GROUP OF DOCUMENTS #4
DOCUMENT number 2
To The Federal Court of Canada
from Alla Gunin.
FEDERAL COURT Supreme Court Building Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0H9
Alla Gunin 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 201 Montreal, Quebec, CANADA H2X 2B5
Tel.(514)944-1294
Dear Sirs! This appeal is formal. It composed not by a lawyer but by
the refugee claimants themselves. Despite a temptation
to treat it as a non-official letter we want an official response.
We believe that we are victims of partiality, and our refugee claim
has been refused because of extreme generalization and
political approach towards our claiM.. That became possible only because
some refugee boards of Canadian Ministry of
Immigration are manipulated by a foreign state. This is the main reason
why our refugee claim was denied.
Our case is extraordI.ry. My husband was a relatively well - known
dissident in the former USSR and was severely
persecuted by communist authorities. He was a dissident also in Israel.
He was persecuted for his views in Israel as well. The
state radio and newspapers called to take the law in own hands and
to punish hiM.. We were beaten, assaulted, and
disgraced. All members of our family faced constant mockery.
Our case is extraordI.ry also because we presented so many documentary
proofs of persecutions as probably nobody else.
The documents we presented are absolutely reliable: official, legal,
medical, juridical, and others. Even in the tribunal negative
decision we can read that the tribunal agree that under certain circumstances
persecutions, which we described, "difficulties"
(they called persecutions like that)"could take place". We also presented
unbeatable evidences that a threat to our lives and
to our mental and physical health exist in Israel. Our claim is special
also because we did absolutely everything for finding
protection in Israel. We turned to police, to the Ministry of Police,to
the Ministry of Internal Affairs, to the Minister of
Culture, to all human rights organizations, including Amnesty International's
headquarters in Tel-Aviv, to famous parliament
members, to newspapers and to any other possible sources. We have Amnesty
International confirmation in our case, which
arrived here in response to tribunal's inquiry.
The reason of tribunal's negative decision and our eventual deportation
from Canada was expressed by the immigration
officer, Mrs. Judith Malka. During our 3-rd immigration hearing (it
can be listed as 2-nd by Immigration) she hinted at her
desire to send my husband to Israel because he must be punished there
for his views. We believe that not the commissioners
but she was the only person who made a decision in our case and that
she also composed the text of the decision. She and
the chairman of the tribunal said us that we may be persecuted in Canada
as well, our children may be beaten and we may be
also discrimI.ted against. We understood their words as a bad hidden
threat. Tribunal's negative decision and Mrs. Malka
and Mr. Boisrond's insinuations during the hearings send us the message:
We must be punished! But what for? We are
innocent people, and we did no crimes, ever!
The answer why we have to be punished may be found probably in paragraphs
#4 and 5 of the decision's text, which
suggests thhat immigrants from ex-USSR in Israel have no rights to
claim a status of refugee in Canada because they are
property of Israeli government. Israel bought them paying for their
transportation to Israel, and for other things for theM.. So,
they belong to Israel forever. And the paragraph 6 suggests that the
ordI.ry Israelis also paid their part to be our masters!
This very fact that this suggestion is made indirectly and that the
information about the mentioned payments made by Israel
and Israelis is incorrect is not really matter. I am absolutely sure
that our lives will be in danger in Israel and that my husband
will be killed or imprisoned immediately or soon after our arrival
to Israel.
What will be with us without him, what will be with his mother? Please,
take pity on us! Save our souls! Save my children!
Sincerely yours, - Alla Gunin
GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4
DOCUMENT 3
TO THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
From Lev GUNIN
Dear Sirs! We came here as thousands of other refugee claimants who
flied from their countries to Canada. But our case is
special, may be - even unique. In ex-USSR I was a dissident; I was
severely persecuted by communist authorities. I was
relatively well known in my native republic. Under certain circumstances
I refused to declare that I never desired to immigrate
to Israel. Now I actually claim that I was deported to Israel from
my native Blears because of my political activity. My family
and me tried to escape to Germany but were seized in Warsaw by Israelis.
They took us to Israel by force, and we have
certain evidences. In Israel my family and me, we were severely persecuted.
I presented the reasons of these persecutions in
my claim, and also during my immigration hearings. I was considered
as a dissident in Israel, too. Our case is special also
because we presented more documentary proofs of what happened to us
then probably no other refugee claimants.
Persecutions against us in Israel were massive, systematic and dangerous
to us. They caused physical and moral loses to us.
Despite clear evidences and undeniable proofs our claim was denied.
It happened only because of wide-scaled conspiracy
against Russian-speaking refugees from Israel, and because the immigration
committee assigned to our case was manipulated
by a foreign state.
We have several well-grounded reasons: enough to accuse members of the
committee in partiality. Almost all basic juridical
norms and elements were violated during our 3 immigration hearings
(see Document # 1). The basic moral and political norms
of Canadian society were replaced acting in Israel. Mrs. Judith Malka,
the immigration officer, spoke to us and acted as
Israelis normally do. She openly expressed her hatred to us personally
- and to Russian speaking people in general. Her
manner and her ironical attitude were assaulting. Besides, she openly
assaulted us directly several times (see Document #1).
Her aggression and threats can be explained only by her partiality.
When she couldn't control her emotions of hatred and
detestation she left the room of the hearings two times. May be her
reaction was so visual because she's a Jew and - it looks
like that - an Israeli. Then - why she was sent to such a hearing?
We have 7 main points in connection with that: 1. It is
absolutely clear that the two commissioners refused to participate
in our hearings (in other words, kept them out of the way of
the hearing). Mrs. Malka was given an option to speak non-stop during
almost all the time excluding rare exceptions. She
accused us, shouted on us, declared pure political pro-Israeli propaganda
and accused me in acting against Israel without any
interruption from the judges. Of course, they can claim that they participated
by hearing and analyzing. But then their passivity
caused a situation when they had to analyze only what Mrs. Malka gave
them to analyze. When Mr. Boisrond spoke he
never opened his own topic and used his role for illegal methods of
pressure to distort my responses to Mrs. Malka's
previous questions. 2. The commissioners refused to sign the decision.
There are no their signatures on that document. That's
another proof that Mrs. Malka composed that document herself. 3. The
committee decision is based on her statements,
insinuations, accusations and declarations only. If something correspond
to what Mr. Boisrond said - he just repeated what
Mrs. Malka already said before. The stylistics of the text and the
essence of it is deeply differ from Mr. Boisrond's and Mrs.
Madelenine Marien-Roy's, who completely kept her aloof from the hearing
(except of few formal words). In the same time
that stylistics fits to Mrs. Malka's manner. These two suggestions
allow us to detect her as the only author of the decision,
what is the severe violation of the law. 4. This committee gives no
positive decisions in refugees' from Israel cases. When in
1994-95 about 52% of refugees from Israel were recognized as Convention
refugees, with this committee it is "0" (or almost
"0"?). 5. She's refusing to give her motivations behind that decision.
But to explain such a decision is a juridical norM.. She
replaced any explanations by a pure political rhetoric and pro-Israeli
propaganda, which has nothing what to do with our
claiM.. She is also a person who contacted Israeli embassy for explanations
(instructions?) in our case. 6. The committee
decision ignores all documents we presented as if there were no documents
at all. In the same time to support its statements
the committee used documents, which credibility is "0", and that's
obvious not just towards our case but in general sense. But
most of the document used in the decision have no relationship to our
case and were given just because something had to be
given. 7. By denying our claim the Immigration committed one of the
most inhuman and cruel actions in its history. I am may
be just one of few people in the world who suffered so much for expressing
their opinions. I am still living only because of a
miracle, which saved me in ex-USSR, and from angry "patriots"-Israelis.
We had so many documentary proof of our refugee
claim as nobody else. We had testimonies, certificates, and articles,
which I wrote for various newspapers. We had Amnesty
International confirmation in my case... My children, wives, mother's
suffering was just rejected by commissioners. They
acted against us as if we were solders of an enemy army, not innocent
people. My family and my lives are in a real danger
now. 8. The decision is partially based on distortions Mrs. Eleonora
Broder did when she translated our claim and our
documents.
I can support these points by analyzing the text of the decision and
by other supporting material. First of all let's analyze the
decision - paragraph after paragraph.
Let us point that this document replaces some well-known facts and even
data by false facts, events and data. The
information from our PIF, our claim, hearings and even passports this
document describes with distortions. For example, on
page #1 (par.6) the children ages are indicated as 5 and 6 when in
reality they were much younger by then. Only under a
slight view that information is not very important. In reality the
children ages were changed for changing an impression.
Because what is less destructive and traumatic for older children for
younger children may be totally different. In the same
paragraph we can read that the children were denied the participation
in the Sukkot celebration, when in reality in our claim
and during the hearings it was a description of a dark room, in which
our children were placed. It makes a difference! A
dispute about that dark room erupted between us - and Mrs. Broder,
who refused to translate the text of my testimony which
I typed and gave her but desired to intervene actively. Later - when
we demanded to change the places distorted by her in
her translation - she threatened to testify against us before the committee
and mentioned that dispute like as we did or said
something wrong. It is clear for me that Mrs. Broder probably was Mrs.
Malka's informer. Anyway, that detail shows once
again that Mrs. Malka alone composed this document. How can this document
be considered as a legal order when even
during a pure description it refuses to tell the truth?
We can find next false statement on page 2, in paragraph # 4 ("the demander
also claim that he was persecuted because he
denounced about the fascism"). In reality I never said like that this
happened because of that, and this happened because of
that... The person who composed that document tries to hide here that
the fascism was mentioned in connection with my
article entitled "Why Israel Is Against the Victory Day?", which was
published in Israel in 1994. In his comment to my article
the editor call to take the law into people's own hands and to make
short work of me. As you can see that's also makes a
difference!
Then, the paragraphs #4 and #5 on page 3 deny rights to enter any country
as a refugee to any person if he escaped from
Israel. It means that these paragraphs deny not just my personal right
to escape from Israel (in other words, I must live in
Israel forever!), but disputes that right in principle. Formally speaking
about me that paragraph's meaning is actually
depersonalized. It claims that all immigrants from the former USSR
in Israel were bought by Israeli government as any other
property, and now belong to Israel forever. So, can a property escape?
There is no other reasonable explanation of these
paragraphs' sense. ("Demanders declared that they flied from Israel
to claim a refugee status in Canada after a series of
incidents, which victims they were. But the tribunal denies them the
credibility [...] because [...] this family immigrated to
Israel [...] according to the Law of Return" and because Israel paid
for their "free transportation, free medical insurance, and
also gave them a certain amount of money, citizenship and other benefits").
Anyway, these two paragraphs have nothing what
to do with our claim! Mrs. Malka also mentions the Law of Return here.
That Law of Return is a declaration, which was
made when Israel was founded in 1948. Israelis can call it "the main
rule of the country" or whatever they want but it is what
it actually is: Just a proclamation. Since Israel has no constitution
the Law of Return and some other laws like it are still there
to calm down people who demand the creation of Constitution. But as
in former USSR between constitution and real life
there were thousands of executive laws, which could just abolish what
the constitution said. There are customs, official
religious code and thousands of other laws between the Law of Return
and the real life in Israel. And Mrs. Malka knows it!
The paragraph #5 on page 3 just shows how far away from the real life
is the Law of Return, which was created almost 50
years ago and named here as an "evidence". Mrs. Malka gives an extract
from that law, which says that the medical insurance
in Israel is free, but that isn't correct! I can show the receipts
for the money that we paid for the medical insurance since our
first day in Israel, because it isn't free any more! The language course
is not completely free any more! And not the whole
way to Israel is free!(I can show you the tickets). These are not just
mistakes. The whole attitude is wrong (or false, or the
first and the second in the same time). So, how can be reliable a document
that contains so many mistakes and falsifications?
Let us point also that these two paragraphs are absolutely illegal
from the juridical point of view. Our material situation wasn't
mentioned nor in our claim, nor during our hearings. We described persecutions
against us, not our fI.ncial situation. May be
Mrs. Malka had to compose a report for American Jewish organizations
to show where their money is going. Then this
decision is not about our status, and has no juridical power!
The next paragraph looks nice, but somehow avoid quitting. Why? I think,
I know, why. I know the document and place in
that document the last paragraph on page 3 refers to... Let me show you
what it about. It declares that 80% of Israel
population is mobilized to welcome new immigrants from the former USSR.
Isn't it sound strange? It's hard to believe that
such a ridiculous sentence can be a part of any juridical document!
Let's admit also that this particular fragment is the beloved
fragment of Mr. La Salle, a commissioner who was recently accused of
partiality towards refugee claimants from Israel. He
used this paragraph in probably all negative decisions he composed.
(He made practically no positive decisions in refugees
from Israel cases). For example, Mr. La Salle used that "evidence"
in his responds to Zilber and Buyanovsky's claims. (Page
6 in a response to G. Buyanovsky and p.3 in a response to family Z.
claim) Let's to abstract from its complete nonsense and
suppose it reflects something from Israel's life and reality, and reflects
the mentality of Israelis (Mrs. Malka's intention to
choose this particular extract, and not another one, reflects her national
identity as Israeli). If Israel is a country like other
countries, like Canada, so how it comes that "80% of Israeli population"
can be "mobilized" to "welcome new immigrants"?
How people can be "mobilized" (or, probably, ordered) to "sponsor immigrants"
and to help them by "giving money, closes
and furniture" (p.3, 5-th line of Mr.La Sall's response to family Z.
claim). May be something is wrong in a country where
population can be "mobilized"? May be, our troubles have been erupted
exactly because people in such a country have to be
"mobilized" to welcome new immigrants?And then - how those figures,
80% of Israeli population, can be understood? Were
they been called (to a draft board, to Mossad?) to get an order to
"welcome new immigrants" - and were counted one by
one? And what about the other 20%? We don't know anything about that
"mobilization". But we know that the Israeli
population (and the Hebrew media employees in particular) was mobilized
to abuse, assault, disgrace and to discrimI.te new
immigrants from the former USSR. If the Canadian Ministry of Immigration
was not on one side it could employ 2-3
translators and send them in a library to translate Hebrew newspapers
for last 6 years. Thousands of racists, xenophobic
articles, which encourage aggressive actions against Russian-speaking
people and teach to treat them with malicious anger,
could be found. That is the real "mobilization". By the way, if we
began to speak about Mr. La Salle, his personality may be
the best illustration of who stands behind the total injustice towards
us. He is a permanent director of the Informative
Committee Canada-Israel, an organization that may be considered as
a shadow structure of Israeli government. Allegations
that Mr. Salle systematically treats the Russian-speaking refugees
from Israel with partiality were expressed several times. In
1996 Federal Court indirectly recognized that. Despite of that Mrs.
Lucienne Robillard - Canadian Minister of Immigration -
gave Mr. La Salle a new commissioner's mandate (for the next term).
52% of refugee claimants from Israel obtained their
refugee status in 1994-95.On hearings with Mr. La Salle it is 0(%).
In 1997 Mr. Jacques La Salle was accused in partiality
towards refugees from Israel, and his involvement in their cases was
termI.ted* (see comments). However, his mandate
wasn't termI.ted in general. How can it happen in a country, which
is not a province of Israel, but an independent state?
In the first large paragraph on page#4 of the decision the tribunal
express recognition that the persecutions we faced in Israel
might happen to us. But it claims indirectly that we provoked them
ourselves by refusing to give up our believes and views.
And it claims directly that the persecutions were caused by some individuals,
not by country's rules, traditions or policy. And
it claims also that there no persecutions against Russian-speaking
people at all. As we can see that paragraph is deeply
contradictory in itself. In first 5 lines it recognizes the existence
of persecutions (calling them "difficulties" but that is not
important because it clear explaining what it means). In next 5 (!?)
lines it says the contrary. We already know (see the
reasons expressed above) that there is a bad hidden lie in the referrals
concerning fascism in this document. So, this lie is
exploited in that paragraph, too.
The next paragraph is based on a sentence in my refugee claim (in my
PIF), which did the translator, Mrs. Broder herself,
insert. Instead of just translating my story about what happened to
me during my work on a stadium in Petach-Tikva (August,
1991), she transformed this event into a symbolic conclusion-declaration.
In the same time this conclusion is correct in
general. Because what happened to me then may be called a slavery.
This event was discussed during the two hearings. I was
tested if I tell the truth, and it is clear from the test that I told
the truth. Besides, I presented an affidavit from Mr. Ginsburg
who describes the same event. I also presented an article written by
Rivka Rabinovich and entitled "Haim #1 and Haim #2",
which professionally describes some forms of slavery in Israel. I also
explained during my hearings that I do not want to make
any declaration and that Mrs. Broder just distorted my words. Instead
of taking into consideration all these facts the tribunal
is persisting in its absolutely I.dmissible and illegal suggestions.
Instead of investigating whether or not we were persecuted it
accuses us in spreading slander about Israel. It claims like if we
would not came to Canada to seek a political asylum but to
spread the slander about Israel. If we claimed that my wife and me
- were beaten during our work: that's because we want
show Israel as a state of slavery, claims the tribunal. If we describe
what happened to our children: that's because we want to
draw a picture of Israel as a horrible state... And so on. Reading that
document you completely forget that it is a decision in
refugees' claiM.. It looks like the tribunal misinterpreted its functions
and sees itself not as immigration but as a political
tribunal. But the main point of this paragraph is that we claim we
got no help from the state of Israel and will not be defended
by it if will be deported back there because we want to show Israel
as a mayheM.. This is the only tribunal's excuse for
ignoring all our evidences, all documentary and other material proofs
of police and other state offices' refusal to defend us.
This is the only excuse for ignorance of all the reliable and very
serious evidences like Amnesty International's confirmation in
our case! This is the only excuse for ignorance of intensity and incredible
scale of our attempts to find protection in Israel!
The next paragraph continues the allegation that we claim we were denied
police protection, multiple organizations' , Knesset
members' help (and even our layer couldn't do anything) and were forced
to turn to Amnesty International only because ("en
effet"!) we want to show that Israel is a state of injustice.
The declaration, which the tribunal made in the next paragraph (that
Israel is a democratic state, a state like other countries,
and so on) has nothing what to do with our claiM..
Let us express our father concern about credibility of the documentation
the tribunal used as a documentary proof "against
us". We know that the same document, which mentions the 80% "mobilized"
Israelis mentions also a "Department of
Integration", which doesn't exist in Israel. It's clear that the real
name of Israeli Ministry of Absorption ("misrad ha-klita in
Hebrew) was replaced by non-existing "Ministry of Integration" because
it sounds strange for Canadian (or American,
European) ears. But the "Ministry of Absorption" is the real name of
the organization, which "takes care" of new immigrants.
And this document changes it to the "Department of Integration"...In
reality the Zionist ideology is against integration. Look
over Ben-Gurion's, Orlosorov's, Bella Katsnelson's, Golda Meir's works
and statements! Then you will be convinced that the
name "Ministry of Absorption" expresses their desires completely well.
It means that the document, which was used as an
"indisputable source of information" replaces actually the truth by
the lie, not only a real name by a false name. Then - how
can such a document be considered as a credible one?
We also express our deep concern of utilization of Mr. Natan Sharansky's
affidavit. As far as we know this affidavit was
given through a telephone interview what is juridical unacceptable.
Especially when the commissioners don't accept copies of
articles (even from the most famous newspapers), which refugee claimants
present, they demand origI.ls! Then - it was well
known before Mr. Sharansky became a Minister in Israeli government
that his "Zionist Forum" is not an independent
organization (as well as its chairmen) but an organization infiltrated
by the government. By the time of our second hearing Mr.
Sharansky has already became a minister. And Mr. Malka knew it. So
he presented the view of Israeli government as an
"independent" view that time as well as in all other occasions. She
clearly exposes the source of all the manipulations with the
refugees from Israel in Canada: Israeli government! That paragraph
also exploits the topic , which was closed by my answer
during our first immigration hearing. Mrs. Malka asked me how can I
explain the statistic from Israel that no Russian-speaking
people were regestered complaining against the police. I shown then
all the receipts of my appeals I have submitted to police,
to the Ministry of police, to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and
to police headquarters in Tel-Aviv. And I said that this is the
explanation because my mails were unanswered and my complains were
never registered. I also presented an article, which
gives absolutely precise, reliable and competent information that nothing
can be really done against police in Israel. And the
story about a policeman who get a fine because of his refusal to help
an Arab as an "evidence" looks like a clowned.
It was clear for the tribunal that it's impossible to avoid comments
about the total ignorance of the whole documentation,
which we presented. It was clear that something must be said. This
is why the next paragraph was composed to say just
anything about that and was designed to say nothing in particular.
The tribunal claims that all our documents were rejected
because its members took into consideration only "absolutely reliable"
documents. And it looks like there were no such
documents among these we presented... In reality documents like the letter
from the Minister of Culture Mr. Amnon
Rubinschtein, which shows that persecutions against me weren't just
a chain of coincidences, Amnesty International's
confirmation, Lev Ginsburg's affidavit, receipts of my letters to police
and other organizations, other official papers can not be
considered as "reliable" or "not reliable". Another thing is that their
existence may be recognized or not recognized. The
tribunal chosen the second way: to ignore theM.. It's your choice now
to decide if that happened as the result of the tribunal's
partiality. But we ask you to read over the paragraph #4 on page 3
of the decision where the tribunal rejects in advance even
the possibility of existence of such a category of refugees as "refugees
from Israel". How could you expect then another
attitude to any documents from a tribunal, which refuse to recognize
refugees from Israel in principle? On the other hand that
tribunal's ability to distinguish between "reliable" and "non-reliable"
documents is reflected in documents they chosen
themselves to support their point of view: one of them is incompetent
when it speaks about Israel , another one has "0"
credibility because it was presented during the hearing as an independent
source, and in reality is the voice of Israeli
government (Mr. Charansky's affidavit), and the 3-rd can proof nothing
because it is a part of the declaration of the state of
Israel (the Law of Return), and nothing more.
The suggestion that my wife refused to collaborate with the tribunal
is a pure lie what can be heard on the tapes from the
hearings.
And the ignorance of the medical documents is the thing from the same
category.
Please, believe us that our lives were in a real danger in Israel and
that this danger just increased since we came to Canada.
We were threatened from Israel even here, and we presented the proof.
Please, save our souls!
Lev Gunin
NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 5 - CONCLUSIVE DECISION]]]
PEVIOUS DOCUMENT: [[[GROUP of DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4]]]
DOCUMENT NUMBER 5
From Lev Gunin
File number 3082-7125
}
CONCLUSIVE DECISION
(Paragraph 69.1 (9) of Immigration Law)
This is the translation in brief
P.1. Paragraph 1. Lev Gunin, M.. and I., and Alla Gunin, and Elisabeth
Epstein are not recognized as refugees.
Paragraphs 4-7. This is demanders' declaration in brief: They came
to Israel in April 1991. When they arrived in
Petach-Tikva theirs neighbors, orthodox Jews, were persistent [and
aggressive] in their attempts to convert them [from
atheism from one side, and passive Christianity from another side]
to JudaisM..
Children, then 5 and 6 years old [*1] - (see commentaries), were abused
during a religious celebration at a kinder-garden
[*2]. The governor has found the situation ordI.ry. Dispute the transfer
to another kinder-garden children faced abuses.
They were bitten, bite by another children [*3]. The kinder-garden
administration refused to protect theM..
Demander was mocked by the employers [*4] and bitten by his colleagues
because he is not a true Jew.
P.2. His wife has difficulties in finding a job [*5] , and when she
was at least hired she was insulted, bitten and - under certain
circumstances - became a victim of a sexual harassment[*6].
There were multiple insults and abuses from theirs neighbors, who were
furious because demanders in their eyes are not true
Jews.
They turned to police in innumerous occasions with no results. One time
police itself abused and ill-treated the demander
under certain circumstances. His lawyer told him that nothing could
be done against police.
They contacted innumerous organizations including Amnesty International.
They wrote to members of parliament and
contacted a number of lawyers with no result [*7]. The demander also
said that he was persecuted because of denouncing
fascism [7-a].
Demander's mother also became a victim of multiple aggressions. She
was attacked by a group of youngsters when she went
to pick up the children from school [*8]. Policemen at the police station
refused to pay an attention to that incident.
In Nov. 1993 she was attacked by her neighbor; she stroke her by a basket
with oranges and cried to her "goy!". It tool
place at a market.
In January 1994 in company with her children she went to pick them up
from school, when she was attacked by a group of
youngsters, who thrown stones at her and injured her [*9].
One evening in 1994 [*10] youngsters, friends of their neighbor, have
thrown a little box at her door [*11]. She composed a
letter to police in that case but police never responded [*12].
P.3. Paragraphs 1-2. In context of that the demander together with his
family including his mother came to ask a refugee
status in Canada [*13].
Paragraph 3. After seeing that declaration, studying their lawyer's
arguments and other material we came to a conclusion that
demanders are not refugees. We came to that conclusion because of the
next reasons:
Paragraphs 4-6. Demanders claim that they flied Israel for seeking an
asylum and because of a number of incidents, which
victims they became. But the tribunal is disagree with that because
[...] they all came to Israel according to Israeli authorities
permission and acceptation, and also because they took an advantage
from benefits of a free transportation to Israel, Israeli
citizenship, a certain amount of money for settlement, a free language
course, and other benefits. They also might use other
help because we have the documentation indicated that the population
in Israel gives material help to newcomers.
P.4. Paragraphs 2-5. It is possible that during their life in Israel
they faced some difficulties because some individual
ultra-religious feel that their rights are violated because of the
presence of 2 secular adults who refuse to practice their
religion. But there are no evidences that Russians are persecuted because
of their religion, nationality, or because they are
mixed couples or because they express anti fascist views as pretend
the demander.
In result we were convinced that the demanders are [dangerous for their
state] exaggerators who painted a picture of their
state as a state of slavery, injustice, where Russians are bitten if
they do not work quickly enough, where Russian children are
victims of mockery committing by theirs classmates and teachers, and
where Russian women are victims of sexual
harassment. And that all is going on without any possibility to obtain
a protection from the state.
As a result of that the demanders turned to police in several occasions
without success, to innumerous organizations, human
rights groups and to Amnesty International, composed letters to members
of parliament and contacted more then one lawyer
without getting any protection from the state.
It is incongruous to that documentation about Israel, which we have
chosen. This documentation present Israel as a
democratic society, maintaining a justified juridical system in favor
of the citizen. Police never have any discrimI.tory
behavior towards Russian or Arabs.
P..5. Paragraphs 1-5. Multiple human right organizations are also presented
in Israel, both local and international.
Documentation, which we present, we consider as completely reliable,
when the demanders' documentation we consider as
unbelievable.
The tribunal ignored demanders' medical and other certificates and documents
because we have found that their documents
show nothing in particular.
COMMENTS 1. Children age is given incorrectly. Probably, because our
children were younger, and that could give us
more sympathy. 2. It is false. Our children were abused during the
celebration as well as in cause of that celebration (they
were not allowed to a "suka" and were kept in a dark room - because
they are "Russians"). It is clear from our declaration. 3.
It is false. They presented the event as if our children were abused
not by the teacher but by the children during the
celebration, when in reality it is the teacher who abused theM.. 4.
They combine two different event into one what is juridicaly
incorrect. 5. Without a notice that my wife could not find a job because
she was considered as Russian that sentence is
incorrect. 6. It is false. She was not sexually abused. But she was
beaten because she refused to obey the sexual pretensions
of an Israeli. It is also false because it happened not at her first
working place but when she became a cleaner. 7. It is false.
