada could also provide diplomatic support to legislation that link the impact of “military goods” on defenders, such as the Berta Cáceres Human Rights in Honduras Act that would prohibit “U.S. assistance to the police or military of Honduras” and “instruct U.S. representatives of multilateral development banks to vote against providing loans to the Honduran police or military.”

Arms embargoes

Additionally, Global Affairs Canada says that it can impose an “arms embargo” in order to “prevent weapons and military equipment from leaving or reaching a targeted country.” Currently, “Canada’s sanctions apply an arms and related materials embargo” on thirteen countries, though none explicitly mention attacks on human rights defenders in the “Background” section on the rationale for the embargo.

GAC funding of CADSI

We further express our concern that for at least the past three years, Global Affairs Canada (GAC) has provided funding to the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI) that describes itself as “the national voice representing” the “leading defence and security companies” in Canada.

In 2024, GAC provided $291,400.00 to CADSI. In 2023 it gave them $208,600.00, and in 2022 another 241,752,00.

CADSI organizes the annual CANSEC arms show in Ottawa that features 300 exhibitors including some of the world’s largest weapons companies, notably the top two: Lockheed Martin Corp. and RTX. It is not clear why the “voice” of some of the most profitable weapons companies requires this subsidy.

The countries with questionable records towards human rights defenders that have sent delegations to CANSEC include Indonesia, the Philippines, Hungary, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, as well as Colombia, Argentina, Bahrain, and Peru. A condition of public funding could be to make the list of the “50+ international delegations” that attend CANSEC a publicly accessible document.

COP30 on the horizon

The Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council has affirmed that “human rights defenders, including environmental human rights defenders, must be ensured a safe and enabling environment to undertake their work free from hindrance and insecurity, in recognition of their important role in supporting States to fulfil their obligations under the Paris Agreement [reached at COP21].”

Global Witness has documented on an annual basis the number of defenders killed and that “over 1,500 defenders have been murdered since the adoption of the Paris Agreement on climate change on 12 December 2015.”

COP30 begins on November 10 this year.

While “Voices at Risk” does provide direction to Canadian missions with respect to “Land rights and environmental human rights defenders”, it does not specifically mention the prohibition of military goods to countries whose state forces are implicated in repression and violence against frontline climate defenders.

Conclusion

In July 2024, Mary Lawlor, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, told The Globe and Mail that Canadian embassies, despite “Voices at Risk”, have failed to respond adequately to those raising serious concerns about the impacts of Canadian mining and oil activities abroad.

This critique by Lawlor is backed in reports from the Justice and Corporate Accountability Project (December 2022), MiningWatch Canada (June 2024), and Professor Kirsten Francescone and law student Lisa Rankin (February 2025), as well as this statement from Amnesty International (June 2019).

We add to their concerns the impact of “defence and security companies” notably the makers of weapons and military components that may be implicated in the repression and deaths of human rights defenders.

Further reading: Canadian Government Stonewalls Questions About Peru Arms Export Permit (Alex Cosh, The Maple, December 2023).