Complains to Amnesty International gave a result. In result of them
Israeli government let us leave the country. 7-a. It is a
direct distortion. First, the discussion about fascism arose during
our immigration hearings but does not reflected in our
declaration. On the other hand, I never claimed that I was persecuted
in Israel solemnly because of denouncing fascisM.. The
discussion about fascism was related to my article and to a commentary
to it made by the editors of that newspaper. They
wrote that I have to be punished for my views, that my works have to
be destroyed and expressed their aggression towards
my poor person. 8. It is false. Two different events, which happened
in different years, are confused together here. They
combined the event consciously in a kind of nonsense: to make all our
declaration non-reliable. 9. It is false. It is the second
from the above-mentioned events, it mixed with the previous in a strange
way. It is absolutely contradictory with what may be
found in the declaration. 10. We gave a precise month. 11. It is false.
A huge box, which was released to hit our front door
(to the entrance to our apartment, and not to my mother's door - as
the tribunal wrote) from the above flour, has damaged
our door. It was breached through. The tribunal presents the events
as if there were no damages. They claim that in a
non-justified wave of panic my mother turned to police, and - naturally
- was refused. They try to present us as exaggerators.
12. My mother did not compose her letter to police herself. Other people
assisted her. 13. It is false, because that paragraph
may be interpreted as if we flied Israel because somebody threw a little
box in our door direction. In reality from one hand
the event with the box was falsified itself, from another hand, it
is clear from the real text of declaration and from immigration
hearings that we left Israel in result of systematic persecutions and
because we were afraid under serious circumstances.
Translation from French and comments were made by Lev Gunin
NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 6]]]
PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 5]]]
DOCUMENT NUMBER 6
FROM Lev GUNIN
FILE Number 2948-6524/ 95/76/23/18
ID: 3082-7125/7174/7220/7231/7317/
LIST OF SUPPLEMENTS or LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
SUPPLEMENTS
This is the list of Documents, which I have submitted to Immigration
Canada in support to my refugee claiM.. There were, I think,
more then 50 of other Documents, which are not
listed here. I believe that the total number of documents,
which supported my claim, was about 180-200, and
none of them was rejected by the Immigration Board as non-reliable...
TO VIEW THE ORDER OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON INTERNET FROM THE
LIST BELOW,
CLICK HERE: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 7]]]
1. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 5-a. 5 pages. Letter to Jerusalem Post. 19
June 1991. Refers to Introduction, page 2,
paragraph 4.
2. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 6-a. 3 pages. Fax from Israeli consulate to
Mrs. Judith Malka. Refers to Document 1.
Paragraph 1.2., point A).
3. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 7-a. 3 pages. Fax from Maitre Michel Dor? to
Maitre Yves Boirond. Refers to Document
1. Paragraph 1.2., point A).
4. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 8. 3 pages. List of Organizations, Institutions,
Persons and Governmental Boards, Where
We turned for Protection in Israel during 1991-1994. Refers to Document
1, page 3, point C).
5. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 9. 2 pages. Mrs. MarI. Heifetz's autograph.
Refers to Document 1, page 3, point C).
6. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 10. 2 pages. Postal receipts. Refers to Document
1, page 3, point C).
7. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 11. 2 pages. Fax receipt. (Fax was submitted
to Amnesty International in London). Refers
to Document 1, page 3, point C).
8. A room was prepared for a document, which I did not attached.
9. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 13. 2 pages. Medical document from Asharon
(or Ha-Sharon) hospital. Refers to
Document 1, page 5, line 5.
10. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 14. 2 pages. From medical center "Golda".
Refers to Document 1, page 5, line 5.
11.SUPPLEMENTS, Document 15. Medical certificate. Refers to Document
1, page 5, line 5.
12. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 16. Evaluation psychologique. Refers to Document
1, page 5, line 5.
13. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 17. Medical certificate. Refers to Document
1, page 5, line 5.
14. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 18. Medical certificate from Reddy Memorial
Hospital. Refers to Document 1, page 5, line
5.
15. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 19 (number of documents: A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,
J,K, L,M,N,O,P). All of them refer to
Document 1, page 3, point D):
16. Document 19-A.1 page. U.S. Jews hold fire in rift with Netanyahu.
17. Document 19-B.1 page. Arabs seek resumption of U.N. session on Israel.
18. Document 19-C.1 page. Israeli immigrants finding work.
19. Document 19-D.1 page. Ethiopian Jews Riot Over Dumped Blood.
20. Document 19-E. 1 page. A group of children marched along St.-Alexander...
21. Document 19-F. 1 page. A mourner pauses... page 2
22. Document 19-G. 7 pages. We do not need your love, but just stop
beating us!
23. Document 19-H. 7 pages. Interview with Jonathan Gefen.
24. Document 19-I. 1 page. The Bungling Bank Robbers of Israel.
25. Document 19-J. 2 pages. Fleeing the Promised Land.
26. Document 19-K. 1 page. Name On the Tombstone.
27. Document 19-L. 3 pages. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. An urgent
call to stop the recent Israeli bill, which could
forbade all religions beside JudaisM..
28. Document 19-M.. 3 pages. MAOZ, Messianic Jews' Almanac. ONE YEAR
IN PRISON FOR POSSESSING A
NEW TESTAMENT.
29. Document 19-N. 1 page. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. AN URGENT CALL
FOR PRAYER AND
SOLIDARITY: "This bill before the Knesset would render illegal the
possession, production, reproduction, importation and
distribution of literature or information, which may serve to persuade
another to change his religious views or affiliations".
30. Document 19-O. 2 pages. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. A CALL FOR
PRAYER AND PROTEST.
31. Document 19-P. 1 page. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. YOU CAN BE
ACTIVE IN THE STRUGGLE FOR
FREEDOM IN ISRAEL.
32. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 20: from A to K: Israeli visas. (Total number
- 11 documents). Refer to Document
number 2 (in Documents, not in Supplements), paragraph 1.16.
33. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 21.
34. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 22.
35. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 23. < Group of documents, which could be
attached later
36. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 24.
37. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 25.
38. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 26.
39. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 27-a. 3 pages. (From "Courier" newspaper).
Lev GUNIN. A Jewish Apartheid? Refers to
Document number 1, page 5, beginning of the part "ME".
40. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 27-b. 1 page. Letter for radio "RECA". Refers
to Document number 1, page 5, beginning
of the part "ME".
41. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 28. 4 pages. From newspaper "Vremia". Lev
GUNIN. Why Israel Is Against The Victory
Day? Refers to Document number 1, page 5, see part "ME".
42. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 29-a. 1 page (in Russian; translation was
done, but disappeared from my file...). From
newspaper "Vremia". Interview with Lev GUNIN. (Life of Lev Gunin, Permanent
Dissident). Refers to Document number 1,
page 5, (part "ME"), see the last line of the page 5. Also refers to
Document number 1, page 7, lines 3-4.
43. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 29-b. 2 pages. Complains to "Vremia" newspaper,
regarding the interview. Refers to
Document number 1, page 5, (part "ME"), see the last line of the page
5.
44. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 30. Examples of threats submitted by Israelis.
Refers to Document number 1, page 6
(upper part of the page). page 3
45. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 31. 2 pages. Explication. In French. I wrote
it and submitted to my lawyer Maitre Le
Brune (asking him to add it to my file) in a protest against another
provocation by Mrs. Malka. Refers to Documents, Group
of Documents Number 4.
46. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 32. 4 pages.
45 Years With Pain In The Heart. Refer to Document number 1 from Documents
(not Supplements), page 4, paragraph 1.3.,
CILDREN.
47. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 33. 6 pages. The Silence of the Lambs. Refer
to Document number 1 from Documents,
page 4, paragraph 1.3., CILDREN.
48. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 34. 2 pages. Your Blood has to be Avenged.
Refer to Document number 1 from
Documents, page 4, paragraph 1.3., CILDREN.
49. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 35. (Refers to Document number 1, page 7 (on
the top).
50. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 36. 2 pages. Affidavit form Asharon (Ha-Sharon)
Urgency. Refers to Document number
1, page 7 (on the top).
51. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 37. 2 pages. Medical document from doctor
Pinkas. Refers to Document number 1, page
7 (on the top).
52. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 38. Was reserved.
53. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 39. 2 pages. Medical document from an urgency.
Refers to Document number 1, page 7
(on the top).
54. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 40. 2 pages. An appointment issue with a neurologist.
Refers to Document number 1, page
7 (on the top).
55. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 41. 1 page. Declaration to the police in Petach-Tikva.
Refers to page number 8, upper
paragraph.
56. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 42.
57. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 43 (a and b): a : Barak, Avraham, tel. (03)
528-0878. b : 5 pages. Letter from Israel.
Description of threats in my address. Refers to Document number 1,
page 8.
58. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 44. 3 pages. Human Rights Watch Documents:
Law Effectively Legalizing Torture in
Israel, Police and Army Police Brutality in Israel. Refers to Document
number 1, page 8.
59. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 45. 7 pages. A Raven Will Never Peck Up Raven's
Eye. An article about police brutality
and unpunishement of policemen. Refers to Document number 1, page 8,
60. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 46.
61. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 47.
62. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-a. 2 pages. Results of Special Musical
Attestation Committee in Tel-Aviv, which
defined the level of professional skills and abilities. Refers to Document
1, page 10, point 4.
63. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 48-b. 3 pages:
64. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-b: 1-st page. Diploma in superior studies
in Music. Refers to Document 1, page 10,
point 4.
65. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-b: 2-nd page. Attestation D'Etudes Superior.
Refers to Document 1, page 10, point 4.
66. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-b: 3-rd page. Attestation D'Etudes Postsecondair
Professionnel. Refers to Document
1, page 10, point 4. page4
67. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-c. 3 pages. Refusal from "Talpiot" course.
( A course, which could give me
professional employment authorization, was refused to me). Refers to
Document 1, page 10, point 4.
68. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-d. 2 pages. Letter from the Minister of
Culture and Education of Israel Mr. A.
Rubinstein in response to my lawyer Maitre S. Levin declaration. Refers
to Document 1, page 10, point 4.
69. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 49. 1 page. Letter from Maitre S. Levin to
director of Petach-Tikva's governmental labor
exchange. Refers to Document 1, page 10, point 5.
70. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 50-a. 2 pages. Civil court's in Petach-Tikva
decision. Refers to Document 1, pages 10-11,
point 8.
71. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 50-b. 1 page. Dr. S. Levin's letter to the
National Insurance. (Regarding refusal to register
me at the labor exchange). Refers to Document 1, pages 10-11, point
8.
72. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 50-c. 1 page. Dr. Levin's letter to National
Insurance. Refers to Document 1, pages
10-11, point 8.
73. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 51. 3 pages. National Insurance Institute's
refusal to send the allowances, determined by
the law. Refers to Document 1, pages 9, 10, 11.
74. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 52.
75. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 53-a. 3 pages. Illegal order issued by the
Income Tax Board from JerusaleM.. (No fresh
immigrant receives such orders). Refers to Document number 1, page
11.
76. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 53-b. 2 pages. Another order from General
Reports Centre, JerusaleM.. Refers to
Document number 1, page 11.
77. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 54. If there are not enough documents like
53 (a} and b}), then other documents of this
kind could been added.
78. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 55. 3 pages, 6 documents. Orders to appear
at the draft board at Tel-ha-Shomer.
79. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 56.
80. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 57-a. 1 page. Letter from Mrs. Judith Malka
to Mr. Michael Dore. Refers to Document
number 1, page 13.
81. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 57-b. 3 pages. Letter from Mr. Dore to Commissioner
Mr. Yves Boisrond. Refers to
Document number 1, page 13.
82. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 58. 1 page. True translation of my wife's
(Alla Fishman) Birth certificate, made in Israel in
1994. Refers to Document number 1, page 13.
83. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 59. Translation of the same birth certificate,
distorted by Mrs. Eleonora Broder. Refers to
Document number 1, page 13.
84. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 60.
85. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 61..
86. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 62.
87. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 63.
Group of Documents Number 4 of Supplements.
All documents in the group refer to Document number 1, Page 15, 1.6.
- RESUME.
88. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 64. 1 page. An affidavit from Mr. Iwan Edvards,
Conductor and Director of Montreal
Symphony orchestra chorus and St. Lawrence chorus. Page 5
89. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 65. 1 page. A Letter From Mrs. Margaret Rumscheidt,
President of St. Lawrence Choir.
90. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 66. 1 page. Festival Mozart Plus.
91. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 67. 1 page. List of Singers, participated
in Festival "Mozart Plus".
92. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 68. 1 page. List of Singers, participated
in Festival of contemporary music.
93. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 69. 1 page. A contract concerning the audio
cassette release.
94. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 70. 1 page. List of Participants in Festival
in Hilton Dorval, in April, 1996.
95. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 71. 1 page. List of Participants in Festival
in Hilton, Dorval, in April, 1996.
96. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 72. 1 page. An Affidavit in my participation
in Cultural (Musical) Festival in Terrebonne.
97. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 73. Newspaper Polonia-Montreal. One of newspapers,
which I am editing in Montreal.
98. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 74. Newspaper "Russian Voice". One of newspapers,
which I am editing in Montreal.
99. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 75. Newspaper "Romanian Voice". One of newspapers,
which I am editing in Montreal.
100. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 76. An Affidavit from Mrs. Zelia Nisman,
Toronto. 1997. Next numbers were reserved
for other documents of this kind, which could be added if needed.
101. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 77.
102. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 78.
103. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 79.
104. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 80. END OF GROUP 4 OF SUPPLEMENTS
105. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 81-a. 8 pages. From "Yitogi" newspaper. By
Rivka Rabinovitch.HAIM NUMBER ONE
AND HAIM NUMBER TWO. (About slavery tendencies in Israel). Refers to:
a) Document number 1 of Documents, page
1-2, Introduction, paragraph 3 of Introduction; also - Document number
1, page 3, paragraph C); b) Document number 1,
top of the page 4, comments *) and **); c)
106. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 81-b. 3 pages. By Irma Zokol. From "Yitogi"
newspaper. IF I WAS A TRADE
UNIONS MEMBER. (About the slavery tendencies in Israel).
106-a. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 82. 2 pages. An affidavit from Lev Ginsburg,
composed in Israel, in 1994.
Next numbers were reserved for the same kind of documents, which could
be added later if needed.
107. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 83.
108. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 84.
109. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 85.
110. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 86.
111. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 87.
112. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 88.
113. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 89.
114. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 90.
115. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 91.
EXAMPLES OF MRS. BRODER DISTORTIONS OF NEWSPAPERS'
ARTICLES (AND OTHER DOCUMENTS)
ALL DOCUMENTS OF THIS GROUP REFER TO DOCUMENT NUMBER 3 (TRANSLATOR'S
SABOTAGE).
116. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 92. 1 page. A copy of the origI.l of my
wife's birth certificate.
117. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 93. 4 pages. From "New Russian Word" newspaper.
Russians, Get Out Back! Article by
Savely Kashnitzki.
118. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 94. 2 pages. From "New Russian Word" February
1995 issue. About Hitler's "My
Kampf"'s edition in Hebrew in Israel.
119. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 95. 2 pages. From newspaper "Nasha Strana".
Wake Up, Israel. About the resemblance
of the fascist's slogan in right-wing propaganda in Israel. End of
This Group of Documents.
120. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 96. 2 pages. Natan Charanskzs statement,
which illustrate his double position: rejection
of "speculations" that Israeli society is sick in his statements for
Immigration Canada, and declarations about that when it
helps to obtain money (in his fundrisen compaigns). Refers to Group
of Documents number 4.
121. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 97. From newspaper "Novaya Gazeta". To Celebrate!
A letter to the editor by a World
War II veteran Vladimir Kogan in protest of admiration of fascism by
among young Israelis and refusal of the state of Israel
officially recognize the Victory Day (in relation to the Victory over
fascism). Refers to Group of Documents number 4.
122. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 98.
End of List: See the referring documents!
Please, Save Our Souls!
NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENTS NUMBER 7 - BRIEF DESCRIPTION AND SAMPLES]]]
Short DESCRIPTION of GUNINS CASE
PREVIOUES DOCUMENT <> NEXT DOCUMENT
From Family Gunin, Montreal, November, 1998
Dear Friends!
Please, try to treat this letter as an unusual appeal, not just a desperate
cry for help and justice.
In October 1998, the Federal Court of Canada issued a second decision
in family GUNIN's appeal. (The 1-st one was
positive). That tragic decision resumed our refugee claim, which took
4 years of our lives.
Let us make a brief description of events, which took place before that
sad date.
The head of the family, Lev GUNIN, as all members of the family, was
born in Bobruisk, Belarus, ex-USSR. Senseless,
ridiculous coincidences in 1971-72 turned him, a secondary school student,
young composer, and advance piano player, into
a person, persecuted by Soviet authorities. They tried to prevent him
from entering collegial - university studies; however, his
persistence and a lucky miracle broke that wishes circle, and he received
first collegial, and then university degrees in music.
In spite of that, L. GUNIN could not build a successful composer's
carrier because of persecutions. In the same time, he
played a specific role in ex-USSR, Belarus, and other countries' cultural
life. He's the author of novels, stories, poetry,
contemporary and electronic music, works in history, essays, musicology,
music history, philosophy, etc. His articles were
published in a number of newspapers all over the world.
In 1979-1986, Lev became an object of wide humiliations. He was beaten
by somebody, who has links with militia (police)
and KGB. The authorities stood up in defense of the attackers. They
persecuted L. GUNIN even more for bringing the
attacker to trial. In another incident he and his brother - they were
hunted by two well-coordI.ted groups: mobsters, and a
gang of youngsters. "Hunters" were also leaded by militia (police).
Later brothers GUNIN were interrogated by police /KGB
men. Lev's brother Vitaly became a victim of secret medical manipulations.
L. Gunin has multiple links with the cultural elite, famous personalities
and dissidents in Moscow, St. - Peterburg (Leningrad),
Vilnius, Warsaw, and Belarus. He also has connections with the Western
journalists in Moscow, and with representatives of
the governments of the Western countries.
1980-s. Because of persecutions L. GUNIN's decided to participate in
the dissident movement. There are the main
directions of his dissident activities:
1. Participation in Human Rights movement and links with the most famous
human rights activists.
2. Membership in underground literacy circles.
3. Defense of the Old City of Bobruisk from revelation and demolition.
4. Journalism and editorial functions for underground magazines.
5. Cooperation with forbidden (or unwelcomed) in ex-USSR NTS (People's
Labor Union) and the National Front of
Belarus.
6. Participation in the Jewish national movement.
7. Creation of ideologically independent and stylistically controversial
music, prose, poetry, philosophy, and historical,
political, and other works.
1985-1989. A conflict erupted between leading by L. GUNIN group - and
the powerful institution of Israeli emissaries to
USSR, and controlled by them Jewish political Mafia. (Their goals -
devastation of the local Jewish cultural life, confiscation
of huge aid from the Western Jewish communities, and concentration
of the propaganda of immigration to Israel - L. Gunin
was fighting). He also confronted three important personalities - Kebich,
Alimbachkov, and Lukashenko. All of them became
top political figures later: first one short before, and the two others
- after his departure from USSR (The 1-st one became the
Prime Minister of Belarus, 2-nd - major of Bobruisk, and the 3-rd is
the present dictator of Belarus).
.
His attempts to emigrate to USA or Germany - to save his brother's
life - failed. All attempts to obtain an Israeli visa for
permanent residency have been failed, too. (By then practically everybody
could easily get such a visa). Israelis did not want
to allow him and his brother to immigrate to Israel.
1991. After his brother's death, Lev started to cancel all steps of
immigrating to Israel. He did not want to go there by then.
Soon he received an order from KGB to leave his native country for
Israel. Soviet authorities sent us (family Gunin) all
previously suspended visas. We could not say "no" to KGB, but planned
to escape from Warsaw to Germany. At the
Central railway station in Warsaw, in presence of L.Gunin's Polish
friends, Israelis captured us, and took us to Israel by
force. In Israel, Mossad (Shabbak) officers verbally accused Lev in
an attempt to sabotage the whole operation of bringing
the Soviet Jews to Israel. Mossad approached him several times.
In Israel we faced next persecutions:
1) Israeli citizenship was thrust on us
2) Alla, Lev's wife, was abused, attacked, beaten, assaulted, and systematically
discrimI.ted against
3) Elisabeth, his mother, was abused, attacked, and assaulted
4) Children became victims of systematic humiliations and mockery
5) Lev himself was deprived in his rights. Israeli authorities denied
him:
a) valid diploma equivalent
b) professional courses
c) rights to enter other courses or university
d) full and valid employment authorization
e) registration with the State labor exchange
f) tax exemption as all fresh immigrants were receiving
g) welfare when he was unemployed
h) proper and equal medical service
i) legal, and police defense
j) reduction of municipal taxes
k) authorization of departure, which is required in Israel to leave
the country
l) etc.
He was beaten, abused, discrimI.ted against. Israeli state radio called
him an enemy. One of the leading Israeli newspapers
suggested that his works (essays, articles, etc.) must be destroyed.
Innumerous and systematic draft board's orders to appear
affected his normal life and his (his family) fI.ncial situation.
During his life in Israel L. Gunin published a number of articles &
books in Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Moscow, and Germany,
criticizing Israeli government for human rights violations and fascist
tendencies in Israel.
1994-1996. With an indirect Amnesty International's involvement we could
come to Canada, and claimed a refugee status.
To support our claim we presented next types of documentary proof:
A. Legal documents
B. Documents, issued by Israeli government
C. Documents, issued by all kinds of Israeli institutions
D. Affidavits
E. Letters
F. Post receipts
G. Medical documents
H. Newspapers
I. Researches made by International committees and human rights organizations
J. Proof that in Israel we turned to innumerous organizations, institutions,
police, court, and lawyers for protection
K. Our lawyer's documents
L. Etc.
Practically each statement, described in our refugee claim, was supported
by the documentary proof. Only the list of
documents' description consisted of six pages.
1994-1997. In her translations, our lawyer's secretary/translator distorted
all documents in our refugee claiM.. One of our two
lawyers submitted several messages to IRB in protest of some outraged
events. He claimed that the IRB members took
advantage of the distorted translations, using them as a tool against
us. IRB members used offensive, illegal methods against
Lev. They interrogated only hiM.. No questions were given to other family
members. IRB commissioners demonstrated their
opinion that Lev GUNIN must be punished for his ideological (political)
views. Two members of IRB, immigration judges,
gave the whole initiative to the third member, an immigration officer,
a Jew and - probably - Israeli, who only spoke. During
our refugee hearings she manifested an outraged malicious hatred towards
us, and maintained close contacts with the Israeli
embassy in writing, in our case. IRB members maintained the atmosphere
of hostility and arbitrary attitude towards us.
Denying our refugee claim, the IRB members not just acted unfair. Their
negative decision was not just a refusal to recognize
us as refugees, but a declaration-manifest, which rejected the basic
human rights in principle. In form of declaration, they
denied in principle rights to have an independent opinion, practice
or not to practice religion, be protected by the state. IRB
members claimed that if government paid for immigrants' transportation,
immigrants became the property of that government
(a kind of commodity). IRB members also claimed that police' and other
institutions' refusal to give protection was justified if
people had an alternative political /ideological opinion (even if that
opinion was not expressed to police). They claimed that
we alienated Israelis by keeping controversial opinions, and refusing
to change our views. And so on...
The IRB's negative decision became not just a matter of our personal
fate, but also a matter of human rights in general.
1998. In her speech in the Federal Court, Mrs. Murphy, the Minister's
of Immigration representative, confirmed the IRB
members' negative attitude towards human rights, and also widened personal
accusations against Lev Gunin, turning the
question of our refugee status into the question of his "I.dmissible"
(by whom?) ideological views. As IRB did before, Mrs.
Murphy refused even to mention Alla Gunin, Elisabeth Epstein (Gunin),
and the children.
The Federal Judge, Mr. Dube, just copied Mrs. Murphy's and the IRB statements,
refusing to evaluate arguments of the
TWO sides. He claimed that - because in their refusal to recognize
us as refugees IRB members used the formula "no minimal
credibility", - such cases are automatically denied by the Federal
Court. In reality, his decision was made in contradiction to
another Federal Court judge's decision in our case, and also contradicted
the IRB's fI.l (conclusive) decision. In that
decision IRB agreed that some persecutions against us (they called
them "difficulties") could take place because we abused
the Israelis by refusing to obey their demands to change our views.
Mr. Dube also revealed his partiality by distorting some
important events and attacking our lawyer in personal. A person, whose
name was also Dube, was involved into negotiations
between the immigration officer, Mrs. Malka, and the General Consul
of Israel, in our case. We could not find that person
among the IRB headquarters' staff, or among other immigration divisions.
All faxes were submitted to Israeli consulate from
Mrs. Malka, without mentioning any other name (s). However, the responses
from the consulate were submitted to Mr.
Dube. We feel that this mysterious Mr. Dube has something what to do
with the Federal Judge Mr. Dube.
IRB and Mrs. Murphy's accusations against us were such, which are the
prerogative of the crimI.l court. They accused us
so sharp as if we were killers or terrorists. In reality we are innocent
people, never accused in defamation, or fraud. In the
same time, the way they acted might be easily considered as a crimI.l
offence.
We are appealing not just because of incredible injustice, but because
the removal back to Israel means DEATH for us. If
nobody in the whole world could prevent it, it would mean that if people
are deprived and innocent they might be kidnapped
and taken to another country by force. It would mean that demonstrative
humiliations over human rights, such as the IRB
members and Mrs. Murphy expressed, are tolerated. There are rumors
among UN staff that the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights might be changed soon to fit to the brutal and ultra-religious
regimes' requirements. Please, do something for us
before it happened!
The only way to save us is to help us in obtaining the permanent residents
status in any civilized country. That could prevent
our eventual removal to Israel.
Please, help!
Family GUNIN:
Alla, Lev, I., and M..
Gun.
Elisabeth EPSTEIN-Gunin
Tel. (514) 499-1294
E-mail: [leog@total.net]
From Lev GUNIN, April, 1999
Dear Friends!
In 1991 I was deported from my native Belarus to Warsaw because
of my political opinion.
Together with my family (wife and 2 children) and my mother I wanted
to move from Warsaw
to Germany.
On the Central railway station in Warsaw we were captured by Israelis
and were taken to Israel
against our will.
We were widely persecuted in Israel and were refused an exit vise during
3 and a half years.
In 1994 we managed to quit Israel and came to Canada seeking a refugee
status.
In an outraged manner, openly accenting their rights for injustice,
the members of IRB
committee refused us the status.
Deportation to Israel means death for me and members of my family.
The only solution is to start a legal immigration to Canada.
But we need travel documents to afford it because:
1) our Israeli passports have expired and to extend them is not possible
2) I asked the Israeli embassy to cancel my Israeli citizenship
We made an appeal to the Federal Court, but our appeal was automatically
rejected
without any analysis of our file, just because of the formula that
the Immigration and
Refugee Board used in their conclusive decision. In the Federal Court,
the Immigration
Canada representative, Mrs. Murphy, expressed outraged accusations
against me,
as if by claiming a refugee status and by criticizing the IRB decision
I have committed
the most violent crime or was a terrorist.
Almost 5 years we (my family, and me) live under a threat of deportation,
under the wild persecutions of the Immigration Canada, institution,
which
put the equal sign between my peaceful and legal human rights activism
against the former Soviet and Israeli governments' violation of human
rights
- and terrorism!!!
Please, help us!
My best wishes,
Lev GUNIN
August, 1997
E-Mail: leog@total.net
PREVIOUES DOCUMENT <> NEXT DOCUMENT
To The Federal Court of Canada from Alla Gunin.
FEDERAL COURT Supreme Court Building Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0H9
Alla Gunin
3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 201 Montreal, Quebec, CANADA H2X 2B5
Tel.(514)944-1294
See the list of the places where the copies of that appeal are submitted
below.
Dear Sirs! This appeal is formal. It composed not by a lawyer but by
the refugee claimants themselves. Despite a temptation
to treat it as a non-official letter we want an official response.
We believe that we are victims of partiality, a wide-scaled
conspiracy against Russian-speaking refugees from Israel and political
repression. That became possible only because some
refugee boards of Canadian Ministry of Immigration are manipulated
by the foreign state. This is the main reason why our
refugee claim was denied. Our case is extraordI.ry. My husband was
a relatively well - known dissident in the former USSR
and was severely persecuted by communist authorities. He was a dissident
also in Israel. He was persecuted for his views in
Israel as well. The state radio and newspapers called to take the law
in own hands and to "punish" hiM.. We were beaten,
assaulted, and disgraced. All members of our family faced constant
mockery. Our case is extraordI.ry also because we
presented so many documentary proofs of persecutions as probably nobody
else. The documents we presented are
absolutely reliable and legal. Even in the tribunal negative decision
we can read that the tribunal agree that under certain
circumstances persecutions, which we described "could take place".
We also presented unbeatable evidences that a threat to
our lives and to our mental and physical health exist in Israel. Our
claim is special also because we did absolutely everything
for our defense in Israel. We turned to police, to the Ministry of
Police, to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, to the Minister of
Culture, to all human rights organizations, including Amnesty International's
headquarters in Tel-Aviv, to famous parliament
members, to newspapers and to any other possible sources. We have Amnesty
International confirmation in our case, which
arrived here in response to tribunal's inquiry. The reason of tribunal's
negative decision and our eventual deportation from
Canada was expressed by the immigration officer, Mrs. Judith Malka.
During our 3-rd immigration hearing (it can be listed as
2-nd by Immigration) she hinted at her desire to send my husband to
Israel because he must be punished there for his views.
We believe that not the commissioners but she was the only person who
made a decision in our case and that she also
composed the text of the decision. She and the chairman of the tribunal
said us that we may be persecuted in Canada as well,
our children may be beaten and we may be also discrimI.ted against.
We understood their words as a bad hidden threat.
Tribunal's negative decision and Mrs. Malka and Mr. Boisrond's insinuations
during the hearings send us the message: We
must be punished! But what for? We are innocent people, and we did
no crimes, ever! The answer why we have to be
punished may be found probably in paragraphs #4 and 5 of the decision's
text, which suggests that immigrants from ex-USSR
in Israel have no rights to claim a status of refugee in Canada because
they are property of Israeli government. Israel bought
them paying for their transportation to Israel, and for other things
for theM.. So, they belong to Israel forever. And the
paragraph 6 suggests that the ordI.ry Israelis also paid their part
to be our masters! This very fact that this suggestion is
made indirectly and that the information about the mentioned payments
made by Israel and Israelis is incorrect is not really
matter. I am absolutely sure that our lives will be in danger in Israel
and that my husband will be killed or imprisoned
immediately or soon after our arrival to Israel. What will be with
us without him, what will be with his mother? Please, take
pity on us! Save our souls! Save my children! Sincerely yours, - Alla
Gunin
Dear Sirs! We came here as thousands of other refugee claimants who
flied from their countries to Canada. But our case is
special, may be - even unique. In ex-USSR I was a dissident; I was
severely persecuted by communist authorities. I was
relatively well known in my native republic. Under certain circumstances
I refused to declare that I never desired to immigrate
to Israel. Now I actually claim that I was deported to Israel from
my native Belarus because of my political activity. My
family and me tried to escape to Germany but were seized in Warsaw
by Israelis. They took us to Israel by force, and we
have certain evidences. In Israel my family and me, we were severely
persecuted. I presented the reasons of these
persecutions in my claim, and also during my immigration hearings.
I was considered as a dissident in Israel, too. Our case is
special also because we presented more documentary proofs of what happened
to us then probably any other refugee
claimants. Persecutions against us in Israel were massive, systematic
and dangerous to us. They caused physical and moral
loses to us. Despite clear evidences and undeniable proofs our claim
was denied. It happened only because of wide-scaled
conspiracy against Russian-speaking refugees from Israel, and because
the immigration committee assigned to our case was
manipulated by a foreign state.
We have several well-grounded reasons: enough to accuse members of the
committee in partiality. Almost all basic juridical
norms and elements were violated during our 3 immigration hearings
(see Document # 1). The basic moral and political norms
of Canadian society were replaced by the norms, which traditionally
acting in Israel. Mrs. Judith Malka, the immigration
officer, spoke to us and acted as Israelis normally do. She openly
expressed her hatred to us personally - and to Russian
speaking people in general. Her manner and her ironical attitude were
assaulting. Besides, she openly assaulted us directly
several times (see Document #1). Her aggression and threats can be
explained only by her partiality. When she couldn't
control her emotions of hatred and detestation she left the room of
the hearings two times. May be her reaction was so visual
because she's a Jew and - it looks like that - an Israeli. Then - why
she was allowed to be a member of the committee
assigned to such a hearing? We have 7 main points in connection with
that: 1. It is absolutely clear that the two commissioners
refused to participate in our hearings (in other words, kept them out
of the way of the hearing). Mrs. Malka was given an
option to speak non-stop during almost all the time excluding rare
exceptions. She accused us, shouted on us, declared pure
political pro-Israeli propaganda and accused me in acting against Israel
without any interruption from the judges. Of course,
they can claim that they participated by hearing and analyzing. But
then their passivity caused a situation when they had to
analyze only what Mrs. Malka gave them to analyze.When Mr. Boisrond
spoke he never opened his own topic and used his
role for illegal methods of pressure to distort my responses to Mrs.
Malka's previous questions. 2. The commissioners
refused to sign the decision. There are no their signatures on that
document. That's another proof that Mrs. Malka composed
that document herself. 3. The committee decision is based on her statements,
insinuations, accusations and declarations only.
If something correspond to what Mr. Boisrond said - he just repeated
what Mrs. Malka already said before. The stylistics of
the text and the essence of it is deeply differ from Mr. Boisrond's
and Mrs. Madelenine Marien-Roy's, who completely kept
her aloof from the hearing (except of few formal words). In the same
time that stylistics fits to Mrs. Malka's manner. These
two suggestions allow us to detect her as the only author of the decision,
what is the severe violation of the law. 4. This
committee gives no positive decisions in refugees' from Israel cases
at all. When in 1994-95 about 52% of refugees from
Israel were recognized as Convention refugees, with this committee
it is "0" (or almost "0"?). 5. She's refusing to give her
motivations behind that decision. But to explain such a decision is
a juridical norM.. She replaced any explanations by a pure
political rhetoric and pro-Israeli propaganda, which has nothing what
to do with our claiM.. She is also a person who
contacted Israeli embassy for explanations (instructions?) in our case.
6. The committee decision ignores all documents we
presented as if there were no documents at all. In the same time to
support its statements the committee used documents,
which credibility is "0", and that's obvious not just towards our case
but in a general sense. But most of the documents used
to support the decision have no relationship to our case and were given
just because something had to be given. 7. By
denying our claim the members of the board have committed one of the
most inhuman and cruel actions in Canadian
Immigration history. I am may be just one of few people in the world
who suffered so much for expressing their opinions. I
am still living only because of a miracle, which saved me in ex-USSR,
and from angry "patriots"-Israelis. We had so many
documentary proof of our refugee claim as nobody else. We had testimonies,
certificates, and articles, which I wrote for
various newspapers. We had Amnesty International confirmation in my
case... My children, wives, mother's suffering was
just rejected by commissioners. They acted against us as if we were
solders of an enemy army, not innocent people. My
family and my lives are in a real danger now. 8. The decision is partially
based on distortions, which Mrs. Eleonora Broder
did when she translated our claim and our documents. 9. The decision's
text style is ironically humiliating, what reflects the
committee' partiality towards us.
I can support these points by analyzing the text of the decision and
by other supporting material. First of all let's analyze the
decision - paragraph after paragraph.
Let us point that this document replaces some well-known facts and even
data by false facts, events and data. That document
describes the information from our PIF, our claim, hearings and even
passports with distortions. For example, on page #1
(par.6) the children ages are indicated as 5 and 6 when in reality
they were much younger by then. Only under a slight view
that information is not very important. In reality the children ages
were changed for changing an impression. Because of what
is less destructive and traumatic for older children may be totally
different for younger children. In the same paragraph we can
read that the children were denied the participation in the Sukkot
celebration, when in reality in our claim and during the
hearings it was a description of a dark room, in which our children
were placed. It makes a difference! A dispute about that
dark room erupted between us - and Mrs. Broder, who refused to translate
the text of my testimony which I typed and gave
her but desired to intervene actively. Later - when we demanded to
change the places distorted by her in her translation - she
threatened to testify against us before the committee and mentioned
this dispute like as we did or said something wrong. It is
clear for me that Mrs. Broder probably was Mrs. Malka's informer. Anyway,
that detail shows once again that Mrs. Malka
alone composed this document.
When the committee describes two acts of aggression against my mother
it confuses the dates and the events. We declared in
our claim and during the hearings that my mother was attacked two times:
in August 1992, and in January 1994. We're giving
clear description for each event, so there is no way to confuse one
event with another one unconsciously. But the committee
did it! Read the paragraph # 5, on page # 2. It says: "In August 1992
when she was on her way to pick up the children from
school she was surrounded by a group of teenagers". In reality that
happened when my mother took the children to a park. In
paragraph #7 on the same page you can read: "In January 1994 she was
accompanied by her little children and went to find a
school..." The real event, which happened to my mother in January 1994
, took place when she was alone and was on her
way to the school to pick up the children. But the author of that text
not only confuses the two different events but creates an
atmosphere of a non-sense ("to find a school", "her little children"
instead of "her grandchildren"). These distortions can hardly
been considered as "innocent mistakes" because it is absolutely clear
that they were made by intention. Their goals were to
form a bad impression of my story and show that everything is permitted
for the commissioners. I am sure that by doing these
distortions Mrs. Malka desired to give me a signal that she's the appropriator
of the laws and can go unpunished whatever
she's doing. And - if so - any complains will not help me...
How can this document be considered as a legal order when even in a
pure description it refuses to tell the truth?
We can find next false statement on page 2, in paragraph # 4 ("the demander
also claim that he was persecuted because he
denounced about the fascism"). In reality I never said like that it
happened because of this, and it happened because of that...
The person who composed that document tries to hide here that the fascism
was mentioned in connection with my article
entitled "Why Israel Is Against the Victory Day?" which was published
in Israel in 1994. In his comment to my article the
editor calls to take the law into people's own hands and to make short
work of me. As you can see that's also makes a
difference!
Then, the paragraphs #4 and #5 on page 3 deny rights to enter any country
as a refugee to any person if he escaped from
Israel. It means that these paragraphs deny not just my personal right
to escape from Israel (in other words, I must live in
Israel forever!), but disputes that right in principle. Formally speaking
about me that paragraph's meaning is actually
depersonalized. It claims that all immigrants from the former USSR
in Israel were bought by Israeli government as any other
property, and now belong to Israel forever. So, can a property escape?
There is no other reasonable explanation of these
paragraphs' sense. ("Demanders declared that they flied from Israel
to claim a refugee status in Canada after a series of
incidents, which victims they were. But the tribunal denies them the
credibility [...] because [...] this family immigrated to
Israel [...] according to the Law of Return" and because Israel paid
for their "free transportation, free medical insurance, and
also gave them a certain amount of money, citizenship and other benefits").
Anyway, these two paragraphs have nothing what
to do with our claim! Mrs. Malka also mentions the Law of Return here.
That Law of Return is a declaration, which was
made when Israel was founded in 1948. Israelis can call it "the main
rule of the country" or whatever they want but it is what
it actually is: Just a proclamation. Since Israel has no constitution
the Law of Return and some other laws like it are still there
to calm down people who demand the creation of Constitution. But as
in former USSR - there were thousands of executive
laws between constitution and real life, which could just abolish what
the constitution said. There are customs, official religious
code and thousands of other laws between the Law of Return and the
real life in Israel. And Mrs. Malka knows it! The
paragraph #5 on page 3 just shows how far away is the Law of Return,
which was created almost 50 years ago and named
here as an "evidence", from the real life. Mrs. Malka gives an extract
from that law, which says that the medical insurance in
Israel is free, but that isn't correct! I can show the receipts for
the money that we paid for the medical insurance since our first
day in Israel, because it isn't free any more! The language course
is not completely free any more! And not the whole way to
Israel is free! (I can show you the tickets). These are not just mistakes.
The whole attitude is wrong (or false, or the first and
the second in the same time). So, how can be reliable a document that
contains so many mistakes and falsifications? Let us
point also that these two paragraphs are absolutely illegal from the
juridical point of view. Our material situation wasn't
mentioned nor in our claim, nor during our hearings. We described persecutions
against us, not our fI.ncial situation. May be
Mrs. Malka had to compose a report for American Jewish organizations
to show where their money are going. Then this
decision is not about our status, and has no juridical power!
The next paragraph looks nice, but somehow avoid quitting. Why? I think,
I know, why. I know the document and place in
that document the last paragraph on page 3 refers to... Let me show you
what it about. It declares that 80% of Israel
population is mobilized to welcome new immigrants from the former USSR.
Isn't it sound strange? It's hard to believe that
such a ridiculous sentence can be a part of any juridical document!
Let's admit also that this particular fragment is the beloved
fragment of Mr. La Salle, a commissioner who was recently accused of
partiality towards refugee claimants from Israel. He
used this paragraph in probably all negative decisions he composed.
(He made practically no positive decisions in refugees
from Israel cases). For example, Mr. La Salle used that "evidence"
in his responds to Zilber and Buyanovsky's claims. (P.6 in
a response to G. Buyanovsky and p.3 in a response to family Z. claim)
Let's to abstract from its complete nonsense and
suppose it reflects something from Israel's life and reality, and reflects
the mentality of Israelis (Mrs. Malka's intention to
choose this particular extract, and not another one, reflects her national
identity as Israeli). If Israel is a country like other
countries, like Canada, so how it comes that "80% of Israeli population"
can be "mobilized" to "welcome new immigrants"?
How people can be "mobilized" (or, probably, ordered) to "sponsor immigrants"
and to help them by "giving money, closes
and furniture" (p.3, 5-th line of Mr.La Sall's response to family Z.
claim). May be something is wrong in a country where
population can be "mobilized"? May be, our troubles have been erupted
exactly because people in such a country have to be
"mobilized" to welcome new immigrants? And then - how those figures,
80% of Israeli population, can be understood? Were
they been called (to a draft board, to Mossad?) to get an order to
"welcome new immigrants" - and were counted one by
one? And what about the other 20%? We don't know anything about that
"mobilization". But we know that the Israeli
population (and the Hebrew media employees in particular) was mobilized
to abuse, assault, disgrace and to discrimI.te new
immigrants from the former USSR. If the Canadian Ministry of Immigration
was not on one side it could employ 2-3
translators and send them in a library to translate Hebrew newspapers
for last 6 years. Thousands of racists, xenophobic
articles, which encourage aggressive actions against Russian-speaking
people and teach to treat them with malicious anger,
could be found. That is the real "mobilization". By the way, if we
began to speak about Mr. La Salle, his personality may be
the best illustration of who stands behind the total injustice towards
us. He is a permanent director of the Informative
Committee Canada-Israel, an organization that may be considered as
a shadow structure of Israeli government. Allegations
that Mr. Salle systematically treats the Russian-speaking refugees
from Israel with partiality were expressed several times. In
1996 Federal Court indirectly recognized that. Despite of that Mrs.
Lucienne Robillard - Canadian Minister of Immigration -
gave Mr. La Salle a new commissioner's mandate (for the next term).
52% of refugee claimants from Israel obtained their
refugee status in 1994-95.On hearings with Mr. La Salle it is 0(%).
In 1997 Mr. Jacques La Salle was accused in partiality
towards refugees from Israel, and his involvement in their cases was
termI.ted* (see comments). However, his mandate
wasn't termI.ted in general. How can it happen in a country, which
is not a province of Israel, but an independent state?
In the first large paragraph on page#4 of the decision the tribunal
express recognition that the persecutions we faced in Israel
might happen to us. But it claims indirectly that we provoked them
ourselves by refusing to give up our believes and views.
And it claims directly that the persecutions were caused by some individuals,
not by country's rules, traditions or policy. And
it claims also that there no persecutions against Russian-speaking
people at all. As we can see that paragraph is deeply
contradictory in itself. In first 5 lines it recognizes the existence
of persecutions (calling them "difficulties" but that is not
important because it clear explaining what it means). In next 5 (!?)
lines it claims the contrary. We already know (see the
reasons expressed above) that there is a bad hidden lie in the referrals
concerning fascism in this document. So, this lie is
exploited in that paragraph, too.
The next paragraph is based on a sentence in my refugee claim (in my
PIF), which did the translator, Mrs. Broder herself,
insert. Instead of just translating my story about what happened to
me during my work on a stadium in Petach-Tikva (August,
1991), she transformed this event into a symbolic conclusion-declaration.
In the same time this conclusion is correct in
general. What happened to me then may be called a slavery. But I never
did any pure declaration. This event was discussed
during the two hearings. I was tested if I tell the truth, and it is
clear from the test that I told the truth. Besides, I presented an
affidavit from Mr. Ginsburg who describes the same event. I also presented
an article written by Rivka Rabinovich and
entitled "Haim #1 and Haim #2", which professionally describes some
forms of slavery in Israel. I also explained during my
hearings that I do not want to make any declaration and that Mrs. Broder
just distorted my words. Instead of taking into
consideration all these facts the tribunal is persisting in its absolutely
I.dmissible and illegal suggestions. Instead of
investigating whether or not we were persecuted it accuses us in spreading
slander about Israel. It claims like if we would not
came to Canada to seek a political asylum but to spread the slander
about Israel. If we claimed that my wife and me - were
beaten during our work: that's because we want show Israel as a state
of slavery, claims the tribunal. If we describe what
happened to our children: that's because we want to draw a picture
of Israel as a horrible state... And so on. Reading that
document you completely forget that it is a decision in refugees' claiM..
It looks like the tribunal misinterpreted its functions and
sees itself not as immigration but as a political tribunal. But the
main point of this paragraph is that we claim we got no help
from the state of Israel and will not be defended by it if will be
deported back there because we want to show Israel as a
mayheM.. This is the only tribunal's excuse for ignoring all our evidences,
all documentary and other material proofs of police
and other state offices' refusal to defend us. This is the only excuse
for ignorance of all the reliable and very serious evidences
like Amnesty International's confirmation in our case! This is the
only excuse for ignorance of intensity and incredible scale of
our attempts to find protection in Israel!
The next paragraph continues the allegation that we claim we were denied
police and multiple organizations' protection, and
Knesset members' help (and even our layer couldn't do anything) and
were forced to turn to Amnesty International only
because ("en effet"!) we want to show that Israel is a state of injustice.
The declaration, which the tribunal made in the next paragraph (that
Israel is a democratic state, a state like other countries,
and so on) has nothing what to do with our claiM..
Let us express our father concern about credibility of the documentation
the tribunal used as a documentary proof "against
us". We know that the same document, which mentions the 80% "mobilized"
Israelis mentions also a "Department of
Integration", which doesn't exist in Israel. It's clear that the real
name of Israeli Ministry of Absorption ("misrad ha-klita in
Hebrew) was replaced by non-existing "Ministry of Integration" because
it sounds strange for Canadian (or American,
European) ears. But the "Ministry of Absorption" is the real name of
the organization, which "takes care" of new immigrants.
And this document changes it to the "Department of Integration"...In
reality the Zionist ideology is against integration. Look
over Ben-Gurion's, Orlosorov's, Bella Katsnelson's, Golda Meir's works
and statements! Then you will be convinced that the
name "Ministry of Absorption" expresses their desires completely well.
It means that the document, which was used as an
"indisputable source of information" replaces actually the truth by
the lie, not only a real name by a false name. Then - how
can such a document be considered as a credible one?
We also express our deep concern of utilization of Mr. Natan Sharansky's
affidavit. As far as we know this affidavit was
given through a telephone interview what is juridical unacceptable.
Especially when the commissioners don't accept copies of
articles (even from the most famous newspapers), which refugee claimants
present, they demand origI.ls! Then - it was well
known before Mr. Sharansky became a Minister in Israeli government
that his "Zionist Forum" is not an independent
organization (as well as its chairmen) but an organization infiltrated
by the government. By the time of our second hearing Mr.
Sharansky has already became a minister. And Mr. Malka knew it. So
he presented the view of Israeli government as an
"independent" view that time as well as in all other occasions. She
clearly exposes the source of all the manipulations with the
refugees from Israel in Canada: Israeli government! That paragraph
also exploits the topic , which was closed by my answer
during our first immigration hearing. Mrs. Malka asked me how can I
explain the statistic from Israel that no Russian-speaking
people were regestered complaining against the police. I shown then
all the receipts of my appeals I have submitted to police,
to the Ministry of police, to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and
to police headquarters in Tel-Aviv. And I said that this is the
explanation because my mails were unanswered and my complains were
never registered. I also presented an article, which
gives absolutely precise, reliable and competent information that nothing
can be really done against police in Israel. And the
story about a policeman who get a fine because of his refusal to help
an Arab as an "evidence" looks like a clowned.
It was clear for the tribunal that it's impossible to avoid comments
about the total ignorance of the whole documentation,
which we presented. It was clear that something must be said. This
is why the next paragraph was composed to say just
anything about that and was designed to say nothing in particular.
The tribunal claims that all our documents were rejected
because its members took into consideration only "absolutely reliable"
documents. And it looks like there were no such
documents among these we presented... In reality documents like the letter
from the Minister of Culture Mr. Amnon
Rubinschtein, which shows that persecutions against me weren't just
a chain of coincidences, Amnesty International's
confirmation, Lev Ginsburg's affidavit, receipts of my letters to police
and other organizations, other official papers can not be
considered as "reliable" or "not reliable". Another thing is that their
existence may be recognized or not recognized. The
tribunal chosen the second way: to ignore theM.. It's your choice now
to decide if that happened as the result of the tribunal's
partiality. But we ask you to read over the paragraph #4 on page 3
of the decision where the tribunal rejects in advance even
the possibility of existence of such a category of refugees as "refugees
from Israel". How could you expect then another
attitude to any documents from a tribunal, which refuse to recognize
refugees from Israel in principle? On the other hand that
tribunal's ability to distinguish between "reliable" and "non-reliable"
documents is reflected in documents they chosen
themselves to support their point of view: one of them is incompetent
when it speaks about Israel , another one has "0"
credibility because it was presented during the hearing as an independent
source, and in reality is the voice of Israeli
government (Mr. Charansky's affidavit), and the 3-rd can proof nothing
because it is a part of the declaration of the state of
Israel (the Law of Return), and nothing more.
The suggestion that my wife refused to collaborate with the tribunal
is a pure lie what can be heard on the tapes from the
hearings.
And the ignorance of the medical documents is the thing from the same
category.
Please, believe us that our lives were in a real danger in Israel and
that this danger just increased since we came to Canada.
We were threatened from Israel even here, and we presented the proof.
Please, save our souls!
Lev Gunin
TO UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE TRIBUNAL
From Family GUNIN
Central European (Windows 1250) Encoding
1. To UN High Commissioner
2. Adjustments
TO UNITED
NATION'S HIGH COMMISSIONER OF REFUGEES IN MONTREAL,
MRS. KIM MANCINI
From family GUNIN (Lev, Alla, I., M..,
and Lisa), refugee claimants, who
were denied the status of refugees (1997),
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS
and whose casewas approved for the
judicial control in the Federal Court (1998)
Postal address: 3455 Aylmer St., App. 201, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5
Tel. (514) 499-1294
e-mail: leog@total.net
September, 1998, Montreal
NEW CHANGES IN OUR SITUATION. NEW FACTS, DOCUMENTS, AND EVENTS SINCE
THE FIRST
SUBMISSION OF OUR FILE TO UNITED NATION'S HIGH COMMITTEE OF REFUGEES
IN MONTREAL
ABOUT 1.5 YEARS AGO
(By then our file was handed over to Mrs. Luis O'Ben, former head of
United Nations High Committee of Refugees)
CONTENT OF THIS DOCUMENT
I. New Brief Description of Our Immigration Case
II. About Latest Changes in Our Situation
III. What We Expect From You
I
To remind you about details of our case we give its brief description,
made by one of our immigration counselors, Mrs.
Anna-Maria Augenstad:
Shortly before 1991 the authorities ordered Lev Gunin, human rights
activist, to leave his native Belarus, and issued an Israeli
visa. In April, 1991, in Warsaw, family Gunin attempted to escape to
Germany, but were captured by Israelis and taken to
Israel by force. They came to Tel-Aviv, including I., 4, and M...,
3-years-old by then. In Israel the children faced
systematic humiliations, mockery, and became witnesses of severe persecutions
against their parents and grandmother.
Without the government permission Gunins could not leave the country.
In 1992 they appealed to the consulate of Belarus in
Tel-Aviv, but were denied the citizenship and access to their native
country. They could live Israel only in 1994 with indirect
Amnesty International involvement. They arrived to Canada, claiming
a refugee status. The Refugee Board (IRB) did not
rejected Gunins' claim completely, but accused the family in provoking
persecutions by refusal to change their believes and
religious orientation. Doing that, the IRB denied Gunins one of the
basic human rights: not to be persecuted for their believes
and opinions.
IBR members also contacted Israeli embassy, revealing Gunins' refugee
claiM..
IRB members recognized that Gunins started to complain to dozens of
organisations and institutions when they were in Israel,
and were denied protection. But the IRB concluded that the police and
other Israeli institutions' refusal to give family Gunin
protection was justified because of the views, expressed by family
members. The IRB also invented a speculative suggestion
that Gunins turned to all these organizations not for protection but
for propaganda against Israel. They also called Gunins
aggressive "exaggerators", dangerous to their country (they did not
use the word "dangerous", but this is what they mean).
The Immigration Board (IRB) also indirectly called Gunins "property
of Israel" just because the state of Israel paid for Gunins'
transportation from Warsaw to Tel-Aviv. IRB denied the right for all
Russian speaking refugees from Israel to claim a status
of refugees in principle: just because they came to Tel-Aviv for Israel's
cost and because they were allowed to come to Israel
according to "the law of return".
So, IRB in Montreal rejected the refugee claim of family Gunin in the
manner of demonstrative denial of all basic human
rights. By rejecting openly the main principles of the Charter of Rights
IRB members probably tested special humiliation over
family Gunin.
Because IRB targeted what is the prerogative of United Nations and rejected
one of the most important United Nations'
documents, it was natural to turn to United Nation asking to protect
not only Gunins' personal rights, but also UN own
principles from IRB's attack. This is why and how Lev Gunin made the
previous submission to UN High Commission of
Refugees in Montreal.
II
1. Since then our accommodation in Canada has been improved; we are
not on welfare any more. We started to work more
then one year ago.
2. Our children continued their brilliant accommodation in Canada,
participating in further cultural events since then, including
concerts, performances, and TV shows.
3. The Federal Court approved our case for the judicial control (the
Federal Court's decision is enclosed).
4. The hearing in the Federal Court is scheduled for the 30-th of September.
5. Israeli consulate in Montreal answered the request to termI.te
Lev Gunin?s citiwenship first positively; but lqter expressed
inqppropriqte preconditions (see the folder REASONS For Humanitarian
& Compassionate Cases - further: REASONS).
6. By now (September, 1998) it is clear that the members of IRB, assigned
to our refugee file, fI.lly refused to return us
origI.ls of two among several crucial for our case documents, which
they confiscated:
a) card for visitors of a Mossad officer, who contacted and interrogated
Lev Gunin in Israel;
b) and the certified translation of Alla Gunin's birth certificate,
made in 1994, in Tel-Aviv.
7. Uncertain situation and fear of removal from Canada became equal
for us to a moral torture and seriously damaged health
of all members of our family. For further details, please, look over
the folder REASONS. You can also contact our family
doctor Wanda Brzezinska (tel. ).
8. We won sympathy and compassion of a number of lawyers and immigration
counselors, including Maitre Le Brune, Maitre
Bouchemin, Maitre Dore, Maitre Tobolewsky, Maitre Drozdowski, and others,
who did or doing just great work for us or
give us advises. If such a marvelous and numerous team of lawyers could
do nothing against unfair immigration decisions, it
will mean the end of the legal defense for the refugee claimants.
9. We have collected a big number of signatures under a petition to
the Minister of Immigration.
10. Our case caused some international repercussions, including several
forums on Internet, specially dedicated to us by web
sites owners and designers in several countries. They attracted hundreds
of entries.
11. We won sympathy and support of some institutions including school
F.A.C.E., which our children attend.
12. Some famous personalities gave referrals to Lev Gunin or composed
separate petitions to the Ministry of Immigration.
13. Our legal staff prepared an application for Humanitarian and Compassionate
cases prograM..
14. But in spite of all these achievements we still can be removed
to Israel in case of a negative decision in the Federal Court
or later, in result of eventual further refugee hearings. Such a removal
would end our lives tragically.
15. We would like to abandon our refugee program and start an independent
immigration, but this is impossible because of
the next obstacles:
1) We consider ourselves as stateless persons (see REASONS)
2) Besides, our Israeli passports have been expired or expiring. It
is impossible to extend them (see in REASONS, why)
4) One of us has steady exchange of correspondence with the Israeli
consulate in terms of termI.tion of his Israeli citizenship
3) Our appeal for Humanitarian & Compassionate cases could be also
rejected: because immigration officials often support
previously made by their colleagues decisions in solidarity with them,
no matter how unfair they were.
16. All lawyers, which served us or consulted us did not "recommend"
us to reveal the fact that we were taken to Israel by
force. Being afraid that we can loose their sympathy and emotional
support we had to agree not to include this statement in
our refugee claiM.. We need help in finding a lawyer who will admit
our claim as a whole, without cutting the fact that we were
taken to Israel by force if even he thinks that it will diminish our
chances. The only thing we want now is truth.
17. This document is followed by the letter of Elisabeth Epstein, and
then - by the copy of an adjustment to an application for
Humanitarian and Compassionate cases, which was prepared by one of
our counselors in case of a negative decision in the
Federal Court (it entitled REASONS). All new events, facts, documents,
changes, and arguments were presented in this
document, as well is everything we would like to tell you about our
situation. REASONS is the new basic document, which
we submit to you in our case.
More materials can be found on Internet:
[http://www.total.net/~leog/appealX.htm]
III
What We Expect From You?
A) We hope that you might prevent or even exclude our removal in case
of a negative decision in the Federal Court.
And
B) Help us with an extortion of termI.tion of our Israeli citizenship
from Israeli consulate. This citizenship was given to us
against our will and must be termI.ted.
And /Or
C) Help us with obtaining any valid travel documents and the Mexican
visa for an interview in Canadian consulate for an
independent immigration.
Or
D) Make your own decision recognizing us as refugees
Or
E) Find a way to obtain for us a granted permanent residency in any
country, where we could avoid persecutions, and
subsist, eventually working and supporting ourselves without public
aide, from the next: Great Britain, France, Germany,
Poland, Belgium, Canada.
Best regards,
Family GUNIN
ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL TO UN REFUGEE TRIBUNAL
From Lev Gunin, former citizen of USSR (now - Belarus),
formal citizen of Israel (asked for termI.tion of his citizenship).
Montreal, Oct. 1998
Tel. (514) 499-1294
E-mail: [leog@total.net]
3455 Aylmer St., App. 210, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5
Around October, 18, a negative decision, signed by the Federal Court's
judge Mr. Dub?, came to my lawyer's office. The
date on the decision was October, 8, 1998. They might submit it so
late on purpose, to prevent me from starting another
immigration program before an eventual deportation order.
In His conclusions Mister Judge claimed again that the IRB used "no
minimal credibility" formula (paragraph [7] ) towards our
refugee claim, what is not completely true. He called the documentary
prove, that we and our three lawyers presented, an
accumulation of innumerous documentary prove from the " sources fiables
" (week sources), including medical documents,
requests and protests of my Israeli lawyer about the State Labor Exchange
refusal to register me (what is something like an
employment authorization in Israel), about the refusal of the Ministry
of Culture and Education to allow me a professional
course (what was a routine procedure in Israel), about the refusal
of the National Insurance to issue me welfare when I was
unemployed (this was a precondition of the Labor Exchange for registering
me), about Tax Agency's refusal to give me the
tax exemption as all fresh newcomers, and so on. I also presented receipts
of the registered mails to Israeli Ministry of Police
and Ministry of Eternal Affairs with the copies of the letters, responses
from the Ministry of Culture and Education, and
course "Talpiot", medical documents, testimonies, and so on. I presented
innumerous orders from Israeli draft board to
appear for tests and interrogations as the proof that the necessity
of traveling to the draft board so often distorted my normal
life, affected my employment possibilities, and deteriorated our fI.ncial
situation because the draft board situated not in our
city, and the buses tickets were extremely expensive for us, fresh
immigrants. I presented Israeli Tax Agency's official
requests, submitted to
me in violation of Israeli laws about fresh immigrants, which ordered
us to present a report about busyness we never had, and
deteriorated our fI.ncial situation because we had to hire a lawyer
to compose such a report. Plus, the Tax Agency
documents were submitted to us from Jerusalem in violation of Israeli
district rules. And also my wife presented medical,
judicial, governmental, and other official documents, which corresponded
to events, which happened to her and the children.
And Mister Judge called that all "sources fiables"! Incredible! Then,
my lawyers quoted sometimes the same documents,
which the Ministry of Immigration used against our claim, but different
paragraphs. If these are the "sources fiables", then it
had to correspond to IRB, too, because they used the same sources!
In paragraph [8] of His conclusion Mister Judge wrote: documentary prove
shows that claimants could turn for help to Israeli
authorities - and obtain the help. If police refused to cooperate,
there are multiple other organizations. He completely ignored
the fact that we turned for help to Israeli authorities, to all possible
governmental institutions, to all possible organizations (see
above), but were refused. Only the list of organizations we turned
to consist of two pages. Plus, in support of our claim we
presented official documents as the proof that we really turned to
all these institutions. Now it is clear that He simply refused
to compare our arguments with the Ministry's of Immigration, to take
our arguments into consideration and present them
objectively, but simply copied the Ministry's point of view and presented
it as His own. IN OTHER WORDS, HE
REFUSED TO JUDGE! So, He violated the whole legal procedure itself,
turning the Federal Court procedure into clownery,
and producing a decision, which had to be prepared in advance, without
any connection with the Federal Court hearing,
documents, presented by us, or judgement of the arguments presented
by two sides.
He also claimed that the analysis of IRB's evaluation of our personal
claim is not in the jurisdiction of the Federal Court: this is
why he replaced it by a generalized statement about how good the state
of Israel treats the Russian-speaking people. Even if
our case would missed with another one, I see here a violation of the
legal procedure itself - because we appealed not the
results of the theoretical dispute around human rights in Israel, which
- as any other dispute - can not be solved
synonymously, but the practical IRB's decision about our personal refugee
claim, which affected our personal lives and
brought us to a suicidal situation!
He also claimed that the analysis of IRB's evaluation of our personal
claim is not in the jurisdiction of the Federal Court: this is
why he replaced it by a generalized statement about how good the state
of Israel treats the Russian-speaking people. Even if
our case would missed with another one, I see here a violation of the
legal procedure itself - because we appealed not the
results of the theoretical dispute around human rights in Israel, which
- as any other dispute - can not be solved
synonymously, but the practical IRB's decision about our personal refugee
claim, which affected our personal lives and
brought us to a suicidal situation!
In the same time Mister Dub? was sincere or rather cynical enough to
tell me the truth: he pointed that people like me, who
claim something that the powerful circles do not want to recognize,
"see miracles in the middle of reality". I understood very
good what he wanted to say by that. To fight what the powerful politicians
made an opinion and hope that an ordI.ry man
like me could win was to expect a miracle! If the state of Israel and
powerful Jewish communities decided to stop admission
of the Russian speaking refugee claimants in Canada, they did it, and
stopped all "Russian" refugees, including me. More
persistent I was, more evidences I presented that I was persecuted,
more unbeatable material proof I found, more strong
they wanted to reject me.
NEXT DOCUMENT:
DOCUMENT NUMBER 10
HUMANITARIAN AND COMPASSIONATE CASES
CONTENTS:
1. Part 1: Humanitarian Cases, Main Part
2. Part 2: Exceptional contribution, which Gunins could bring to Canadian
cultural heritage
3. List of Photos: Adjustment to PART 2
4. List of Documents: Documents, Chacklist-2
5. ExplaI.tion
PART 1
Lev Gunin - Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - File Number 2948-6524/95/76/23/18
IMM - 1462-97
(In Addition to Form IMM 5283 (02-98) E)
REASONS
ADJUSTMENT TO SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE
CASES
Grounds for Exemption - Adjustment to Paragraphs A and B
[ A) Canadian Immigration law requires applicants for permanent residence
to obtain an immigrant visa outside Canada,
before coming to Canada. Explain why you believe that your application
for permanent residence should be processed from
within Canada as an exception]
[ B) What hardship would you have if appeal from outside Canada?]
MAIN PART
ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF MAIN PART
Main part describes each paragraph from the listed above in details.
In Main Part, these paragraphs called Part 1, Part 2,
Part 3, Part 4, etc.
Each description contains the general descriptions, which are a part
of this document, and a number of referrals, data, and
links, which correspond to other documents with further
detailing, proof, description, and explanation.
(There are 2 big chapters of reasons why Applicants can not apply
from outside Canada: First 7 Groups [A] and Second 7
Groups [B]).
Documents, which this document refers to, are:
a) PIF of the immigration file (PIF)
b) Audio-cassettes from the refugee hearings (CASSETTES)
c) Documents from Applicants' file, which was founded and maintained
by their lawyer (LAWYER'S FILE)
d) Package of documents, composed by Applicants for the post-determI.tion
officer and for the Federal Court
(APPLICANTS)
e) All documents, which were composed by the Ministry of Immigration
in Applicants' case (MINISTRY)
f) All material proof and supplementary documents, such as medical
documents, newspapers, affidavits, legal, official and
other documents, which were added after the 1-st of April, 1998 (SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2)
g) Documents, which illustrate and explain why Applicants could bring
an exceptional contribution into Canadian cultural
heritage (EXCEPTIONAL CONTRIBUTION, WHICH GUNINS COULD
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 2 -
BRING TO CANADIAN HERITAGE).
REMARK: Decisions taken by the Post-DetermI.tion officer and by Federal
Court in Applicants' case does not matter for
evaluation of the documents described in paragraphs d), e), and f)
because these documents might not being taken into
consideration when the decisions were made (see all decisions in our
case). It is also obvious that the same document might
have different values and meaning for different immigration programs,
and must be evaluated from the Humanitarian and
Compassionate grounds point of view only.
ATTENTION!
We absolutely demand that before reading this document you read first
the copies of our three letters to the High
Commissioner of Refugees. Without reading them you could not understand
the most delicate and sensitive issues of our
situation. If you'll study this document first, it might make a wrong
impression. So, we claim that it is absolutely necessary to
read above mentioned three document before. These 3 letters are enclosed
and attached right after this document.
FIRST 7 GROUPS OF REASONS (PARTS)
[ A) Canadian Immigration law requires applicants for permanent residence
to obtain an immigrant visa outside Canada,
before coming to Canada. Explain why you believe that your application
for permanent residence should be processed from
within Canada as an exception]
1. Applicants consider themselves as people without citizenship (see
below)
2. Passport of the principal Applicant has been expired; its extension
is not possible through Israeli consulates in Canada (see
below)
3. It is also impossible to extend the expired passport in Israel, because
there passports are confiscated from some refugee
claimants (see below)
4. In spite of the refugee board's negative decision in Applicants'
case the danger to their security, health or even lives still
exist in Israel. The Refugee Board (IRB) did not reject Applicants'
claim completely, but accused the family in provoking
persecutions by refusal to change their believes and religious orientation.
Doing that, the IRB denied Applicants one of the
basic human rights: not to be persecuted for their believes and opinions
(see below). During debates in the Federal Court
Immigration representative, Mrs. Murphy, went even further, replacing
the question about credibility of our refugee claim and
IRB's decision by attacks on my personality (see ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL
TO UN REFUGEE TRIBUNAL). The
Federal Court Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 3 -
judge, Monsieur Le Juge J. E. Dub?, committed several legal mistakes,
missing up our case with an unreal one (we never
received an IRB's decision with "aucune credibilite" remark; if we
would appeal the "no minimal credibility" formula, we had
no chances to win, but a positive decision to allow us the judicial
control was already issued by the Federal Court's judge,
Monsieur Le Juge Tremblay-Lamer). He also claimed that the analysis
of IRB's evaluation of our personal claim is not in the
jurisdiction of the Federal Court: this is why he replaced it by a
generalised statement about how good the state of Israel
treats the Russian-speaking people. Even if our case was missed with
another one, I see here a violation of the legal
procedure itself - because we appealed not the results of the theoretical
dispute around human rights in Israel, which - as any
other dispute - can not be solved synonymously, but the practical IRB's
decision about our personal refugee claim, which
affected our personal lives and brought us to a suicidal situation!
(see the copy of an appeal to UN High Commissioner for
Refugees because of our drastic situation after the Federal Court's
negative decision; also compare the texts of IRB's
Conclusive Decision - see in the folder MINISTRY, Federal Court's
positive decision to allow us the hearing for the Judicial
Control, and Mister Judge Dub?'s decision in our case - see in the
folder SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2)
5. The principle Applicant submitted a request to Israeli government
to abandon his Israeli citizenship (see explanations
below)
6. If after 4 years in Canada Applicants' children would be sent away
- this would be an inhuman action.
7. Members of Applicants' family can bring an exceptional contribution
into Canadian cultural heritage (see below)
DESCRIPTIONS
PART 1 - (a)
Thesis: Applicants consider themselves as people without citizenship.
Applicants claim that they were actually deported from their native
country (Belarus) to Israel against their will (see folder
APPLICANTS, document # 2)
They also claim that in Warsaw Israeli officials prevented them from
going to Germany and took them to Israel by force (see:
APPLICANTS, document #2, pages 7,8,9)
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 4 -
Therefore, in spite of their protests and disagreements Applicants
were taken to the state of Israel (see: APPLICANTS,
document # 2, pages 7,8,9)
Applicants believe that Israeli citizenship was thrust on them, and
they would like not to use it for the independent immigration
procedure from outside Canada
Any attempts to force Applicants to use the citizenship, which - they
believe - was given to them against their will, would
severely violate the basic principles of human rights and freedoms
This is one of the reasons why they must be given a possibility to apply
from within the country
Applicants also submitted several messages to Israeli government in
Lev GUNIN's name asking the Israeli government to
termI.te his Israeli
citizenship. The copy of these letters and the responses from
Israeli side are enclosed (see them among
SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, Requests for Citizenship TermI.tion).
In 1993, Applicants applied to the consulate of Belarus in Tel-Aviv,
asking for restoration of their Belorusian citizenship, but
were denied.
This part mainly refers to next documents:
1) APPLICANTS, Document #2
2) APPLICANTS, Supplements
3) Copies of the letters to Israeli government and consulate, and the
responses (SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2,
Requests for Citizenship TermI.tion, doc. 9, 10, 11, etc.)
PART 2 - (a)
Thesis: Passport of the principal Applicant has been expired; its extension
is not possible through Israeli consulate in Canada
The Israeli passport of one of the Applicants (Lev GUNIN's passport)
has been expired already by March 1998 (see the
photocopy of the passport: SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, documents 4,
4-a).
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 5 -
If even an obstacle to use Israeli passports, described in the
Part 1, would not exist, an extension of Lev Gunin's expired
passport is not possible anyway because of the next reasons:
1) Israeli consulates practice refusals to extend passports of Russian
speaking refugee claimants (see SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2, document number 5).
2) Israeli consulates not just reject the requests to extend an Israeli
passport, but also practicing humiliation over Russian
speaking visitors (see SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, document number 6).
3) A stamp "claimed a refugee status in Canada" is placed in passports
of those, who claimed the refugee status in Canada,
instead of the extension (see SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, document number
7).
PART 3 - (a)
Thesis: It is also impossible to extend the expired passport in Israel,
because passports are confiscated from refugee
claimants (See: SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, document number 8)
Because Lev Gunin's Israeli passport has been expired, Applicants can
not go outside Canada for obtaining a Canadian
immigration visa. The only country they could go to is the state of
Israel. However, it is widely known that when people who
claimed a refugee status in Canada return to Israel, their passports
might be confiscated: if Israeli authorities know that they
claimed a refugee status. Madam Judith Malka, the immigration officer,
member of the IRB assigned to Applicants' refugee
file, informed Israeli consulate about Applicants' refugee claim (see:
APPLICANTS, document 1, INTRODUCTION, and
also: pages 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18). Therefore, Applicants
belong to the category of people, whose passports must
be eventually confiscated in Israel.
All necessary documents are enclosed.
Part 4 - (a)
Thesis: 1) In spite of the refugee board's negative decision in Applicants'
case the danger to their security, health or even lives
still exist in Israel. The Refugee Board (IRB) did not reject Applicants'
claim completely, but accused the family in provoking
persecutions by refusal to change their believes and religious orientation.
Doing that, the IRB denied Applicants one of the
basic human rights:
Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 6 -
not to be persecuted for their believes and opinions. 2)Immigration
representative, Mrs. Murphy, only enforced that attitude
in her speech in the Federal Court. 3)We believe, that giving His negative
decision, the Judge of the Federal Court did severe
mistakes violating the legal procedure itself.
1) See the analyses of the negative decision in folder "APPLICANTS",
Document #5, Conclusive Decision; and in Group of
Documents # 4
2) See ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL TO UN REFUGEE TRIBUNAL (folder SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2)
3) See this document, FIRST 7 GROUPS OF REASONS (PARTS), paragraph
4
Part 5 - (a)
Thesis: One of the Applicants (Mr. Lev Gunin) has submitted a request
to Israeli government to abandon his Israeli citizenship
He was submitting the same request several times, first time in 1994,
when he was in Israel. Since 1994, in Canada, he used
to submit such a -
request once a year, since 1996. The latest request was submitted on
September 10, 1998, by his consultant, Anna-Maria
Augestad.
The copies of the requests and other relating documents are enclosed
(see Copies of the letter to Israeli government
(consulate) and the responses in folder Supplementary Documents-2,
Requests for Citizenship TermI.tion).
Part 6 - (a)
Thesis: If after 4 years in Canada Applicants' children would be sent
away - this would be an inhuman action.
The children accommodated in Canada very well, when in Israel they suffered
from neuroses and hiperkinesys (see this
document, SECOND 6 GROUPS OF REASONS, Part one). If they will be sent
away from here, where they feel secure,
convenient and equal, back to the nightmare they lived under when they
were in Israel, - this would be an inhuman action.
See also a letter from Elisabeth Epstein, related to this issue (SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2, doc. 1).
Part 7 - (a)
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 7 -
Thesis: Members of Applicants' family could bring an exceptional contribution
into Canadian cultural heritage.
Everything, which relates to this part, is described in additional documents
(REASONS For Humanitarian and
Compassionate cases, sub-folder CONTRIBUTION):
a) Introduction for: "Exceptional contribution, which Gunins could
bring to Canadian cultural heritage".
b) Evaluation of Lev Gunin as a talented musician / musical composer.
c) Evaluation of Lev Gunin as a poet and writer.
d) Evaluation of Lev Gunin as a human right activist, historian, and
a thinker.
e) Evaluation of I. and M... Gunin.
f) Evaluation of Gunins as a family.
SECOND 7 GROUPS OF REASONS (PARTS)
[ B) What hardship would you have if appeal from outside Canada?]
1. An irreversible damage could be cause to Applicants' health if they
will be forced to apply from outside Canada (see
below)
2. Applicants' lives could be under a threat (see below)
3. Mistakes, committed by the members of the refugee board (IRB), Mrs.
Murphy, put Applicants' health and lives under an
additional threat (see below)
4. Applicants might face ill treatment and extreme sanctions if they
will be forced to appeal from outside Canada (see below)
5. Both Israeli authorities and IRB consider one of the Applicants
as an enemy of Israel with a tendency to justify any
punishment (see below)
6. Direct threats to Applicants used to come from Israel even here,
to Montreal (see below)
7. Because of all above-mentioned reasons exceptional hardship for
Applicants to apply from outside Canada (from Israel)
seems obvious (see below). A special permission (pass) is required
to leave Israel. Lev GUNIN was always refused that
"departure authorization" during 3,5 years, when he lived in Israel.
He links Israeli authorities' decision to give him at least that
authorization with his appeal to Amnesty International in 1994. Authorities
in Israel will never give it to Gunins again (Israeli
authorities refusal to give Gunins permission to leave the state of
Israel during 3 years was discussed during their refugee
hearing; refers to CASSETTES). So, he never could do the independent
immigration procedure from outside Canada
because Israeli authorities will never let him leave Israel again!
The certified translation of that pass - permission - (2-pages
document) was presented to the IRB in Montreal and can be found in
folder SUPPLEMENTS-2.
Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 8 -
Part 1 - (b)
Thesis: An irreversible damage could be caused to Applicants
health if they will be forced to apply from outside Canada
There are 5 main reasons for that:
1) Because one of Applicants' passports has been expired, and can not
be extended (see: SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2, documents 5,6,7,8,9,10,11, etc.) Applicants could go outside
Canada only to Israel. In the same time
Applicants have so much fear of what they believe could threat their
freedom, lives, right not to be persecuted, if they would
be forced back to Israel, that it alone could damage their health by
a psychological shock (see: APPLICANTS, Document
1).
Three and a half years in Israel already damaged Applicants' health
so much that now another push towards the same country
may lead to irreversible damage to their health. This issue was described
or reflected in next documents: APPLICANTS,
Document #1, pages 5,6,7,8,17,18; NOTE OF MOTION OF EXTENSION OF TIME;
SUPPLEMENTS; see the list of
medical documents. To evaluate this point it is necessary to read over
all documents in this submission. To examine this point,
please, read over the above mentioned documents. [Please, also look
over all medical documents in SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2, sub-folder MEDICAL].
2) What Applicants consider as IBR members' humiliating behavior and
partiality provoked Applicants to feel themselves
completely unprotected, insecure, bad-treated and insulted (see: APPLICANTS,
Document #1, pages # 3-8, 14-18;
Document #4, parts 1,2, and 3; Document #5; also see: LAWYER'S FILE,
Document # ). This caused an additional
damage to their health.
Part 2 - (b)
Thesis: Applicants' lives could be under a threat
Applicants' lives might be under a threat if they will be forced to
appeal from outside Canada.
Predictable inhuman treatment and extreme sanctions against them in
Israel (because this is the only country they can go:
please, read over the First seven reasons, this document, page #2)
can put even their lives under a threat.
They already faced inhuman treatment and extreme sanctions in Israel
(see: APPLICANTS, Document #1, pages # 10-14,
16-19), and there are same significant indications (see the same documents)
that the both inhuman treatment and extreme
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 9 -
sanctions will be used against them again as soon as they will enter
the state of Israel.
Such a sensitive towards some specific items state as Israel might retaliate
against Lev Gunin even for his request to termI.te
his Israeli citizenship.
Both adults - both husband and wife - already suffering from: she -
chronically fatigue and depression, he - from hyper
tension and other blood vessel disorders, as well as neurological disorders
in result of what - they believe - happened to them
in Israel. Their heath disorders were jeopardized because of extremely
painful and dramatically tenth immigration collisions.
Now the state of their health is not a direct threat to their lives.
But if removed to Israel, Applicants could face any father
damage to their health, and then it could become irreversible.
Besides, Applicants' lives might be under a threat in Israel: sooner
or later. The latest documents enclosed by Applicants in
this submission present some further explanations.
Part 3 - (b)
Thesis: Actions, committed by the members of the refugee board
(IRB), put Applicants' health and lives under an additional
threat. In her speech in the Federal Court Immigration representative,
Mrs. Murphy, repeated IRB's mistakes, and even
enforced them
Non-compatible with the status of IRB actions, which were committed
by the IRB members, assigned to Applicants' file,
directly increased an eventual danger for Applicants if they would
be forced to go back to Israel:
1. IRB members contacted Israeli embassy and denounced (disclosed)
Applicants' refugee claim (see next documents:
APPLICANTS, Group of Documents #4, document #3 (p.p.1,2,3); APPLICANTS,
document #1 (page 1, paragraph 3,
points 2,3,5,8, 11); APPLICANTS, document #1, INTRODUCTION, and
pages 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18;
SUPPLEMENTS, documents #6, 7). IRB members had no reasonable grounds
to do that (APPLICANTS, document #1,
page 13, paragraph "D"). The disclosure of Applicants' refugee claim
to Israeli officials from one side shows the total
ambivalence of the IRB members towards refugee claimants' security,
and from another side caused an additional severe
threat to their freedoms and lives if they will be moved to Israel.
2. IRB members presented Applicants as exaggerators, who committed
themselves to spread slander against "their" state
(see next documents:
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - p.10 -
APPLICANTS, Group of Documents # 4, Document #3 (p.3, paragraph 4;
p.4, 3 last paragraphs; p.5); APPLICANTS,
Document #5, p.2, paragraph P.4).
3. IRB members pretended that the Applicants appealed to dozens of
institutions and organizations in Israel (with complains)
not for protection but to spread slander against "their" country (see:
APPLICANTS, document #5, p.2, paragraph P.4). IRB
members recognised that Applicants started to complain to dozens of
organizations and institutions when they lived in Israel,
and were denied protection. But the IRB concluded that the police and
other Israeli institutions' refusal to give family Gunin
protection was justified because of the views, expressed by family
members (folder APPLICANTS, document 5, page 3).
The IRB also invented a speculative suggestion that Gunins turned to
all these organisations not for protection but for
propaganda against Israel (APPLICANTS, document 5, page 3). They also
called Gunins aggressive
"exaggerators", dangerous to their country (they did not use the word
"dangerous", but this is what they mean). The
Immigration Board (IRB) also indirectly called Gunins "property of
Israel" just because the state of Israel paid for Gunins'
transportation from Warsaw to Tel-Aviv. IRB denied the right for all
Russian speaking refugees from Israel to claim a status
of refugees in principle: just because they came to Tel-Aviv for Israel's
cost and because they were allowed to come to Israel
according to "the law of return" (see APPLICANTS, document 5, page
2, paragraph P.3).
4. IRB members expressed almost direct insinuations that Applicants
came to Canada to defame against "their" country, just
camouflaging it by the refugee claim (see APPLICANTS, document 5, page
2, paragraph P.3).
5. Therefore the general ideologically-motivated line in IRB statements
and in their questions during interrogations put the
equal sign between peaceful protests against human rights violations,
Applicants' attempts to defend themselves, their human
dignity in Israel, - and revolutionary activity, defamation and/or
mutiny.
6. Everything, starting from IRB members' replicas during the hearing,
to their negative decision's text, is a direct
encouragement for Israelis to continue persecutions of Applicants.
Or a direct order...
Part 4 - (b)
Thesis: Applicants might face ill treatment and extreme sanctions
if they will be forced to appeal from outside Canada
It is clear from the above placed information that Applicants can go
outside Canada only to Israel. But in Israel Applicants
would face ill treatment and extreme sanctions.
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - p.11 -
This part correspond to all above mentioned reasons.
To learn more, please, read over next documents: folder APPLICANTS,
document#1, page 16, INHUMAN
TREATMENT; folder APPLICANTS, document#1, page 10; APPLICANTS, GROUP
OF DOCUMENTS #4,
document#1.
Part 5 - (b)
Thesis: Both Israeli authorities and IRB considered one of the
Applicants (L. Gunin) as an enemy of Israel with a tendency to
justify any punishment.
This consideration goes in contradiction with the clear evidence that
the only thing he wants is to be away from the state of
Israel, and the only method he's using to achieve it is the peaceful,
legal approach.
The Refugee Board's treatment of Mr. Gunin is evidently not independent.
During their evaluation of GUNINS' claim they
were in close contacts with Israeli embassy. They clearly demonstrated
a tendency to represent the attitude from the Israeli
point of view before the objective evaluation of the dangers for the
refugee claimants in case of their removal. Instead of
defining whether or not the removal of the refugee claimants from Canada
is dangerous for them, they made attempts to
define their "guilt". Instead, the Refugee Board turned itself into
a kind of a crimI.l (or, rather, a political) court, accusing
Applicants in exaggerations, propaganda against Israel, and other "crimes".
The very tone of the negative conclusive decision
is not a neutral, but accusational. The same tone was used by all Israeli
official documents, which concern Applicants.
Part 6 - (b)
Thesis: Direct threats to Applicants used to come from Israel even
here, to Montreal
Israeli state radio and newspapers used to make direct provocation against
Lev Gunin trying to cause violence against him,
playing on sensitive issues. Applicants also used to get mails from
Israel, which reflected some actual threats to theM.. There
also were malicious telephone threats, e-mails, and other forms of
threats. Applicants believe that an official status in Canada
given to them could put an immediate end to such threats. In the same
time these threats proved that if removed to Israel
Applicants would face malicious anger of Israeli authorities as well
as of ordI.ry Israelis [see APPLICANTS,
SUPPLEMENTS, documents #30 ("A" and "B")].
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - p.12 -
Part 7 - (b)
Thesis: Because of all above mentioned reasons the extreme hardship
for Applicants to apply from outside Canada (from
Israel) seems obvious.
Applicants can never apply from Israel (the only country they can go)
for Canadian permanent residency because of: 1)
predictable persecutions; 2) impossibility of accommodation in Israel;
3) eventual confiscation of Applicants' passports; 4) a
special permission, which is required in Israel to leave the country;
Israeli authorities will never give it to Lev Gunin again (the
permission issue was already discussed during the refugee hearings).
Resume: Family Gunin suffered a lot. They went through dramatic, drastic,
and tragic events. It is absolutely clear that they
can not apply for permanent residency in Canada from outside Canada.
A refusal to give them a possibility to apply from
within Canada will bring their lives to a tragic end. If humanity and
compassion is not for them - for whom then?
IMPORTANT NOTICE: PLEASE, TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT SOME OF THE DOCUMENTS,
MENTIONED HERE AND IN OTHER DECLARATIONS, WITH REFERRAL TRACES, MIGHT
BE SUBMITTED
1-2 WEEKS AFTER
PART 2
Lev Gunin - Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases
IMM Second Additional Document [refers to the
form 5283 (02-98) E]
Exceptional contribution, which Gunins could bring to Canadian cultural
heritage
REFERS TO
REASONS
ADJUSTMENT TO SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE
CASES
Grounds for Exemption - Adjustment to Paragraphs A and B
Three members of Applicants' family can bring an exceptional contribution
into Canadian cultural heritage.
1. Mr. L. Gunin is a productive musical composer, journalist, historian,
poet, writer, and amateur photographer. He is also an
advance computer designer and HTML programmer.
Mr. Lev GUNIN is an editor of two non-commercial Montreal-based newspapers:
in Polish and in Russian languages. He is
an owner and editor of 11 web sited on Internet; 7 of them are E-Zines.
His newspapers and E-Zines became wide known
among International Internet community. People submitted him tenth
of mails and thousands of E-mails. They expressed their
interest and approval. His creative works in Russian (poetry and prose)
became known on faculties of Russian Literature in a
number of universities, for example, in Gomel University (Belarus)
or Moscow State University (Russia). A number of famous
personalities like a famous Russian writer Vladimir Batchev or poet
Andrei Voznesensky spoke with warmth about L.Gunin's
poetry. Mr. Josef Brodsky, Noble Prize-winner, has marked his poetry
as unusual and sophisticated. Mr. Gunin's essays
were published in huge number in Belarus, Russia, Israel, Germany,
France, Poland, and Canada. Interviews with him were
published by the leading Russian newspaper "Vesti" in Israel (1994)
and by the Radio "Russian Aliance" in Montreal, Canada
(1998). World-famous writer and scenario creator, author of the famous
American movie "Hostages", Mr. Grigory Svirski,
citizen of Canada, gave the highest approval to L. Gunin's creative
and social activity. Gunin's prose and poetry were added
to the most complete and famous electronic Russian libraries (Alex
Farber & Maxim Moshkov's library, for example).
Mr. Gunin is an author of numerous contemporary compositions for piano,
orchestra, choral, instrumental duets, trios, etc.,
and also electronic music and songs in jazz, pop and rock styles. In
Montreal he took part in a number of music festivals,
concerts, and other types of musical activity. During his Montreal's
life period he released several musical albums with other
musicians and poets - both immigrants and Canadian citizens. He created
several songs with relatively well-known Montreal
poet Miguel Lamiel. His music was placed on Internet. He participated
in so many musical events that they hardly could be
listed. Mr. Gunin is a member of Montreal-based Saint-Lawrence choral
(the leading in Quebec) and Union Des Artist.
Mr. Gunin is a known human rights activist, recognised by many informal
human rights groups all over the world. He
maintains contacts with the leading human rights organisations.
Mr. Gunin's works about the history of Belarus were approved by all
leading professional historians in Belarus, including A.
Gritzkievich, A. Tarasov, O.Dadiomova, V. Posse, etc. His work "BOBRUYSK"
is a unique monograph of that kind among
the books about Belorusian cities.
He is also an author of works in music history, musicology, theory of
music, counterpoint, art, and culture. He is an author of
a number of philosophical essays and works in political science.
As an amateur photographer he has a fresh, colourful and origI.l style.
Mr Gunin is an advanced amateur computer technician, designer and HTML
programmer.
He is also an amateur architect.
All about mentioned information is supported by documents, referrals,
photos, diplomas, certificates, etc. This supplementary
information evaluates each sphere of Mr. Gunin's activity separately,
and could be divided on next parts:
1) Music plus works in musicology
2) Poetry
3) Prose
4) Journalism
5) Works in history
6) Computer skills + HTML programming
This 6 groups of documents will be submitted 1-2 days later or could
be presented on your request.
One can ask: Why - if he is so talented - we never heard about him?
This is because in the former USSR Lev was seriously persecuted (read
over folder Applicants, document 2), his creative
works were not compatible with the communist ideology - and therefore
could not be officially presented for publications or
awards. All doors were closed before him, and his carrier was broken
in advance.
Could he make his carrier in Israel - country, where he never wished
to go and where he was taken by force; country, which
he criticised long before he was taken there? (See: Applicants, Documents
1, 2, etc.). Of course, not!
In Israel he was also widely persecuted. He was not permitted to work
in his profession; even an employment authorisation
was refused him: formally an Israeli citizen! Newspapers in Israel
called him "an enemy"; Israeli State radio called him "an
enemy"! (See other documents). He could not advance in his attempts
to be treated like other people (see attached
documents)...
Now, in Canada... In spite of the pressure of his tragic immigration
situation, uncertain status, time and money-consuming
fight for not to be removed from Canada, time-consuming self-training
to polish his French and English, French course, low
social status related to his immigration situation, hardness of accommodation
period, and myriad of other obstacles, Canada
became the first country in his life, where he is little by little
- but advancing. For almost 4 years in Montreal (taking in
consideration his unstable immigration situation) his achievements
are just great! You can learn more about them in
supplementary information (see the bottom of the previous page).
There is another part of Mr. Gunin's activity, which is hidden and not
so evidently impressive among his achievements, but - in
the same time - is very important and means a breakthrough for hiM..
This activity could play a role of his achievements or
substitute them in some cases, or explain why more impressive results
can be predicted because of next reasons:
a) He was and is still restoring some of his manuscripts, confiscated
by the former Soviet or by the Israeli authorities.
b) Before showing his musical or literacy works to potential publishers,
managers or sponsors he had to make them readable,
retype, print and fold them, make musical records in professional recording
studios, what he did during 3 years. This process
is almost finished by now.
c) It took time also to meet important people and find other musicians
with whom he could record his music.
d) To do that all and to avoid ignorance in creative people' environment,
to keep himself technically updated, he had to buy
(or get as an offer) expensive equipment, which he could not get just
instantly. By now the most important part of such
equipment has been purchased or obtained.
e) Typing, retyping, scanning, printing hundreds of pages, making professional
recordings, translating if necessary, and
creating musical arrangements was a long, money- and time-consuming
process, but it was absolutely necessary for
preparation of a potential future success.
f) Editing and preparing his works for presentations, Lev Gunin did
a huge, monumental job in relatively unfavourable
situation.
In spite of his hard attempts and his present achievements he can not
complete and persuade his goals without any stable
status in Canada.
By these 6 above-placed paragraphs ("a" - "f") we wanted to show that
he is not just a talented person but also a hard
worker; and he did maximum of the possible in his situation to gain
success, and deserves to be given a chance to make
society benefiting from his talents.
It would be absolutely unfair if such a person will be removed from
Canada as if he was an ordI.ry person without any
creativity and without monumental creative goals...
The former Soviet Union was a classical totalitarian power. This power
took away Lev Gunin's future, prevented the society
from benefiting from his talents, and made his life tragic and unbearable.
An evil force sent him to another country: where he
did not want to go and where the verdict against him, taken once by
the Soviet authorities, was confirmed. It is not in the best
interests of Canada to maintain the consequences of what one of the
most brutal regimes in History did to this man. It would
be a tragic mistake if Canada will manifest support to a former brutal
regime's decision and will regenerate in time the
destructive effect to Lev Gunin's life, which was origI.lly generated
by the former totalitarian regime.
Will Lev Gunin become a famous musical composer or a poet, will he
concentrate on literature or on history, will his creativity
been targeting just his closely friendship environment; will he get
a professional job in music or will work as a volunteer on the
amateur scale (as a member of a choral or an instrumental group), the
society will benefit from his creativity anyway.
We were not committed here to discuss social mechanisms, which put up
one talented person to the top of success, and
another one, may be, more talented, don't. We are not here to analyse
why J. S. Bach, V. A. Mozart, F. Schubert, Van
Gogh, and other genius, died in poverty and obscurity. But we know
that the society benefited from their talents even without
recognising their creative superiority. In the same way it might benefit
from Lev Gunin's creativity if he would be left alone, out
of the threat of deportation.
We strongly believe that the rejection of his refugee claim came as
the result of extreme generalisation, partiality and was
generated by the influence of the state of Israel. It is in the interests
of justice to let him stay in Canada.
2. Alla Gunin is a creative and hard-working person, reliable and honest.
During all years of persecution, instability, sometimes fI.ncial
difficulties, and threat of deportation - during the last 4 years,
she always was with her family, with her husband and children. In spite
of her deep depression, caused of the immigrations
situation, she gave all her love, her creativity, and her support to
her husband and children. I don't know any other example,
when in similar situation, which could be compared for that poor family
with the war-time, another woman did so much for
her love ones! Gunins children's excellent performance in that tragic,
drastic situation could be explained not only by their
father's participation in their education, but by their mother's creativity
and love.
3. I. Gunin is a perspective talented musician, music and storywriter.
From her very young age I. Gunin was a gifted and promising musician,
good in both instrumental and theoretical spheres.
She is an advanced for her age piano player (certificates and other
documents are enclosed), a flute player, a member of
F.A.C.E. Junior Tremble choir, conducted by well-known Erica Phar,
and another choir, conducted by Mr. Yvon Edwards.
I. is also a young musical composer, and a good theoretician.
When she was just 4 years old, I. started to create tales and stories.
Now she is an advanced storywriter. She has written
tenth of them in French and in English.
All necessary documents are enclosed.
(Some of them might be submitted in an additional envelops).
4. M... Gunin is a talented ballerI., recognised by all ballet teachers
as an exceptionally talented young ballerI., may be
just one of 2-3 in Canada. She was chosen by the National Ballet of
Canada among many other children as the one of the
most talented.
M... is a gifted ballerI.. She is dancing from 4 years old. She has
good skills and abilities, good physical form, esthetical
and rhythmical feeling - and she is very nice in movements and in everything
she is doing. The director of the National Ballet
educational department M-me Bishop recognised M... as an extremely
talented person.
All M...'s ballet teachers predict her a great future. She already
participated in several big performances in several theatres,
including Jean-Mance theatre, Clark Theatre, and she must participate
in the big "Nutcracker" (ballet) Christmas
performance.
M... is also a storywriter, a musician and an amateur young musical
composer.
All necessary documents are enclosed.
(Some of them might be submitted in an additional envelops).
Gunins are a peaceful, harmonically-established, honest family. The
both adults are working. What will gain Canada by
deporting such nice people? As far as I see it is impossible for them
to apply for immigration from outside Canada, and it
must be obvious for everybody. They suffered so much... much more then
any other family on Earth. Maybe, it is enough to
torment them? Try to imagine yourself, your children, your love ones
on their places! If Humanity and Compassion is not for
them, for whom then?!
Sincerely,
Anna-Maria Augestat,
Canadian Citizen
Tel. (450) 923-2967
( ! ) Brochures, prospects, photos, diplomas, memos, referral letters,
albums, and material evidences of GUNINS'
participation in Montreal's cultural life are so numerous, that most
of them might be presented during the time of an interview
LIST OF PHOTOS
(BOBRUISK, 1974 - 1991)
1. Lev GUNIN with rock-group "Karasi".
This rock-group performed in various places. They played their own
compositions, including L. Gunin's. They worked
sometimes for Moscow and Kostroma philarmonies, but mostly performed
in Myshkovichi, an entertainment center near
Bobruisk (1982 - 1987). They had the most advanced by that time musical
instruments (keyboards, guitars, drums) and
equipment. A disc was released.
2. Lev GUNIN in Myshkovichi (see the previous paragraph).
3. Lev GUNIN with rock-group "Duration"
(he's sitting in front of that group's singer, 1988).
.
4. Lev GUNIN in Lenin plant club, with the club's rock-group. 1977.
.
5. Lev GUNIN with his group "Waterfall"
He performed with that group in 1976 - 1987, parallel with other groups.
It was his main group. They played popular songs
as well as Gunin's compositions.
.
6. The group of students of the Music College in Brest (Belarus), theoretical
faculty, with their teacher, IrI. Morikh. Among
them - Lev GUNIN. 1974.
.
7. Rock-group "Iles" from Hungary, once very popular in Eastern Europe.
Lev Gunin happened to substitute their keybordist.
.
8. With that group Lev GUNIN played on marriages, parties, birthday
parties, restaurants, etc.
.
9. L. GUNIN is the teacher, composer, artistic director for 3 rock-groups
of young musicians. One of these groups.
.
10. Touring over Belorusian villages with an amateur rock-group.
.
11. The same tour as "10".
12. Members of "Raduga" rock-group, who played for the Management
of the restaurants of Bobruisk-city. L.Gunin among
theM.. 1991.
13. The same as "8".
14, 15. L. GUNIN is the teacher, composer, artistic director for 3 rock-groups
of young musicians. Two of these groups.
16. Playing with the group "Raduga" (see paragraph 12).
DOCUMENTS' CHECKLIST - 2
MAIN ENVELOPE (ENVELOPE NUMBER 1)
1. Request For Exemption From Immigrant Visa Requirement (application
form IMM 5001)
2. 3 copies of above mentioned form
3. Additional Sheet Of Paper With Jobs Listed (refers to IMM 5001 form,
p.3, section "G")
4. 3 copies of above mentioned sheet
5. Explanations (refers to Additional Sheet Of Paper With Jobs Listed:
see point 3)
6. Supplementary Information (IMM 5283) form
7. 3 copies of above mentioned form (see point 6)
8. A copy of the Federal Court's decision ("Ordonnance")
9. Authorization by applicant (his spouse) for release of police certificates/clearances
10. Identity documents, issued for the members of family GUNIN by Immigration
Canada and Quebec's Immigration: 11
documents
11. Copies of the last salary checks for Lev and Alla Gunin as evidences
of their employment
12. Official Immigration Canada DOCUMENTS CHECKLIST
13. REASONS (Adjustments to Supplementary Information (refers to IMM5283
form). 12 pages.
14. Exceptional Contribution GUNINS Can Bring to Canadian Cultural
Heritage
15. Copies of 3 letters to UN High Commissioner of Refugees Mrs. Kim
Mancini (14 pages)
16. Motion of extension of time (5 pages): refers to REASONS: see point
10
17. My fI.l word
18. Folder "PASSPORTS, BIRTHDAY CERTIFICATES, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS":
10 DOCUMENTS
SUPPLEMENTARY ENVELOPE (ENVELOPE NUMBER 2)
1. Control copy of IMM 5001 and 5283 application forms (to show what
applicant they belong to)
2. Folder "APPLICANTS": 7 main documents, 11 total, which must show
that the applicants can not go outside Canada,
that they were exposed by IRB to an additional danger, and faced deep
psychological traumas because of the way they were
treated by IRB, and their health or even lives might be completely
destroyed
3. Folder "SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2"
a) folder "Administrative Pressure" (67 documents, which show that
before coming to Canada applicants were under
excessive administrative pressure: they were refused full employment
authorization and welfare in the same time; tax
exemption, diplomas equivalent and professional courses, which were
obvious for all new comers, registration with the state
labor exchange; the departure authorization - permit to leave the country
- was given only after 3,5 years, and so on. This
pressure will never give them any possibility to apply for immigrant
visa from outside Canada)
b) sub-folder "Medical" (24 documents, 31 pages show that even the
threat of the removal from Canada itself already slowly
damaging their health, and the eventual real removal will finish their
lives tragically)
4. Folder "REFERENCES"
sub-folders:
a) Lev GUNIN (46 + 22 documents)
b) I. GUNIN (16 documents)
c) M... GUNIN (9 documents)
All documents refer to "Exceptional contribution GUNINS can bring..."
EXPLAI.TION
DEAR HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS DIVISION OFFICER!
I had two affidavits from refugee claimants families who (one of them)
was removed from Canada, and another one left after
they were refused. Both of them were linked with the movement for Russian
speaking people rights in Israel. In the first family
the International ("foreign" as Russian speaking people call it) passport
was confiscated from their single son (27 years old)
when they came to extend their expired passports. The confiscation
was related to their refugee claim in Canada. Passports
were confiscated from the members of another family right in the airport.
Because the member of IRB, assigned to our file, Mrs. Malka, contacted
Israeli embassy and denounced our refugee claim, I
don't feel secure to any information, submitted to Immigration Canada.
This is why I have no rights to put security of people,
who submitted me their affidavits, in danger. And this is why I decided
fI.lly not to reveal them to you. I live it for your
consciousness to believe or not to believe me. I am an idealist, probably,
a naive man. I still believe in goodness and in
consciousness, and hope that in spite of a potential pressure from
the state of Israel, or, rather, from the public opinion in your
working environment or/and from your supervisors, you could act according
to your consciousness.
You can also go to next web sites for find out more about administrative
terror in Israel against Russian speaking people:
[ http://www.codoh.com/newsdesk/ ]
[http://pinpoint.netcreations.com/search?account=codoh&query=Israeli+persecute+Russian+
Immigrants&submit.x=25&submit.y=10]
Sincerely,
Lev Gunin
DOCUMENT NUMBER/NUMERO 11
Previous Document <> Next Document <>
Main Page
En Francais
In French Language
POUR LE COMMMITTEE DES DROITS DES ENFANTS DES QUEBEC
To QUEBEC's Children Rights Committee
Cher madame, monsieur!
Nous devions s`adresser au public parce que d`autres mesures a prot?ger
les droits des deux enfants ne pourraient pas
fonctionner. S'il est si, un pr?c?dent de violations tres s?rieuses
des droits d'enfants pourrait survenir.
Ca concerne I. & M... Gunin:
Brievement: avant 1991 les autorit?s ont command? Lev Gunin, activiste
des droits de l'homme, a partir de son natale
Belarus, et ?mettaient un visa Isra?lien. En avril, 1991, dans Varsovie,
la famille Gunin essayait de s`?chapper en Allemagne,
mais ?taient captur?s par les Isra?liens et pris en Ira?l par force.
Ils venaient en Tel-Aviv, incluant I., 5, et M..., 3 ans -
vieilles par alors. En Ira?l les enfants affrontent des syst?matiques
humiliations, moquerie, et deviennet des t?moins des
pers?cutions s?v?res contre leurs parents et grand-m?re.
Sans la permission du gouvernement les Gunins ne pourraient pas partir
du pays Ira?l. En 1992, ils s`adressaient au consulat
de Belarus au Tel-Aviv, mais ?taient ni?s de la citoyennet? et
de l'acc?s ? leur pays natif. Ils ont pu quitter Ira?l seulement en
1994 avec l`indirecte participation d'Amnistie Internationale. Ils
sont arriv?s au Canada, revendiquant un statut de r?fugi?. Le
Conseil De r?fugi? (IRB) ne rejettait pas le r?clam? des Gunins compl?tement,
mais accusait la famille en provoquant des
pers?cutions par le refus ? changer leur croix et orientation religieuses.
Faisant que, le IRB a ni? les Gunins un des droits de
l'homme fondamentaux: ne pas ?tre pers?cut? pour leurs croyances et
opinions. Les droits de l'enfant aussi ?taient viol?s.
Maintenant leur cas gagnait le 1er niveau de l'appel, ? la Cour F?d?rale.
Si sur le deuxi?me niveau l'appel sera rejet?, ils
pourraient ?tre d?port?s en Ira?l.
Il est clair qu'une telle d?portation pourrait faire les d'enfants orphelins
( sources Isra?liennes - comme le radio d'?tat -
addresse au public pour l'approbation des mesures s?v?res contre leur
p?re) et les exposent ? des pers?cutions d`avantage.
M?me si elles ne se rappellent pas de tous les d?tails elles pensent
? leur vie dans Ira?l avec l`horreur et la terreur. Bient?t
apr?s leur arriv?e ? Montr?al, l'?valuation psychologique trouvait
le dommage profond au psychique de l'enfant. Parce que le
psychique de I. & M... ne pourrait pas endurer des m?moires horribles,
tout ?tait effac? et remplac? par leur vie ?
Montr?al. Elles ont oubli? les traditions Isra?liennes et l`H?breux
compl?tement. Leur accomodation ? Montr?al est brillante.
Le fran?ais est devenu leur langue maternelle. Elles gagnaient
beaucoup d'amis, elles n'ont pas la mentalit? Isra?lienne, mais
Queb?quoise...
Maintenant, la d?portation de l'endroit qu`elles admirent, apr?s
4 ann?es qu`elles vivent ici, atteindant l'?cole F.A.C.E.,
-
dos ? captivit?, dos au pays qu`elles ?taient prises par force,
n'est pas juste, inhumain, elle est brutale! Elles n'appartiennent
pas et n'avaient jamais appartenus l?!
P.S. Les parents des enfantes sont des gens sinc?res, talentueux, et
paisibles. Ils travaillent.
Elisabeth Gunin, grand-m?re d'enfant
Ce que nous attendons de vous?
1. Une p?tition aux organisations de la protection des enfants et aux
comit?s des droits d'homme, au Ministre D'immigration,
aux m?dias, et une copie pour nous.
2. Une aide en extortation de la termI.ison de citoyennet? Isra?lienne
de GUNINS du consulat d'Ira?l ? Montr?al (Lev
GUNIN apelle pour elle depuis 1994).
I. GUNIN:
Elle est une joueuse avanc?e de piano. I. employait pass? les examens
? McGill chaque ann?e avec les meilleures marques.
Elle participait dans des activit?s et ?v?nements culturels/ artistiques
des douzaines de fois. Elle est aussi une jeune ?crivaine
de po?sie, histoire/ et compositeur.
M... GUNIN:
M... est une ballerine talentueuse. Elle ?tait choisie des douzaines
de jeunes danseurs pour le Ballet National du Canada.
M... participait dans divers ballet & autres performances.
La sculpture, faite par elle, ?tait expos?e au Musee des Beaux -
Arts. Elle est aussi une jeune compositrice/ ?crivaine d'histoire.
Nous sugg?rons que les avocats doivent ?tre contre le chaos dans les
matieres juridiques. La t?rmI.ison compl?te de justice
devrait t?rminer la prof?ssion d`avocat. C`est pourquoi, nous ?sperons
sur votre aide.
En octobre, 1998 une reponse negative est arrivee.
Famille GUNIN
<Previous Document>
THE ENFORCEMENT OF FAMILY GUNIN's PERSECUTION
by IMMIGRATION CANADA
Part 3
LIST OF EVENTS
(short description)
October, 1998 - September, 1999
<<Next Document>>
DOCUMENT NUMBER 14
Elisabeth Gunin (Epstein) - Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases -
(In Addition to Form IMM 5283 (02-98) E)
REASONS
ADJUSTMENT TO SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE
CASES
Grounds for Exemption - Adjustment to Paragraphs A and B
A
[ A) Canadian Immigration law requires applicants for permanent residence
to obtain an immigrant visa outside Canada,
before coming to Canada. Explain why you believe that your application
for permanent residence should be processed from
within Canada as an exception]
1. I had the joint refugee claim with my son, and his family. The negative
decision by Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB)
did not mean that there was no danger for me to go back. I am sure
that my case was neglected. IRB refused to evaluate my
it at all. They did not interrogate me, gave me no questions, in their
speeches and in their conclusive decision in writing I was
not mentioned as a personality at all. They concentrated exclusively
on my son: because they wanted to punish him for his
attitude towards the state of Israel.
2. So, I might face the same humiliations and the same assaults I faced
before coming to Canada.
3. You, probably, understand, that, regarding my age, and my situation,
I have no chances to start an independent
immigration procedure or any other procedure to obtain an immigrant
visa outside Canada.
4. It is absolutely clear that I can only appeal for Humanitarian and
Compassionate grounds, because other attempts not to be
removed from Canada, linked to other immigration procedures, are not
for me.
B
[ B) What hardship would you have if appeal from outside Canada?]
1. When we were taken to Israel from Warsaw, I had a strongest shock.
In result of that stressful situation my eyes disease
have been worsen. It became even more severe after what I still consider
as persecutions, which we faced in Israel.
2. I was refused the proper medical help in Israel. Medical doctors-Israelis
shouted on me, used abusive words and gestures.
We were expelled from the medical clinics we paid for. As the result
my left eye was neglected. When we came to Montreal,
Canadian medical doctors saved my eyes. But they told me that for not
become blind I have to avoid stresses and high
temperatures. Removing me from Canada to Israel you can put me under
the both stress and heating (Israel is one of the
most hot countries in the world), and you'll make me blind. Please,
don't do it to me!
3. Living 4 years in Montreal I've been used to local life. I have
friends, relatives; I speak English more or less, and
understand some French words, too. I have no close friends or relatives
in Israel, I don't speak Hebrew, and I don't know
Jewish religious rules. Regarding my age, my eyes disease (glaucoma),
my general situation, please, do not send me back
there!
4. The members of IRB could say just anything about our claiM.. How
could they not believe our honest and sincere claim,
hundreds of documents we presented, our innocence, I don't know and
don't dare to know. I just know that I still have a
non-imagI.ble fear to go back there. My blood is freezing in my veins,
when I think that I might be removed back there.
5. Please, try to understand that Israel is not my native country,
I am a stranger there, I don't belong to Middle East culture
and traditions.
6. Please, have a merci for me as if I was your mother, sister,
or daughter.
Sincerely Yours,
Lisa Gunin
<Previous Document>
THE ENFORCEMENT OF FAMILY GUNIN's PERSECUTION
by IMMIGRATION CANADA
LIST OF EVENTS
(short description)
October, 1998 - September, 1999
1) 08.10.1998. - The Second Stage
Federal Court's Decision: to reject family Gunin's demand
to revise their refugee case.
Reasons: one reason - "cases with Immigration Tribunal's remark
"no minimum ground" are
automatically rejected".
2) During the Federal Court's hearing
the Immigration Canada's lawyer, Mrs. Murphy, based
her arguments on Lev GUNIN's "dangerous
personality", insisting that he is an aggressive,
dangerous and anti-government
trouble-maker, and because of that must be expelled from
Canada.
3) When the Federal Court's decision
was received Lev and Alla Gunins were deeply
depressed and were close to a
suicide. On the 3-rd or 4-th day after receiving the Federal
Court's decision Lev was so close
to a suicide that only physical efforts could calm him down.
To relax and avoid a suicide attempt
Lev started to run - and completely damaged his already
damaged by batteries and other
incidents ligaments on his both legs.
4) November, 1998. - Family Gunin
submitted an appeal for Humanitarian and
Compassionate grounds to Immigration
Canada. The appeal for the Risk of
Return, made by Gunins in 1997,
was never answered.
5) Immediately after submission
of that appeal Gunins started to have difficulties in
using their telephone line. The
wider description of what is going on with their telephone
line may be found on the next
page
6) Three times BELL's technicians
came to Gunins apartment and checked BELL's
installation in their apartment,
but found nothing.
7) Several times Lev GUNIN's computer
(after using Internet or sending a fax Lev
disconnects it immediately, so
that when Gunins are using the telephone computer is
never connected), was targeted
by computer viruses. The viruses probably came not
through Internet but through the
telephone line itself. (See also next page)
8) Unknown voiced started to give
Lev Gunin and his family advises to live Canada
"voluntarily", otherwise it will
be "more worse" to theM.. The most persistent strangers
called from outside Montreal,
demanding a long distance collect call. They called
several times a week during approximately
3 months, starting from March, 1999. When
one day I. Gunin, Lev's older
daughter, authorized the collect call, they began to
mock over her. They spoke French.
When Lev took over they told him that he received
an unofficial removal order and
was advised to leave Canada.
9) Because of psychological pressure
and tragical immigration situation Lev started to
injure himself. He received 6
injuries, 4 times visited emergency - and some of the
injuries never healed. Both Lev
and Alla Gunin started to suffer from extreme declining
of their health's state.
10) Gunins' children are suffering
from neurothyses because they are also suppressed by
the situation.
11) In March, 1999, Lev Gunin's
work (night auditor) was termI.ted because it was
a temporary job. He had to take
unemployment. In the same time he had a work accident,
and was seriously injured. Because
of the bandage and the gravity of the injury in general
he could not go to another work.
In the beginning of July, when the bandage and the
protective plate were removed,
he could not search for a physical work. In the same time
it is practically impossible to
apply for a better job having no status in Canada.
12) Because of his immigration
situation Lev's unemployment benefits were often
suspended, and he had difficulties
to pay for a renewval of his Employment
Authorization. And without it
he could not receive the benefits...
13) Because of all these reasons
but inicially because of Immigration Canada's
persecutions family Gunin started
to face such extreme fI.ncial difficulties as
never before. They were pushed
much below the poverty line.
14) Searching for work Lev Gunin
applied to hundreeds potencial employers. No
one called him back. He found
out what is going on when one of the potencial
employers told him that she was
advised to call Immigration Canada or called
herself (it is not completely
clear) - and received a "recommendation" not to
employ Lev Gunin.
15) In August, 1999, Lev began
to modernize and classify his web files with full
description of Gunins immigration
case. He did it because almost one year
passed since Gunins applied for
Humanitarian grounds, and an eventual Immigration's
decision might arrive soon. In
case of a negative decision Lev was planning to appeal
to a number of organizations.
To elimI.te the expenses on mails he decided to use
his web site as a primary source.
Since then his web site was subbotaged. He is not
able to upload new versions of
his pages to his Internet server. But something more
serious and dangerous occured:
the server started to send old versions or even blank
pages with existing files' names
to Lev's computer, erasing his renewed files and
elimI.ting his work! In responce
to Lev Gunin's official complaint his server's
representetive claimed server's
innocence and told that allien hackers could do that.
An anonimous e-mail advised Lev
not to place information about his immigration
case on his web site - otherwise
his web site will be closed, and his account - termI.ted.
16) In the end of August - beginning
of September Lev Gunin finished IGS course
for security/investigation agents
- and succesfully passed the exaM.. But he was refused
the security agent licence because
of his status. Quin Elisabeth Hotel's placement
department's clerk responded to
Lev's appeal for work that they do not want to
employ people with no status in
Canada.
17) 08.09.1999 Gunins received
a negative responce to their application
for I. Gunin's Student Authorization.
In his/her statement Vergeville's Case
Processing Center's agent AJL/F
(now Immigration Canada stopped even
reveal real names of its agents:
as KGB in ex-USSR or SS in fascist Germany
did) mentions employment authorization
instead of student authorization. He
gives 2 "reasons":
"I. Gunin was refused and employment [when we applied for student
authorization!] authorization
because a removal order, which might be
executted, was issued for you.
This is why you are not eligible to apply for
employment authorization from
within Canada".
Refusing a child a student authorization Immigration Canada violated
International treaties, Canada's
laws and human rights granted by all existing
laws and regulation. In Gunins'
case only a conditional removal order is acting;
a real removal order was never
issued against theM.. In the same day, 08.09.1999,
Gunins called Immigration Canada
- and verified through both aitomatical
information tool and an agent
(started to speak to an agent at 12.24 p.M..) that
there are no decisions in Gunins
appeals for the Risk of Return and Humanitarian
and Compassionate grounds, and
no removal order issued before 08.09.1999.
In the same time it is possible
that Immigration Canada means anonymous advises
to Gunins by unindentified callers
to quit Canada, otherwise their life will be made
unbearable and misarable. Same
threats expressed during IRB refugee hearings
in Gunins case gudge Mr. Boisrond
and immigration officer Mrs. Malka.
<<Next Document>>
GRIGORY SVIRSKY
Grigory Svirsky is a famous writer, author of the movie's "Hostages" scenario.
Professor, member of Canada's and Russia's Writers' Unions
An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Canada, Mr. Jean
Chretien
About Gunins' immigration case
Translation from Russian origI.l
To the Prime Minister uf Canada
THE OPEN LETTER
Grigory SVIRRKY,
Professor ot literature, writer.
In Canada since 1973.
"THE BERLIN WALL IN CANADA"...
So was called a letter-affidavit, containing text of my statement for a
conference in
Toronto. The conference was organized on October 22, 1997 by the All-American
Institute for Human Rights Defense (Washington, D. C.) This statement criticized
the
Management of Immigration Canada, which is obviously not in accord with
any common
sense and humor: most undesirable immigrants in its official document were
announced...
writers.
...
A writer is a creature, certainly, horrible. But a composer appears simply
a horror, an
invasion of aliens.
The name of this composer and musician is Lev Uunin. He's 42 years old,
he is a
polyglot, and is fluent in English, Prench, German, Polish, Byelorussian,
and Yiddish. His
wife Alla (39) has a technical education. The children - I. and M...
- 11 and 12 years
old, like their father - are gifted in music. I. plays piano and flute,
M... is a young
ballerI., once chosen by the Natiunal ballet of Canada for further studies,
but... status,
status! Of course, she participates in many performances even without the
status, and her
list of performances is already longer, than that of some adult ballerI.s.
This family does not require any help from the stale. The composer is skilled
in many
musical specialties. He tutored children; has performed in prestigious
clubs, concert halls,
and restaurants!.
Such a self-sufficient family, one should think, would be welcomed in any
country...
Naturally, except the most racist, xenophobic-anti-Semite.
And now the family is on the verge of catastrophe: The Immigration Management
in
Montreal has refused to give them the right to settle... in free Canada.
Deportation
threatens theM..
Why suddenly?!
Oh, this family, Mister Prime Minister, has an awful past.
1. First of all, they ran away from Israel. The Israeli consulate persecutes
escapees by all
means as fugitive slaves. Then, not only the Israeli consulate, but even
the immigration
authorities of Canada assume that Israel is a free country, and therefore
consider escape
from freedom as impossible...
However, it is really hard to understand why people run away from this
"freedom". By
number of refugees, Israel, according to official statistics, is on the
third - fourth place
(depending on the years), annually: directly after the brutal murder regimes
of Iran and
Somali.
The nature of human mentality is so, that people willingly believe myths.
Myths are
much more smoother than the truth. Why listen to the confused words of
unfortunate
refugees that Israeli nationalists have blocked all venues for Russian
Jews except to
Israel since the first of October, 1989. What has happened (for many years)
is a real
deportation of half-million free people to a small East country.
That, in itself, was a crimI.l abuse of authority, humiliation over the
principles of basic
human rights. But today the consequences of that crime are much more painful:
nobody
tried to foresee the results of this irresponsible operation, which has
sharpen up to limits
the socio-economic and political situation in the country. One can observe
the extreme
intolerance of aborigI.l Israelis (such as outcomers from the countries
of Muslim
fundamentalism: Morocco, Algeria. Iraq and etc.) for new arrivants. Upon
their arrival in
Israel, immigrants from Africa were deprived of privileges. As a rule,
they were taken to
Negev desert and left there; and only fragmentary army tents were thrown
to theM.. The
care of the state for tile new arrivants from Africa ended with this.
Naturally, former Africans were irritated by rumors that "Russians" are
given
"everything"... Suppressed hatred towards the authorities has found a convenient
outlet:
non-sanctioned murders of the immigrants from Russia, non-provoked battering
of the
"Russian" children in schools, a wave of rapes of new "Russian" immigrants.
The last case
reported by the world press (a week ago): a policeman (a Moroccan origin)
extremely
irritated by an Israeli soldier, who loudly spoke with his friends in Russian
in a restaurant,
stabbed the soldier with a knife and killed hiM.. (Moscow newspaper "Koмepcaнт
Daily." ("Commersant Daily") of November 13, this year, and tens of other
editions
wrote about it).
In the last years the attitude of the Israeli aborigines to new arrivants
has deteriorated
alarmingly. The Israeli and American press in Russian has now informed
the readers
about a pogrom in Jerusalem's religious quarter " Mea Shearim". Angry crowds
have
beaten "Russians", burned their furniture, broken glasses in their motor
vehicles. Only the
intervention of the Israeli army stopped murders... One rabbi, associate
of the mayor of
Jerusalem, has called his co-religionists for this pogroM..
Why then has the immigration board heard, with a grimace of mistrust, the
testimony,
that the wife of composer Gunin, ethnically Russian (she's from a mixed
family), was
persecuted, called " Russian whore ", prostitute. According to supplied
documents she
was cleaning the subsidiary premises of a shop, where she worked as a cashier.
Influenced by spasm of brutaliен aborigines took the mop from her hands
and hit her on
the head with it, then they severely beat her up half-to-death. She arrived
home with
injuries and bruisies.
And the small Gunins' daughters, who in kindergarten were preparing for
holiday
Sukkot's celebration, learning verses and songs with burning eyes, were
separated from
all others and locked in a dark closet with "You are not Jews, this holiday
is not for you."
as only explanation.
As soon as the composer published articles against narrow-minded small-town
nationalism and racism, in defense of human rights, this intellectual man
was beaten by
everyone: by "kablans" - Israeli sub-contractors, who employed that "Russian"
only for
the heaviest work, then by police, whose brutality nowadays everyone speaks
about
(even the members of Israeli Knesset). Gunin even tried to find "truth"
(protection) in a
police station. But uselessly since the composer, after writing one of
his articles was
already once "invited" for "discussion" by police. After that discussion
his lips were
swelled, and the doctor diagnosed a brain concussion...
Israel is a free country. It is possible (theoretically) to leave her.
You must only bring
two dozen permits (visas for exit): from the army, from Immigration bank
"Ydud", from
building bank and other organizations, which can give out these papers,
or can not to
give out; at last, from police, which does not give any documents to plaintiffs,
whatever
you do...
One day Ana ran to a few embassies, with the vain hope to take her husband
and
small girls out from Israel immediately.
But only the support of Amnesty International to Gunins made their departure
from
Israel possible...
And here they are in blessed Canada.
2. And here something even more awful was found out, - the composer and
musician
Lev GUNIN not only "escaped" with his family from a very free country,
he furthermore
has an independent and obstI.te personality. And even here he has not
changed...
He was exasperated and demoralized by how unlawfully the trial of Gunins'
case in the
refugee court was managed. I have listened to all cassettes with records
of refugee
hearings. Each of them lasted from four to five hours.
During that huge amount of time Canadian judges spoke out only three -
four phrases,
transferring the whole initiative to an immigration offficer whose name
is Judith Malka.
With passion and anger Malka (her Jewish family name means "queen") repeated
all
"proofs" of Israeli government about "fugitives and traitors" (Exactly
by that name former
Prime Minister of Israel Mr. Shamir, ardent Zionist called all Jews, who
did not desire to
live in Israel).
But the composer Gunin is not a Zionist, though he has nothing against
ZionisM..
He merely wants that his wife not be called "Russian prostitute", and not
be beaten up.
He does not understand in general, why an immigration officer whose name
is Judith
Malka, cries hysterically: how could this Gunin call himself and his family,
which were not
allowed to get out of Israel, "Russian slaves"?!. Slaves driven to the
Middle East.
Certainly, it was absolutely necessary for a tired out person to quit Israel
immediately.
But not alone! It was necessary to grasp from humanitarian reasons the
prime minister
Netanyahu, whom the iron Madeline from USA State Department puns to one
side, the
opponents of the peace agreements Sharon with Shamir - in an opposite,
and the right
psychopaths threaten to shoot him immediately as lzhak Rabin, if he will
listen to the
Americans. That's who is a true "prisoner of Zion"! He's only not beaten
by police yet as
Lev Gunin was.
Oh, the exhausted, tormented composer was not up to these thoughts in the
court. He
multiplied, and multiplied the facts of inter-ethnical hostility and the
brutality of Israeli
police, what is today not only denounced by the Israeli press publications,
but even
discussed by the deputies of Knesset...
Listening to the tapes, I expected that Lev Gunin would soon lead Immigration's
Malka
to a heart attack. FI.lly, as the matter of fact, she really broke up,
and, almost loosing
her conscience, has cried out, that Gunin has submitted the request for
the status of the
refugee just for having an opportunity to discredit and slander the state
of Israel!
Naturally, after that cry Gunin and his family were not recognized as refugees.
It was told about the reasons of that refusal directly, in the official
document.
I "... There are not enough proofs that "Russian" origins, mixed marriages
are
persecuted because of nationality, religion, [...] or because they express
antifascist
views".
2 ''... Because the state of Israel has brought "Russians" on her own expense,
they in
general have no rights to ask for the status of the refugees in Canada...."
And etc...
In Montreal, in the Rene Levesque Street, 200, where there the Council
on refugee
cases (Immigration and Refugee Board), is situated, there is the archive
for documents
that officially confirm inter-ethnic hostility in Israel, attacks on children
from CIS
countries, and systematic rapes of the women from Russia.
Also are carefully kept UN documents, which testify about the same. The
same has been
published nowadays by various newspapers of the World.
But why the judges had to look to the truth into eyes? Eyes will ache!
The Jewish
Congress of Canada does not want to hear that in their beloved Israel somebody
was
deadly beaten, somebody was pogromed and persecuted... From ages the Erets
Israel
for them - their "pink dream", their "birthday of heart". How could it
happen that inside
the "pink dream" anybody is beaten? But if even really beaten, probably,
he must be
beaten!..
Thousands of Russian, Byelorussian and Ukrainian Jews, running from Israel,
are
rejected, with an active assistance of the Jewish Congress, from Canada,
thousands of
families are broken, children become orphans, many are lost. But the idea
that the
members of the Jewish Congress of Canada are accessories to a historical
crime against
the Jews of CIS, - this idea has not yet struck theM....
Dear PRIME MINISTER, Mister Jean CHRETIEN!
I wrote five documentary novels and stories about Israel, including the
trilogy "Branch
of Palestine", translated in all European languages. In my life I saw enough
of such noisy
Judith Malkas, hired or voluntary Israeli super-patriots, so enough that
it would be
enough for ten lives.
I am convinced, that you have judges with the sense of humor and understanding,
who
would not allow to transform the Canadian court into a battlefield for
intolerant towards
dissidents and broken apart Israeli society.
But now the speech goes not only about re-consideration of this obvious
case, but
simply about the rescue of the Gunin family. I talked to these people,
saw their eyes.
Lev Gunin and his wife Alla are exhausted, nervous people, they are on
the verge of
suicide. Four years they are carefully pushed towards this edge. The persecution
of
intelligentsia does not cease...
Young talented professionals are extremely important to Canada. Please,
give Lev
Gunin, a talented composer and musician, an opportunity to work quietly
- in glory to his
family and this remarkable country - Canada
Grigory SVIRSKY
12/26/1998
TORONTO
FROM MARCH TO AUGUST 1999
To Human Ressourses Development Canada
To CSST
For Russian Media (in Russian language)
To Embasses: 1) Russian (in Russian only) 2) Israeli (Hebrew and English)
To International Red Cross
For Employment Authorization Immigration Division (En Francais - In
French)
From Family Gunin, Montreal, November, 1998
Dear Friends!
Please, try to treat this letter as an unusual appeal, not just a desperate
cry for help and justice.
In October 1998, the Federal Court of Canada issued a second decision
in family GUNIN's appeal. (The 1-st one was
positive). That tragic decision resumed our refugee claim, which took
4 years of our lives.
Let us make a brief description of events, which took place before that
sad date.
The head of the family, Lev GUNIN, as all members of the family, was
born in Bobruisk, Belarus, ex-USSR. Senseless,
ridiculous coincidences in 1971-72 turned him, a secondary school student,
young composer, and advance piano player, into
a person, persecuted by Soviet authorities. They tried to prevent him
from entering collegial - university studies; however, his
persistence and a lucky miracle broke that wishes circle, and he received
first collegial, and then university degrees in music.
In spite of that, L. GUNIN could not build a successful composer's
carrier because of persecutions. In the same time, he
played a specific role in ex-USSR, Belarus, and other countries' cultural
life. He's the author of novels, stories, poetry,
contemporary and electronic music, works in history, essays, musicology,
music history, philosophy, etc. His articles were
published in a number of newspapers all over the world.
In 1979-1986, Lev became an object of wide humiliations. He was beaten
by somebody, who has links with militia (police)
and KGB. The authorities stood up in defense of the attackers. They
persecuted L. GUNIN even more for bringing the
attacker to trial. In another incident he and his brother - they were
hunted by two well-coordI.ted groups: mobsters, and a
gang of youngsters. "Hunters" were also leaded by militia (police).
Later brothers GUNIN were interrogated by police /KGB
men. Lev's brother Vitaly became a victim of secret medical manipulations.
L. Gunin has multiple links with the cultural elite, famous personalities
and dissidents in Moscow, St. - Peterburg (Leningrad),
Vilnius, Warsaw, and Belarus. He also has connections with the Western
journalists in Moscow, and with representatives of
the governments of the Western countries.
1980-s. Because of persecutions L. GUNIN's decided to participate in
the dissident movement. There are the main
directions of his dissident activities:
1. Participation in Human Rights movement and links with the most famous
human rights activists.
2. Membership in underground literacy circles.
3. Defense of the Old City of Bobruisk from revelation and demolition.
4. Journalism and editorial functions for underground magazines.
5. Cooperation with forbidden (or unwelcomed) in ex-USSR NTS (People's
Labor Union) and the National Front of
Belarus.
6. Participation in the Jewish national movement.
7. Creation of ideologically independent and stylistically controversial
music, prose, poetry, philosophy, and historical,
political, and other works.
1985-1989. A conflict erupted between leading by L. GUNIN group - and
the powerful institution of Israeli emissaries to
USSR, and controlled by them Jewish political Mafia. (Their goals -
devastation of the local Jewish cultural life, confiscation
of huge aid from the Western Jewish communities, and concentration
of the propaganda of immigration to Israel - L. Gunin
was fighting). He also confronted three important personalities - Kebich,
Alimbachkov, and Lukashenko. All of them became
top political figures later: first one short before, and the two others
- after his departure from USSR (The 1-st one became the
Prime Minister of Belarus, 2-nd - major of Bobruisk, and the 3-rd is
the present dictator of Belarus).
.
His attempts to emigrate to USA or Germany - to save his brother's
life - failed. All attempts to obtain an Israeli visa for
permanent residency have been failed, too. (By then practically everybody
could easily get such a visa). Israelis did not want
to allow him and his brother to immigrate to Israel.
1991. After his brother's death, Lev started to cancel all steps of
immigrating to Israel. He did not want to go there by then.
Soon he received an order from KGB to leave his native country for
Israel. Soviet authorities sent us (family Gunin) all
previously suspended visas. We could not say "no" to KGB, but planned
to escape from Warsaw to Germany. At the
Central railway station in Warsaw, in presence of L.Gunin's Polish
friends, Israelis captured us, and took us to Israel by
force. In Israel, Mossad (Shabbak) officers verbally accused Lev in
an attempt to sabotage the whole operation of bringing
the Soviet Jews to Israel. Mossad approached him several times.
In Israel we faced next persecutions:
1) Israeli citizenship was thrust on us
2) Alla, Lev's wife, was abused, attacked, beaten, assaulted, and systematically
discrimI.ted against
3) Elisabeth, his mother, was abused, attacked, and assaulted
4) Children became victims of systematic humiliations and mockery
5) Lev himself was deprived in his rights. Israeli authorities denied
him:
a) valid diploma equivalent
b) professional courses
c) rights to enter other courses or university
d) full and valid employment authorization
e) registration with the State labor exchange
f) tax exemption as all fresh immigrants were receiving
g) welfare when he was unemployed
h) proper and equal medical service
i) legal, and police defense
j) reduction of municipal taxes
k) authorization of departure, which is required in Israel to leave
the country
l) etc.
He was beaten, abused, discrimI.ted against. Israeli state radio called
him an enemy. One of the leading Israeli newspapers
suggested that his works (essays, articles, etc.) must be destroyed.
Innumerous and systematic draft board's orders to appear
affected his normal life and his (his family) fI.ncial situation.
During his life in Israel L. Gunin published a number of articles &
books in Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Moscow, and Germany,
criticizing Israeli government for human rights violations and fascist
tendencies in Israel.
1994-1996. With an indirect Amnesty International's involvement we could
come to Canada, and claimed a refugee status.
To support our claim we presented next types of documentary proof:
A. Legal documents
B. Documents, issued by Israeli government
C. Documents, issued by all kinds of Israeli institutions
D. Affidavits
E. Letters
F. Post receipts
G. Medical documents
H. Newspapers
I. Researches made by International committees and human rights organizations
J. Proof that in Israel we turned to innumerous organizations, institutions,
police, court, and lawyers for protection
K. Our lawyer's documents
L. Etc.
Practically each statement, described in our refugee claim, was supported
by the documentary proof. Only the list of
documents' description consisted of six pages.
1994-1997. In her translations, our lawyer's secretary/translator distorted
all documents in our refugee claiM.. One of our two
lawyers submitted several messages to IRB in protest of some outraged
events. He claimed that the IRB members took
advantage of the distorted translations, using them as a tool against
us. IRB members used offensive, illegal methods against
Lev. They interrogated only hiM.. No questions were given to other family
members. IRB commissioners demonstrated their
opinion that Lev GUNIN must be punished for his ideological (political)
views. Two members of IRB, immigration judges,
gave the whole initiative to the third member, an immigration officer,
a Jew and - probably - Israeli, who only spoke. During
our refugee hearings she manifested an outraged malicious hatred towards
us, and maintained close contacts with the Israeli
embassy in writing, in our case. IRB members maintained the atmosphere
of hostility and arbitrary attitude towards us.
Denying our refugee claim, the IRB members not just acted unfair. Their
negative decision was not just a refusal to recognize
us as refugees, but a declaration-manifest, which rejected the basic
human rights in principle. In form of declaration, they
denied in principle rights to have an independent opinion, practice
or not to practice religion, be protected by the state. IRB
members claimed that if government paid for immigrants' transportation,
immigrants became the property of that government
(a kind of commodity). IRB members also claimed that police' and other
institutions' refusal to give protection was justified if
people had an alternative political /ideological opinion (even if that
opinion was not expressed to police). They claimed that
we alienated Israelis by keeping controversial opinions, and refusing
to change our views. And so on...
The IRB's negative decision became not just a matter of our personal
fate, but also a matter of human rights in general.
1998. In her speech in the Federal Court, Mrs. Murphy, the Minister's
of Immigration representative, confirmed the IRB
members' negative attitude towards human rights, and also widened personal
accusations against Lev Gunin, turning the
question of our refugee status into the question of his "I.dmissible"
(by whom?) ideological views. As IRB did before, Mrs.
Murphy refused even to mention Alla Gunin, Elisabeth Epstein (Gunin),
and the children.
The Federal Judge, Mr. Dube, just copied Mrs. Murphy's and the IRB statements,
refusing to evaluate arguments of the
TWO sides. He claimed that - because in their refusal to recognize
us as refugees IRB members used the formula "no minimal
credibility", - such cases are automatically denied by the Federal
Court. In reality, his decision was made in contradiction to
another Federal Court judge's decision in our case, and also contradicted
the IRB's fI.l (conclusive) decision. In that
decision IRB agreed that some persecutions against us (they called
them "difficulties") could take place because we abused
the Israelis by refusing to obey their demands to change our views.
Mr. Dube also revealed his partiality by distorting some
important events and attacking our lawyer in personal. A person, whose
name was also Dube, was involved into negotiations
between the immigration officer, Mrs. Malka, and the General Consul
of Israel, in our case. We could not find that person
among the IRB headquarters' staff, or among other immigration divisions.
All faxes were submitted to Israeli consulate from
Mrs. Malka, without mentioning any other name (s). However, the responses
from the consulate were submitted to Mr.
Dube. We feel that this mysterious Mr. Dube has something what to do
with the Federal Judge Mr. Dube.
IRB and Mrs. Murphy's accusations against us were such, which are the
prerogative of the crimI.l court. They accused us
so sharp as if we were killers or terrorists. In reality we are innocent
people, never accused in defamation, or fraud. In the
same time, the way they acted might be easily considered as a crimI.l
offence.
We are appealing not just because of incredible injustice, but because
the removal back to Israel means DEATH for us. If
nobody in the whole world could prevent it, it would mean that if people
are deprived and innocent they might be kidnapped
and taken to another country by force. It would mean that demonstrative
humiliations over human rights, such as the IRB
members and Mrs. Murphy expressed, are tolerated. There are rumors
among UN staff that the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights might be changed soon to fit to the brutal and ultra-religious
regimes' requirements. Please, do something for us
before it happened!
The only way to save us is to help us in obtaining the permanent residents
status in any civilized country. That could prevent
our eventual removal to Israel.
Please, help!
Family GUNIN:
Alla, Lev, I., and M... GUNIN
Elisabeth EPSTEIN-Gunin
Tel. (514) 499-1294
E-mail: [leog@total.net]
Web Page, dedicated to our case:
www.total.net/~mioara/witness.htm
Pour CSST
For CSST
La copie: pour le Droit de Homme de Quebec
(un fragment)
Declaration de M-me GUNIN
M-me Elisabeth Gunin
Montreal, Mai 1999
M-me Elisabeth Gunin
Que est que passe avec nous
Pendant plusieures ann?es mon fils a ete l'activiste des droit d'homme
en
Ex-Union Sovietique. La c'?tait tres dangereux: il a ?t? battu et persecut?
tout le temps, sans arret.
A cause de ca en 1991 nous ?tions d?port?s de facto par les autorit?s
de
R?publique Bi?larussie a l'exterieur de notre pays (en Pologne). Notre
citoyent? a ?t? abandonn?e, nos passports ?taient confisqu?s.
A la place de nos passports on nous a donn? les visas
Israeliennes, mais nous n'avons pas plan? aller en Israel. Notre seule
destenation a ?t? ville Frankfurt, en Almagne.
Quand nous sommes arriv?s a la gare Centrale en Warsavie, nous ?tions
imm?diatement entour?s par les agents Israeliens, et, contre
tous notres protestations, appel a la police Polonaise, scandale et
les autres scenes, nous ?tions amen?s en Israel par force.
Mes enfants (mon fils et sa femme) ont ?t? persecut?s en
Israel comme en ex-USSR sinon plus grave. Mais nous ne
pouvions pas quitter Israel parce que le gouvernement Isra?lien
nous a refus? le permit de d?part, qu`est requis pour quitter cet
?tat. Juste avec l`aide indirecte de L'Amnestie Internationnalle
nous a obtenu ce permit et nous sommes arriv?s au Canada en
1991 pour revendiquer le statut de refugi?.
Naturallement que nous ?tions refus?s parce que si les autorit?s
d'immigration du Canada auraient accept? notre d?claration et les
faits que nous avons donn? avec la verit? precise ca pouvait affecter
les interess?s politiques d`Israel - le meilleurs amis du Canada, -
relations Canadiennes-Israeliennes, et le politique de la communit?
Juive au Canada. Expriment leur parcialit? sincerement, les membres
du commit? du statut de refugi? ont commit pendant leur interrogation
plusieurs actes abusifs contre nous. Le style abusif et moqueur
domI.it dans leur resum? officiel ?crit. Par exemple, d'accord
avec leur opinion, nous sommes la propri?t? du gouvernement
Israelien et ne sommes pas l?gitimes de demander le status de refugi?,
plus, nous avons "provoqu?" les Israeliens a nous persecuter
"parce que" nous refusions d`ob?ir a leures demandes de
convertir a la religion Juive ortodox.
Le dirigeur g?n?ral parmis les membres du commit? du status et la
nationnalit? Juive et - d'accord avec notre information - citoyen
d'Israel...
Pendant presque 5 ans, nous vivions avec la menace de d?portation.
A cause de cette torture psychologique nous somme toujours
deprim?s. Notre sant? psychologique a ?t? tres affect?e au r?sultat
de l'attitude de la commission du Status de R?fugi? dont nous
consid?rons comme extremement cruel. Je suis sur que la d?pression
a provoqu? par cette attitude cruelle est la cause de la haute pression,
migraine et les probl?mes de m?moire de mon fils.
Apres avoir re?u le d?cision de la Cour F?derale (qui a
automatiquement refus? notre appel sans ?tudier les d?tails de
notre cas), il a commenc? a se blesser inconsciament. Jamais, il
ne se blessait comme ca. Il a ?t? battu, mais ne se blessait jamais
par ses propres mains. C`est le r?sultat de son ?tat psychologique.
Il a re?u au total 5 blessures, qui restrictaient ses mouvements et
d?rangaient ses possibilit?s d`executer le travail manuel.
A la fin de Mars, son travail temporaire dans Le Caillier a ?t?
termin?. Quand c`est arriv? il a d?j? trouv? 2 autres travails
alternatifs, plus la possibilit? ?ventuelle (a son avis) de rester
travailler dans Le Caillier 10-15 heures par semaine. Sinon sa
derniere blessure (plus grave que les autres; il a ?t? bless?
pendent son travail), il pouvait commencer de travailler
imm?diatement apres la fin de son dernier travail (qui ?tait
temporaire). Puisqu`il ne pouvait pas travailler a cause de sa
blessure, il a perdu la possibilit? de commencer de travailler
imm?diatement et ?tait forc? d`appeler pour le chomage.
Depuis le vingt Mars jusqu'a aujourd`hui son doigt bless? n'est
pas encore gu?rit (la copie du dernier CSST ?valuation est incluse);
il ne peut pas utiliser sa main pour le travail. C`est pourquoi il
a
besoin de chercher un travail non-manuel. Mais quel travail
professionnel il peut obtenir? Pendant 15 ans, il ?tait un professeur
de musique - jusqu'a notre d?portation de notre pays natal (il y a
presque 8 ans) a cause de mon activit? des droits d'homme. Mais
sans le status il n`est pas l?gitime d`enseigner au Canada. Il possede
des excellents savoirs d'ordI.teur mais il n'a pas de diplome,
puis le formation professionnelle lui interdit aussi (par le permit
du
travail). Ses autres blessures pas encore gu?ries completement.
General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
To Mr. E. Assor,
Information Officer
Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on
98-07-20. In your response you told me:
"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss
this
matter with her".
July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said
that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).
Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.
Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact
between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291,
Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport
and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.
My reasons for that request are: a)enforcement of a confirmation; b)
fear.
"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation
(like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from
you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed
on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture &
Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.
Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take
me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am
not able to control that fear by logic.
However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence,
then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and
compassion reasons.
Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or
by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.
Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin
Montreal, July, 29, 1998.
To Israeli General Consulate
To General Consul Mr.
From Mr. Lev GUNIN,
NomI.lly - Israeli Citizen.
DECLARATION
Starting from 1986 I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave
the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious
sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives just disappeared.
My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such
visas directly to Israeli embassy in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli embassy.
A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me are
unwelcome in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical
treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization "Cojasor"
arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli embassy's staff,
but when I came to the embassy they did not let me in. Later a visa
for my brother for a medical treatment to France was
confiscated by the communist authorities.
After my brother's death I did not want to go to Israel any more. I
was already in conflict with the political machine of the
state of Israel because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community
in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to demolish
the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration to
Israel.
Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that
order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, will arrive now. That was true. But
my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We had
a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your men
and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of our
protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.
We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that
country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what
your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different
from your standards.
Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please,
termI.te my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion
you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.
Sincerely,
Lev GUNIN
General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
To Mr. E. Assor,
Information Officer
From L. Gunin
Former USSR citizen
DECLARATION
Starting from 1986 I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave
the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious
sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives used to disappear.
My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such
visas directly to Israeli consulate in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli consulate.
A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me
are unwelcomed in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical
treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization - "Cojasor"
- arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli consulate's
staff, but when I came to the consulate/embassy they did not let me
in. Later a visa for my brother for a medical treatment to
France was confiscated by the communist authorities.
After my brother's death I did not want to go to Israel any more. I
was already in conflict with the political machine of Israeli
emissary to ex-USSR because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community
in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to
demolish the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration
to Israel.
Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that
order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, will arrive now. That was true. But
my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We had
a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your men
and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of our
protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.
We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that
country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what
your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different
from your standards.
In Tel-Aviv I did attempts to obtain the citizenship of Belarus. But
they never gave us our true citizenship back. First attempts
to get rid of Israeli passport I did in Israel, in 1994. But persecutions
against me deteriorated, and we had to leave Israel as
soon as possible.
Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please,
termI.te my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion
you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.
From 1994 here, in Montreal, I tried to learn how to get rid of Israeli
citizenship. I contacted the Ministry of Interior Affaires
in Israel, the cabinet of Prime Minister, your consulate... But only
now, in 1998, you answered me. This is the copy of our
conversations:
"Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on
98-07-20. In your response you told me:
"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss
this
matter with her".
July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said
that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).
Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.
Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact
between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291,
Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport
and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.
My reasons for that request are: a)enforcement of a confirmation; b)
fear.
"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation
(like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from
you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed
on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture &
Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.
Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take
me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am
not able to control that fear by logic.
However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence,
then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and
compassion reasons.
Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or
by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.
Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin
Montreal, July, 29, 1998"
In response she called me and told that before obtaining Canadian citizenship
I can not appeal for termI.tion of my Israeli
citizenship. Please, give me an official response in writing. Your
verbal response has no legal input. I need I valid document,
which could explain under what law or regulation you can not termI.te
my Israeli citizenship. I also want to remind you that
according to international laws my Israeli citizenship is not valid
because I was taken to Israel by force and was held there as
a hostage.
Your understanding is highly appreciated.
Regards,
L.Gunin
August, 24, 1998.
General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
To Mr. E. Assor,
Information Officer
From A.-M.. Augenstat
Telephone for contacts: (514)923-2967
I am Lev GUNIN's immigration consultant. My intervention was caused
by your refusal to answer the next statement of my
client:
"From L. Gunin
Former USSR citizen
DECLARATION
Starting from 1986 I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave
the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious
sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives used to disappear.
My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such
visas directly to Israeli consulate in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli consulate.
A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me
are unwelcomed in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical
treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization - "Cojasor"
- arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli consulate's
staff, but when I came to the consulate/embassy they did not let me
in. Later a visa for my brother for a medical treatment to
France was confiscated by the communist authorities.
After my brother's death I did not want to go to Israel any more. I
was already in conflict with the political machine of Israeli
emissary to ex-USSR because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community
in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to
demolish the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration
to Israel.
Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that
order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, will arrive now. That was true. But
my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We had
a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your men
and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of our
protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.
We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that
country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what
your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different
from your standards.
In Tel-Aviv I did attempts to obtain the citizenship of Belarus. But
they never gave us our true citizenship back. First attempts
to get rid of Israeli passport I did in Israel, in 1994. But persecutions
against me deteriorated, and we had to leave Israel as
soon as possible.
Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please,
termI.te my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion
you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.
From 1994 here, in Montreal, I tried to learn how to get rid of Israeli
citizenship. I contacted the Ministry of Interior Affaires
in Israel, the cabinet of Prime Minister, your consulate... But only
now, in 1998, you answered me. This is the copy of our
conversations:
"Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on
98-07-20. In your response you told me:
"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss
this
matter with her".
July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said
that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).
Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.
Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact
between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291,
Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport
and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.
My reasons for that request are: a)enforcement of a confirmation; b)
fear.
"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation
(like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from
you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed
on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture &
Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.
Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take
me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am
not able to control that fear by logic.
However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence,
then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and
compassion reasons.
Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or
by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.
Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin
Montreal, July, 29, 1998"
In response she called me and told that before obtaining Canadian citizenship
I can not appeal for termI.tion of my Israeli
citizenship. Please, give me an official response in writing. Your
verbal response has no legal input. I need I valid document,
which could explain under what law or regulation you can not termI.te
my Israeli citizenship. I also want to remind you that
according to international laws my Israeli citizenship is not valid
because I was taken to Israel by force and was held there as
a hostage.
Your understanding is highly appreciated.
Regards,
L.Gunin
August, 24, 1998."
He has submitted that declaration by fax.
I see no reasons why you can not give him a written answer. We would
like not to use measures, which you could interpret
as non-friendly. I think that your ignorance is not in our common interests.
My client's request is reasonable and fully
correspond to existing international practices.
Best regards,
A.-M.. Augestat
FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION
Refers to March-August 1999 Events
Page additionnelle pour IMM (12-1998) F Page 2 de 3
J'ai 5 raisons pourquoi j`ai absolument besoin du noveau permit de travail:
1. Ma famille et moi ne pouvions subvenir sans travailler. On recevait
l'aide sociale jusqu'a ce que nous avons commenc? de
travailler (ca veut dire qu`on recevait l'aide sociale avant). Les
raisons que nous avons envoy?es ?taient evalu?es, et nous
avons re?u quelques permits de travail (le copie du dernier est inclus).
Mon travail donc est l'alternative de l'aide sociale.
Pendant presque 5 ans nous vivions avec la menace de d?portation. A
cause de cette torture psychologique moi et ma femme
- nous sommes toujours deprim?s. Notre sant? psychologique a ?t? tres
affect?e au r?sultat de l'attitude de la commission du
Statut de R?fugi? dont nous consid?rons comme extremement cruel. Je
suis sur que la d?pression a provoqu? par cette
attitude cruelle c`est la cause de ma haute pression, migraine et les
probl?mes de m?moire.
Apres avoir re?u le d?cision de la Cour F?derale (qui a automatiquement
refus? notre appel sans ?tudier les d?tails de notre
cas), j`ai commenc? a me blesser inconsciancement. Jamais, je ne me
blessait comme ca. J'?t? battu, mais ne me blessait
jamais par mes propres mains. ?`est le r?sultat de mon ?tat psychologique.
J`ai re?u totalment 5 blessures, qui restrictaient
mes mouvements et derangaient mes possibilites d`executer le travail
manuel.
A la fin de Mars, mon travail temporaire dans Le Cailliere a ?t? termin?.
Quand c`est arriv? j`ai d?ja trouv? 2 autres travails
alternatifs, plus la possibilit? ?ventuelle (a mon avis) rester travailler
dans Le Cailliere 10-15 heures par semaine. Si non ma
derniere blessure (plus grave que les autres; j'?te bless? pendent
mon travail), je pouvait commencer de travailler
immediatement apres la fin de mon dernier travail (qui ?tait temporaire).
Puisque je ne pouvait pas travailler a cause de ma
blessure, j`ai perdu la possibilit? de commencer de travailler immediatement
et j'?tais forc? d`appeler pour le ch?mage.
Depuis le vingt Mars jusqu'a aujourd`hui mon doigt bless? n'est pas
encore guerit (la copie du dernier CSST ?valuation est
incluse); je ne peux pas utiliser ma main pour le travail. C`est pourquoi
j`ai besoin de chercher un travail non-manuel. Mais
quel travail professionnel je peux obtenir? Pendent 15 ans, j'?tais
un professeur de musique - jusqu'a ma d?portation de mon
pays natal (il y a presque 8 ans) a cause de mon activit? des droit
d'homme. Maintemant, mon permit de travail m`interdit
d`enseigner au Canada... J'ai des excellents savoirs d'ordI.teur mais
je n'ai pas de dipl?me, puis le formation professionnelle
m`interdit aussi (par le permit du travail). Mes autres blessures pas
encore gueries compl?tement. Tout ces raisons ensemble
me d?rangent de chercher n'importe quel travail et s'explique pourquoi
je ne trouve pas le travail pendant mes 2 premiers
mois de ch?mage.
Mai je n`ai jamais arrete mes tentations de trouver un travail - contre
toutes les difficult?s. Mais pour continuer de chercher
un travail j`ai besoin du permit de travail! Je suis sur qu`avec le
permit de travail je trouverai un nouveau travail: si pas
aujourd`hui - alors demain.
2. Sans le nouveau permit de travail mes prestations de chomage seront
annul?es. J`ai d?ja re?u la lettere envoy?e par
l'administration du D?vellopement des ressources humaines du Canada
a ce sujet.
3. Sans le nouveau permit de travail je ne suis pas l?gitime pour obtenir
de CSST aussi.
4. J`ai aussi re?u la lettre de L'Inspecteur g?n?ral des institution
fI.ncieres, mentionn? mon entreprise "Aide Domicile Plus".
Sans le nouveau permit de travail cette entreprise peut etre ferm?e.
5. Sans le nouveau permit de travail je ne peux meme pas obtenir l'aide
sociale - apres avoir commanc? de recevoir les
prestations de chomage!
Resum?: tout les eventuelles solutions de ma situation - difficile et
compliqu?e - sont impossibles sans le nouveau permit de
travail.
Documents additionelle inclus:
1. CSST
2. Prestation de chomage
3. D?claration de soci?t?
Index des documents
(Liste des documents inclus)
1. Formulaires (IMM 1249 (12-1998) F - avcec la page additionnelle
2. Liste de controle des documents
3. Copie de la facture de la banque de $150 pay?s (2 pages)
4. Certificat de situation statutaire (QU?BEC) - Lev GUNIN
5. Certificat de situation statutaire (QU?BEC) - Alla GUNIN
6. Les copies des 4 passports Israeliens
7. Programme f?d?ral de la sant? : Lev GUNIN (copie)
8. Citizenship and Immigration Canada confirmation in proceeding Lev
GUNIN`s application for Humanitarian and
Compassionate grouns
9. Developpement des ressources humaines Canada - UI benefit statement
10. CSST - Rapport m?dical
11. Facture de L`inspecteur g?n?ral des institutions fI.nci?res -
Direction des entreprises
12. Permit de travail: le dernier permit de travail pour Lev GUNIN
(expir? le 04 Juin 1999)
Dear Consulate staff!
Dear Mr. E. Assor!
My consultant recently submitted you the next message:
" General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
To Mr. E. Assor,
Information Officer
From A.-M.. Augenstat
Telephone for contacts: 923-2967
I am Lev GUNIN's immigration consultant. My intervention
was caused by your refusal to answer the next statement of
my client:
"From L. Gunin
Former USSR citizen
DECLARATION
Starting from 1986, I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave
the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious
sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives used to disappear.
My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such
visas directly to Israeli consulate in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli consulate.
A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me
are unwelcome in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical
treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization - "Cojasor"
- arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli consulate's
staff, but when I came to the consulate/embassy, they did not let me
in. Later a visa for my brother for a medical treatment to
France was confiscated by the communist authorities.
After my brother's death, I did not want to go to Israel any more. I
was already in conflict with the political machine of Israeli
emissary to ex-USSR because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community
in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to
demolish the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration
to Israel.
Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that
order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, would arrive now. That was true. But
my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We
had a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your
men and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of
our protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.
We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that
country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what
your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different
from your standards.
In Tel-Aviv, I did attempts to obtain the citizenship of Belarus. But
they never gave us our true citizenship back. I did first
attempts to get rid of Israeli passport in Israel, in 1994. However,
persecutions against me deteriorated, and we had to leave
Israel as soon as possible.
Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please,
cancel my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion,
you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.
From 1994 here, in Montreal, I tried to learn how to get rid of Israeli
citizenship. I contacted the Ministry of Interior Affaires
in Israel, the cabinet of Prime Minister, your consulate... Only now,
in 1998, you answered me. This is the copy of our
conversations:
"Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on
98-07-20. In your response, you told me:
"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss
this
matter with her".
July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said
that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).
Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.
Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact
between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291,
Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport
and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.
My reasons for that request are a) enforcement of a confirmation; b)
fear.
"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation
(like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from
you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed
on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture &
Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.
Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take
me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am
not able to control that fear by logic.
However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence,
then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and
compassion reasons.
Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or
by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.
Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin
Montreal, July, 29, 1998"
In response she called me and told that before obtaining Canadian citizenship
I can not appeal for termI.tion of my Israeli
citizenship. Please, give me an official response in writing. Your
verbal response has no legal input. I need I valid document,
which could explain under what law or regulation you can not termI.te
my Israeli citizenship. I also want to remind you that
according to international laws my Israeli citizenship is not valid
because I was taken to Israel by force and was held there as
a hostage.
Your understanding is highly appreciated.
Regards,
L.Gunin
August, 24, 1998."
He has submitted that declaration by fax.
I see no reasons why you can not give him a written answer. We would
like not to use measures, which you could interpret
as non-friendly. I think that your ignorance is not in our common interests.
My client's request is reasonable and fully
corresponds to existing international practices.
Best regards,
A. - M.. Augestat"
Your answer was (Sept., 15, 1998):
"As we told you before, you can not cancel your Israeli citizenship
if you do not have another citizenship."
My consultants, lawyers, and me - we have discussed and evaluated a
compromise solution. My family, and me, we could
start an independent immigration procedure from a third country if
my expired Israeli passport could be extended. It could be
a compromised solution.
Because you often refuse to extend expired passports of Russian speaking
people in our situation I would like to know if you
are ready to extend my expired passport. Please, do not tell me to
come to your embassy (consulate) for discussing it.
Please, answer "yes" or "no".
Thankful for your response in advance,
Leo Gunin
Please, respond to me (514) 499-1294 - Leo
Or to one of my counselors (450) 923-2967 - Anna - Maria
UPDATE IN FAMILY GUNIN PERSECUTIONS
C O N T E N T
(Lev Gunin is one of the most persecuted people in the world.
His family - loving and devoted wife (a true hero), two
wonderful daughters (talented in art and music), and his old
mother - became targets of outraged humiliations and
abuses).
1. Granting GUNINS the landed immigrants (permanent residency)
status, Immigration's officials in spite of that
continued persecutions. The proceeding of the landed immigrant
status for Gunins is now frozen.
2. The devastating and tragic impact of Immigration's persecutions
on family's social, fI.ncial, health, and legal
situation.
3. The complete history of GUNINS tragedy:
http://www.total.net/~leog/Rights/LevGUNIN/appealX.htm
Short description of previous events:
A poet, writer and musical composer, Leo (Lev) GUNIN became a
victim of communist
authorities' persecutions in his native Belarus. Even after he
was considered as relatively famous
and important for 3 cultures (Yiddish, Polish, and Russian),
persecutions never stopped. Because
of them he started to be involved in human rights' activity and
became one of the most active
dissidents in his native republic. Persecutions destroyed his
family, and his, life, and devastated his
professional career. In 1991 the communist authorities forced
GUNINS to accept Israeli visas,
abandoned their citizenship - and deported them to Warsaw. There
GUNINS were kidnapped by
Israelis (which ruined their plans to move from Warsaw to Germany)
- and taken to Israel by
force. Persecutions in Israel were as severe as in ex-USSR. Israeli
authorities were refusing them a
visa for exit during 3 and a half years. Only with indirect Amnesty
International help GUNINS
could get free - and left Israel in 1994 for Canada. Almost 6
years after their arrival they are still
brutally persecuted by Immigration Canada on request of Israel
and also because of all
governments' solidarity...
NEW OUTRAGED INJUSTICE
1. During several months after they were granted the landed immigrants
status GUNINS were
fighting for extending their Israeli passports, which Federal
Immigration requested (or, - in
GUNINS' case - it could be an alternative documents of citizenship
cancellation). Instead of the
requested documents they received another document: a surrogate
receipt that their expired
passports were confiscated by the consulate and will never been
extended. In giving them such a
paper the Israeli consulate demonstrated an unusual human approach
in spite of initiating
persecutions in past. Formally such a document is normally accepted
by Canadian Immigration as
a routine ground for proceeding landed immigrants papers. However,
it is not known yet if it will
be accepted in GUNINS case... In spite of the human approach
of Quebec's Immigration (Gunins
were already given Quebec's Certificat de selection du Quebec)
Federal Immigration didn't stop
humiliations yet. On April 19 Leo GUNIN called Federal Immigration
because the money
GUNINS ordered for the landed immigrants' status were never removed.
He was told that the
procedure of the landed immigrants status for GUNINS was frozen
and in doubt because of Leo
GUNIN's mother situation. It was clear now that Leo's suggestions
that Immigration's brutal
humiliations over his old mother (see the page about a camouflaged
attempt to kill his mother and
other outraged developments on Internet:
http://www.interlog.com/~syedma/dstand/leo_updte01.html ) were
generated as a punishment for
him! In reality his mother's immigration file (she's a spouse
of a Canadian citizen - and she was
also granted a landed immigrant status and was already given
the Certificat de selection du
Quebec) has nothing to do with Leo and his family's file: because
they were granted the status in
humanitarian appeal. The pretended dependence between Elisabeth
Epstein's (her maiden name)
and Leo Gunin's files could sound as an April's joke if a joke
could be compatible with
well-known black image of Canadian Immigration. In reality the
immigration officer was given the
number of only Leo's file, and if through his file he could accent
his mother's situation it means
that the two files were really combined together. If so, this
is a violation of all procedural, juridical,
immigration and human rights laws and regulation. In Gunins case
Immigration already violated all
the most basic Canadian and international rules. Their whole
immigration history sounds as an
Israeli and Canadian (Federal Immigration's) vendetta. But even
on top of all these violations and
persecutions the sabotage of their landed immigrants status even
after granting it looks sinister and
even more outraged. To know for what views and opinions Lev GUNIN
is suffering, go to
http://www.total.net/~leog/ - and there choose Human Rights.
2. The devastating and tragic impact of Immigration's persecutions
on
family's social, fI.ncial, health, and legal situation.
Content in brief:
A. Artificial employment prevention. Social and professional tragedy
B. FI.ncial disaster
C. Health declining
D. Children's suffering
A. There are both objective and subjective reasons why both Leo
Gunin and his wife are
employed in minimum wages works with no perspective and no chances
to recover from
incredible poverty.
Objective reasons are: 1) They have no status in Canada and because
of that can not be employed
as professionals 2) Immigration's Canada persecutions require
attention, time and excessive
attempts to fix the situation 3) By new and new persecutions
Immigration Canada force Leo and
Alla to spend the whole time on paperwork, completing innumerous
forms, writing answers, and
so on; that is just one of thousands of obstacles for better
employment 4) Gunins are depressed by
their immigration situation, they just can not think about anything
else 5) They are not eligible to
attend any professional or language course until they have no
status in Canada 6) They are not
eligible for any government and other employment assistance 7)
Because of the tremendous
fI.ncial devastation they have no tools for a sophisticated
job search 8) Leo's and Alla's real
employment history (curriculum vitae) in Israel and Canada reflects
persecutions and rises
potential employers' questions, which can not be answered - because
no employer will hire a
persecuted person 9) Their health is constantly declining; and
so on... There are hundreds of other
objective reasons.
Subjective reasons are: 1) Some suggestions could tell that Immigration
intervenes in Leo's
attempts to find a better work, not recommending his potential
employers to hire him 2) Without
the status Leo can not get the license to teach music, can not
run his small busyness, can not be
employed in his profession 3) When he once received a request
to compose music for a
performance - and did it, - he was then rejected because "it
is not possible to have the name of
somebody who's not accepted by the state on public place" 4)
He once was admitted to a Jewish
choral, but later was refused "because if he could claim a refugee
status from Israel, he's an enemy
of Israel"! 5) When the Russian school "Fillipok" (now renamed
and called "Gramota") was in a
desperate need of a Russian speaking music teacher - even then
Leo was refused on political
ground 6) Russian newspapers in Montreal refuse to publish not
just his articles but even his adds;
for example, Info-Bulletin's editor/publisher told him that she
lived many years in Israel, and Leo's
articles published in ex-USSR and in Israel with critics of the
Israeli human rights situation abused
her patriotism: that's why she refused to place his adds! 7)
All potential employers who could hire
him as a musician used to say that they knew or heard about his
"anarchism" - and did not want to
employ him because of that. When he responded that he's not an
anarchist or terrorist but a
human rights activist they said that for them it is just the
same 8) Leo are refused even a voluntary
performances, even without being paid. Rozhinsky, the organizer
of the "Russian Winter" musical
festival, is permanently restricting Leo from the festival because
of the political reasons 9) Leo
completed a course of security agents but was refused a license
because of his immigration
situation 10) Leo was many times refused employment in computer
technology, HTML
programming, computer networks or computer rooms maintenance,
programs installation or
software testing because he's "a kind of hacker or terrorist".
Nobody never told him where they
obtained that referral froM.. Even such enterprises as Copie Express
refused to employ him! 11)
Leo did thousands attempts to find a full time above minimum
wage work - and was never hired.
He believes that all such persecutions are somehow conducted
from Immigration and from Jewish
environment 12) From all newspapers where Leo turned to as a
journalist (such as Globe and Mail
- for example) he never received any answer or opinion about
submitted articles; they just ignored
him! Even when he tried to reach the newspapers by telephone,
he used to be disconnected! 13)
Leo is one of probably 10 most important Russian vanguard poets
in the world. However, an
attempt to publish his book (for his own money!) of poetry was
turned away by a Russian
publishing house. In the same time the above mentioned Rozhinsky,
who's not even a poet, rather
an amateur on a primitively and law scale, published a book of
his "poetry" without any problem!
14) By suppressing and persecuting such a gifted, talented in
many areas person as Leo Gunin
Canada lost an opportunity to use his talents, skills and abilities!
Because Leo is a famous,
well-known personality, people will consider about Canada after
attitude to hiM.. Inhuman, cruel,
humiliative approach towards Leo and his family will speak by
itself.
B. FI.ncial disaster:
Because almost 6 years Gunins were refused the status in Canada,
they had to pay more in taxes,
pay for various immigration programs, for employment and student
authorization, for immigration
lawyers, and so on. They also were not receiving children allowances
and other benefits, which
landed immigrants and citizens are receiving. Because Leo was
in reality restricted from his
profession (music), journalism and all areas, which require professional
skills, he could work for
minimum wage only. The lack of status in Canada is also one of
the main factors in Gunins better
employment attempts failure. The family's fI.ncial situation
is devastating and tragic!
C. Health declining:
A number of descriptions of their health problems in result of
persecutions can be found from the
page http://www.total.net/~leog/Rights/LevGunin/appealX.htm Besides,
both Leo and Alla have a
kind of depression, caused by the status in Canada denial and
other persecutions. D. Children
suffering: The children (13 and 14 years old) suffer from the
same reasons as the adults. They
afraid of their unstable situation, afraid of bringing in the
post because there could be a punishing
message from Immigration. They are very suppressed or even depressed.
They feel like they are
not like other children but excluded from the normal society.
They also complex and feel uneasy
about their poverty. They feel deprived and discrimI.ted because
other children can visit a cafe
or McDonald, or a cinema, or their parents have cars, and so
on. Because the children understand
that their poverty is much related to persecutions they feel
unprotected and threatened. Several
times Immigration threatened the children that they will be expelled
from school. M... is a
talented ballerI.. She participated in movies, in dozens of
ballet and theatre performances, she
also writes poetry and prose, and she's a painter. She's also
a gifted viola player. However, she has
no rights to study, and her parents must pay for any official
ballet studies several times more then
if they were landed immigrants or citizens, what is impossible.
No sponsor will give money for a
child without the status. On television and in movies, where
M... participated, she was always on
the back - probably because of the same reason. I. is a gifted
piano player, each year she's
passing exams at university with the best remarks. She's also
composes and arranges music, she's
a good music theoretician, a choral singer, plays also flute,
writes poetry and prose. I. has
participated in dozens of cultural events and performances as
a member of one of the best tremble
chorales in the world, as a piano player, was on television and
took one of the awards as a piano
player on young piano players' festival. In the same time she
has no piano (!) - because
Immigration is sacking all fI.ncial resources away from the
family! And because her parents are
persecuted and deprived.
That text was prepared by Lushin Valery Stepanovich
Citizenship and Immigration Canada
Citoyennete et Immigration Canada
CIC - DDN (RNH)/ CIC - RSM (RNH)
JETS-14th. FL/TJES-14e365 Lurier Ave. West (quest)
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 1L1
From Mrs. Elisabeth
EPSTEIN's son
[Elisabetha EPSTEIN (GUNIN)
Dossier: 2948-65678
ID: 3082-7317
Address:
5757 Lemieux St., Apt. # 115
H3W 3H1
Montreal, QUEBEC]
L. GUNIN tel.(514)499-1294
E-mail: leog@total.net
14 January, 2000
Dear Sir or Lady!
Because in the latest time (since last Mrs. Robillard days) Immigration
stopped to reveal its agents' names (which is a recall of totalitarian
tribunals' practice), many decisions used to be made by anonymous
people. The very fact that I can not turn to you by name disgraces
not
only me, but you, too.
I am Elisabeta EPSTEIN (GUNIN) son, and I must turn to your common
reason and consciousness because of your decision in her case.
I think that your recent ruling concerning my mother's medical exams
is
completely unreasonable, ungrounded and outraged. The "strun creatinine"
test (testing the kidney function) was already done to my mother during
medical exams performed by Dr. Gianakis for Immigration. That test
didn't reveal any kidney malfunctioning. Dr. Gianakis conducted a very
careful exam - and did not find any serious heart disease, too. So,
there was no need to order my mother the expensive (for her)
echocardiographical and blood tests. Nobody would believe that your
real
goal is not to destroy my mother, affect her health by terrorizing
her -
and provoke her heart attack or a stroke. This is why the Immigration
officer, Madam Roy, first made a negative decision in my mother's case,
and only then replaced it by another one, which recognized her marriage
as a true marriage, not a marriage of convenience. She did it to provoke
my mother's stress, and to affect her health (her husband's health).
The initial decision made by Madame Roy was senseless. It was a negative
decision, which refused to grant her so-called exemption - and should
lead to deportation. It was based on doctor's W. Brzezinska testimony.
That decision was illegal because: 1) the marriage interview has nothing
what to do with the medical exams; 2) Mrs. Roy's decision was based
on
my mother's physician, Mrs. Wanda Brzezinska, statement about my mom's
health, which also has no connection with an marriage interview; 3)
Mrs.
Brzezinska made a false statement about my mom's health; if my mother
had such a serious heart and kidney diseases, why then Mrs. Brzezinska
never prescribed her any treatment or sent her to a specialist?
(hospital?), never treated her for kidney or heart illnesses
(malfunctions)? 4) violating basic regulations and requirements, Mrs.
Roy's 1-st "decision" did not mark any terms for an appeal, what made
it
non-real, illegal: and proved that its only goal was to provoke my
mother's shock; 5) Mrs. Roy is not a medical doctor - and could not
evaluate any medical data to make a fI.l decision in my mother's health
anyway - even with Mrs. Brzezinska's rapport. Other details of that
marriage interview were the same outraged, too. By the way, Mrs.
Brzezinska was famous for her touchy private conversations with her
patients, and the content of conversations was always known to
Immigration authorities.
Now you only pretending to be interested in my mother's additional
exams. In reality your decision is to expose my mother to additional
stresses and turmoil. It is just another turn of our immigration ephos,
just another excuse for punishing us in a new way for our refugee claim
against the state of Israel.
Almost six years we were under constant threat of deportation, under
the
fire of unfair Immigration's decisions and psychological pressure.
Our
fear to be send back to Israel - country, where we never wanted to
go
and were taken by force, facing there severe persecutions - was so
strong that me, my wife and my mother, all 3 adults, had suicidal
intentions. That everyday's fear has destroyed our health, devastated
our lives. Because of that and many other situational, administrative,
psychological, and etc. troubles and inconveniences, related to almost
six years in a limbo and intensive Immigration's pressure, we are
destroyed, our lives are already ruined!
After so many years of persecutions in ex-USSR, in Israel, and in
Canada, tragic deaths of her husband and younger son (my brother),
German occupation and evacuation survivor, my mother can not stand
any
more threatening and compulsive governmental decisions, unfair and
partial treatment. Her prostration, her fear and desperation after
your
absolutely unreasonable ruling, based on Mrs. Brzezinska's false report,
was so deep that we all were afraid about her mental and physical
integrity. It looks non-coincidental and suspicious that a letter with
your ungrounded ruling and an outraged letter from Israeli consulate
came on the same day. The goal of the two letters was to destroy my
mom
- to punish us for our refugee claim against the state of Israel!
How could be her health in question if she was never treated in Canada
for kidney or heart diseases? never was prescribed any medications
for
heart or kidney-related diseases? How could you rule additional tests
if
an exam and tests she made for Immigration did not reveal any concern?
If her health will really decline - it is only because of Immigration's
humiliative treatment. You are responsible for all the consequences,
even if Immigration doesn't want to reveal your names.
If my mother really had heart or/and kidney insufficiency - and Mrs.
Brzezinska new it, then by not prescribing any treatment and medications
to her she committed a crimI.l offence! But if in conspiracy with
Mrs.
Roy she just made a false statement to affect my mother's health -
this
is a crimI.l offence, too! Because my mother is hypochondriac and
easy-suggestible (which both Mrs. Brzezinska and Mrs. Roy new and
attempted to play on it), their actions were equal to an attempted
murder. It happened after Mrs. Roy's telephone conversation with me
(when she tried to find out what would be my mother's reaction in case
of a negative decision) and my warning that my mother could overreact
-
and have a heart attack or a stroke in case of it. "Your negative
decision could kill her, - I told Mrs. Roy. Your demands for additional
tests made my mother more hypochondriac and suspicious about her health,
more worried and distressed. It hardly affected her health!
May be it was the reason, why a simple flu (a grippe), my mother had
just after receiving your demands, completely destroyed her and lasted
so long. Her virus-initiated flu (influenza) lasted almost 2 months,
and
her new physician told her that because of the grippe she can not go
through the tests you demanded earlier then after 2 month from now.
This
is the explanation why we had to delay the tests. If now something
happens to my mother in result of all last ungrounded rulings, I'll
demand a full crimI.l investigation.
But your ruling also provoked excessive and abusive administrational
and
organizational tasks for my old mother. Because there were no
instructions in your rulings, we did not ask Dr. Gianakis to issue
a
prescription or give us a special form for tests you demanded. We also
wanted tests should be done by an independent laboratory. That's why
he
only wrote us the name of one of the tests on a peace of paper - and
verbally mentioned another one (echo cardiogram). So, before my mother
had a grippe, we went to a number of laboratories trying to have a
blood
test (strum creatinine) for my mother. She was refused. In other
hospitals the result was the same! Wasn't it a hard task for my old
mom?! You had to know that to fulfill your order through an independent
laboratory is administratively impossible! You had to enable my mother
administratively a possibility to go through the independent tests,
otherwise she just physically could not do theM..
By the way -
I must warn you that my mother did not authorize me to write a letter
of
that kind, she only asked me to inform you about the reasons of the
delay. So, do not blame her for that letter. I hope that you'll fI.lly
find a minimum ground for responsibility, non-partiality and humanity.
Your
truly,
L. Gunin
14 January, 2000
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
UPDATE TWO
UPDATE IN
FAMILY GUNIN PERSECUTIONS
Manipulation of medical data for political persecutions is the end of the
civilized society
- December 2000 - |
C O N T
E N T
1.
Short descriptions of events - end of 1999 - beginning of 2000
2. Lev
GUNIN - "The Source Of Our Problems"
2. List
of documents
3. The
whole immigration story
4. Other
English publications on Internet about persecution of family GUNIN
To Human Rights Organizations
(AI, HRW, UNHRC, etc.)
December, 2000. Montreal, QUEBEC
- DOCUMENT NUMBER FOUR-A -
From Lev GUNIN
Full immigration story:
http://www.total.net/~leog/Righs/LevGunin/indexX.htm
former refugee claimant
(address, tel. 514-49-1294, leog@total,net)
December 6 2000
Dear Sir or Lady!
The most unpleasant thing is that in a country
where there no concentration camps and common tortures nobody believes
you. Nobody believes that what happens to you - happens. That's why it's
even harder to stand our troubles.
1. Let me mention briefly the source of our problems: I was a
human-rights activist, former Soviet dissident (which led to deportation
from my native Belarus to Poland). From there my family and I were
taken against our will to Israel. In Canada we filed a refugee claiM..
Since 1994 we do not have normal life. We have problems.
Usage (against us) of contrived medical data to manipulate
and prolong our vulnerable situation is one of theM.. Theoretically falsification
and manipulation of medical data can lead to a forcible treatment from
diseases, which we do not have (it could be lethal).
2. Now we are more then 6 years in a limbo, administrative mayhem
and ultra-vulnerable state.
However, in spite of human rights deniers in IRB and other departments,
pro-Israeli lobby (with their people in Immigration), personal contribution
of Immigration officer Mrs. Udith Malka in damaging our situation, we received
a positive decision. (In response to our humanitarian appeal 1+ (one+)
year ago). Since then opponents to this decision made many attempts to
reverse it and make our life unbearable. We are still without any status,
facing excessive hardship.
(a). Even at routine immigration procedures we are a target
of mockery, stalling tactics and humiliation (see Document 8).
(b). Unnecessary personal expensive medical exams and blatant
manipulation of medical data (Doc. 1-23), delays in issuing and short terms
of validity of employment and student authorizations, punitive and threatening
anonymous calls and letters (Doc. 1-6, specifically - 16). Excessive
"totalitarian" secrecy and anonymity when Immigration is dealing with us
(Doc. 10a, 13a, 1, 14, 15, etc.)
(c). After two (2) years we have no clear answer about our police
certificate clearance in spite of confirmation from the Israeli Consulate.
(d). More than half a year ago IMS officials refused us ruling
and forms for medical examI.tion for all family members assuring us that
only my wife must do theM.. Now in contradiction they ordered them for my
younger daughter and me (omitting my older daughter). When the last medical
exams must finish, the validity of my wife's exams will expire (Doc. 2,
19, 20). Also my mother's file was illegally attached to ours to put us
in dependence of her situation (Doc. 1, 4, 6).
(e). My mother's case. 1994: W. Brzezinska, M..D. for Immigration,
makes an insincere report (Doc. 7a, 4b, 7b) about my mother's health (eventual
(!) development of cardiac and kidney insufficiency). (My mother told her
that she was born with heart augmentation). Nov. 1999: an immigration officer
(M-me Roy), not a M..D. illegally intervenes in evaluation of the medical
matters, makes a decision based on it (Doc. 7a,7b). However, she quickly
replaces that decision - recognizing my mother's marriage. In violation
of the marriage interview stage requirements IMS release a negative decision
before med. exams (Doc. 7a). 2000: an entire year of mockery, ungrounded
orders for innumerable additional tests and exams, punitive threatening
letters and calls. Goals: a) to damage my mother's heath, b) clear dr.
Brzezinska and M-me Roy (Doc. 14 -17). For two months after her "medical
saga" Immigration was refusing to give any answer/explanation. Now
(Dec.) IMS made a fI.l negative ruling, based on Mrs. Bezezinska's insinuation
in spite of new contradicting to it results and medical opinions (anatomy,
not pathology). (Also dr. Brzezinska never in 5 years sent my mother for
cardiac or kidney tests, or to cardiologist/urologist, and never prescribed
her any medication for heart/kidney problems). It is outraged that the
whole year IMS was evaluating not actual but eventual health problems -
and confirmed initial inhuman decision! (Doc. 25). If the horrible diagnosis
(Doc. 25a), with which they crucified my mother, were correct, how could
she live a normal life all 6 years without medications and cardiologist?
If my mother's heath declined after one year of humiliations - Immigration
officials must be fully responsible for that. This is what they did it
to punish me!
Actions to influence or even administratively invade medical institutions
and personnel for extorting false medical reports, creation of false medical
documents were committed in both my mother's and my cases. Tricks
with my x-ray, delivery of receipts or calls for tests I've never done,
other manipulations are threat to my own heath or even life! (Doc. 1-7,
9-25). Our children are tremendously suffering from that situation
as well as from artificial delays in extension of their student authorizations
and other essential papers. My wife and my mother became suicidal,
nervous and suffering from depression.
I never received any answer to my letter to the Minister of Immigration
(Nov. 1-6 2000) and to Immigration Complain Board (Nov. 30).
4. In spite of persecutions we have contributed to Canadian society
as much as we could. We had no conflicts in civil life. We worked. We have
accommodated in spite of artificial obstacles - thanks to ordI.ry Canadians.
Even in Federal Immigration some people tried to compensate the damage,
done to us by others. I have participated in tenth of musical festivals
and events. My wife is a hard worker. Our children are recognized talented
musician and ballerI. (<Doc. 27). In spite of the hardship our family
did not break. We love each other and stick to each other. Isn't it would
be better for Immigration to concentrate on other things instead of persecute
such a family as us? We hope that this unacceptable situation will find
a human solution.
Yours truly,
Lev GUNIN
December 8 2000 (Montreal, Quebec)
- DOCUMENT NUMBER FOUR-B -
From Lev GUNIN
Full immigration story: {www.total.net/~leog/Righs/LevGunin/indexX.htm}
former refugee claimant
December 02 - 2000
1. Let's get it straight: the source of my (my family's) problems
were my human rights' activism, and my non-trivial historical/philosophical
attitude. I am a former Soviet dissident. My conflict with the authorities
(KGB involvement form the beginning) started in 1991, when I was a grade
9 secondary school student. Since 1978 the communist authorities instead
of imprisoning and officially sanctioning some dissidents began to use
the non-official persecutions: batteries, threats, secretly initiated by
KGB troubles at work, etc. They also started to use some "volunteers" (non-KGB
officers) for coordI.ting and planning assaults on dissidents. By then
they found such a coordI.tor for me: my relative - my grandmother's (from
my mother's side) nephew's daughter. The authorities were planning administrative
difficulties for me at my work, penetrated and disconnected from time to
time my telephone line, perlustrated and confiscated my correspondence,
and stalled my professional career. And she orchestrated strange relations
towards me in my wife's family, lashed my neighbors against me, spread
dirty rumors about me among my friends. She used my close friends like
M..K. or my girlfriends (before my marriage) to do as much damage to me
as possible. She coordI.ted an assault on me in February 1979, when I
was wildly beaten and spend several weeks in hospital.
2. In Israel she contacted my wife - and took advantage of my
wife's sincerity, openness and good soul. She started to manipulate her
in damaging my life direction. My wife did not believe anything that I
told her about my relative. She did everything my relative has suggested.
There were whispers that my relative was an informant for Israeli authorities.
In Montreal my wife continued to be completely under my relatives' control.
In spite of my protests she turned with our refugee claim to my relative's
lawyer, M-e Le Brune, and took us all - my mother included - to her medical
doctor, Mrs. Wanda BRZEZINSKA, Immigration M..D. I could do nothing - because
did not want to break my family.
3. My relative's closest friend and M-e Le BRUNE's secretary-translator,
Mrs. Eleonor BRODER, Israeli citizen, did all she could to sabotage our
refugee case. You can read more details on Internet (see the address at
the top of the page). (Or in my file handed over to Mrs. Mancini a couple
of years ago). Mrs. BRODER was obviously in contact with the IRB commissioners,
and partially the refusal of our refugee claim was besed on what Mrs. BRODER
did.
4. Mrs. Brzezinska started to play games with our medical data
since our first visit to her back in 1994. She made in 1994 a devastative
for my mom rapport to Immigration about my mother's health, and also did
everything to cause speculations that my wife and me might be infected
by TB. Reporting to Immigration, she in the same time used to say nothing
to my mother, my wife, and me. If - for example - she reported to Immigration
that my mother has a grave kidney problem, she said nothing to my mom and
never sent her to any urologist, never prescribed her any medication for
kidney stabilization. She was afraid that a specialist could reject her
insinuations. The same applies for Mrs. Brzezinska's insinuations about
my mother's cardiac problems. When she sent me to do a x-ray for Immigration,
she used to send an additional note to radiologist like "check the recent
pulmonary infiltrate". No infiltrate was found but in response to Mrs.
Brzezinska's note the answer was "no recent infiltrate". And it was double
meaning. One could ask: then what about non-recent infiltrate? In 1999
Mrs. Brzezinska made another false report to Immigration against my mother,
and me. This will help you to understand better the mechanism behind the
last outraged assault on us by the Federal Immigration. One will ask: "Why
then you did not quit Brzezinska and went to another physician?" Yes, I
knew that she was not only a medical provocateur but also an informant
for Immigration. When I used to come, she spoke with me for 30-40 minutes
not about my health but about my affairs. And I have used her for sending
through her misinformation for some people at Immigration, who wanted to
do damage me and my situation.
5. Political forces from two countries are behind all these events:
the forces of Lukashenko's and Israeli regimes. I believe that there about
5-6 "curators" around me - such as my relative, Mrs. Broder, and Mrs. Brzezinska,
with somebody like their supervisor at a high position in local society
(I even guess who is that). And the rest is self-organizing by the destructivism
of Canadian Immigration itself.
6. From the mid-1970-s governments started instead of putting
dissidents into prisons and concentration camps to practice other methods:
devastation of victim's fI.ncial and social situation, ostracism and isolation,
batteries, dirty rumors, administrative pressure through ordI.ry governmental
institutions (tax agency, telecom, post, etc.). They also practicing deportation
and persecutions of their victims by other governments' hands, assassI.tion,
disappearances, and short arrests with police brutality, insinuated crimI.l
cases. That's why the old classical model of a prisoner of conscience as
a detained person and humanitarian help to get him out of a prison does
not works for approximately 80% of victims. The modern classical "prisoner
of conscience" in many cases is a person without any passport, a refugee
claimant or a refugee without any status. Thousands and thousands not political
but other dissidents are persecuted because of their dispute with employers,
landlords, corporative world, schools, police, vendors, etc. More and more
often contrived medical diagnosis and falsified medical data are used against
theM.. As a rule, it is always very difficult to prove something, so delicately
everything made up. My case is one of unique cases when evidences are so
manifestly. It is a rare opportunity to show what is really going on in
the modern world.
7. If people like me will not be defended - then comes mayhem
and dictatorship. Legislation to give access to personal medical files
to all governmental institutions and even (!) employers have already been
prepared in a number of countries, including Canadian province Ontario.
Where it leads you could see in my files.
Yours truly,
Lev GUNIN
|
|
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
http://www.interlog.com/~syedma/dstand/leo201127.html
http://www.interlog.com/~syedma/dstand/leo_updte02.html
http://www.amin.org/update/censor.htm
http://www.singer.ca/forum/imm/messages/821.html
http://www.kuero4/justice/gun.html
UPDATE THREE
UPDATE IN FAMILY GUNIN PERSECUTIONS
Manipulation of medical data for political persecutions is the end of the
civilized society
- December 2000 - |
C O N T E
N T
1. List
of documents
2. Complaint
on Immigration actions and decisions
3. Complaint
against refusal to allow medical examI.tions.
4. Disagreement
with the decision of ImM..Med.Serv. from November 23, 2000.
5. Copy
of a complaint made to Montreal Chest Institute.
6. Short
descriptions of events - end of 1999 - beginning of 2000
7. Lev
GUNIN - "The Source Of Our Problems"
8. Wider
detailed description of events before December (Sept. - Nov. 2000)
9. Resume
of the visit to MCI December 4 2000.
10. The
whole immigration story
11. Other
English publications on Internet about persecution of family GUNIN
To Human Rights Organizations
(AI, HRW, UNHRC, etc.)
December, 2000. Montreal, QUEBEC
- Introductory Document -
From Lev GUNIN Full immigration story: {www.total.net/~leog/Righs/LevGunin/indexX.htm}
former refugee claimant
(tel. 514-49-1294) December 2 2000
Introductory Note
1. Because violations and injustice are so outraged and unbelievable
that it is difficult to speak about them without emotions, I decided not
to write a special description of events. Instead I am handing
you over a number of documents, which will speak for themselves.
2. Below I am listing these documents with comments and explanations
about each. Manipulation and falsification of medical data is the most
dangerous and tremendous violation of human rights. Most letters from Immigration
were anonymous, but only few marked here on that regard as examples.
Document
1:
Complaint on Immigration actions and decisions submitted to Immigration
Complain Board (like attempts to cause damage to victim's heath).
Theoretically falsification and blatant manipulation of medical
data can lead to a forcible treatment from diseases, which one
do not have (it could be lethal).
Document
2:
Complaint against refusal to allow all my family members medical
examI.tions.
Document
3:
My disagreement with the decision of ImM..Med.Serv. from November
23, 2000.
Document
4-a:
A shortened description of events, which manifested abuse of power,
ungrounded secrecy, misconduct and crimI.l manipulation of medical
data. Document
4-b is a supplementary description about the source of my
problems. It is crucial for understanding the mechanism behind
the persecutions.
Document
5:
Fifth is a copy of a complaint made to Montreal Chest Institute.
Document
6:
A wider description of events, with more astonishing and outraged
details. This document is not enclosed but available on Internet:
{www.interlog.com/~syedma/dstand/leo201127.html}
Document 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d:
M-me Roy's rulings: illegal intervention into medical matters
by non-medic, violation of the procedural requirements of the
marriage interview stage, prejudicial ruling of IMS before my
mother's medical exams for the landed immigrant status.
Document 8:
Complaint to Immigration about extension's of employment authorization
sabotage from May 15 2000.
Document
9:
Resume of my visit to MCI December 4 2000.
Document 10-a
The anonymous letter from MCI mentioned in Documents 1, 3, 4,
5, and 6. Document 10-b: another letter (one page) demanding a
donation to the Royal Victoria Hospital was included in the same
envelope as the "TB letter".
Document 11
An order-receipt (payment) to pay for the blood test for syphilis,
which was never done. Another document (Document 12) shows that
dr. Giannalis uses this laboratory to evaluate test samples, taken
at his office. The blood test for syphilis was not required by
Immigration in my case. It was also mentioned that a patient must
only appear for this test in the CDL Laboratories, in other words
samples taken outside CDL Lab are not admitting for evaluation
for syphilis.
Document 12
Strum creatinine test's form from CDL Lab form for my mother.
The test was ordered by dr. Giannakis on Immigration's request
and the result was: in norM..
Document 13-a
Front page of the IMS ruling from November 23 letter (received
on November 28). Corresponds to Document 3. Also was mentioned
in Documents 1, 4, 6. Document 13-b is the text of the internal
part of the same ruling, addressing to dr. Giannakis.
Document 14-a
Ruling from IMS to my mother, Elisabetha Epstein from January
17 2000. This document is anonymous, no names, telephone numbers.
Document 14-b is the text of the internal part of the same ruling,
addressing to dr. Giannakis.
Document 15-a
Ruling from IMS to my mother, Elisabetha Epstein from June 30
2000. This document is anonymous, no names, telephone numbers.
Document 15-b is the text of the internal part of the same ruling,
addressing to dr. Giannakis.
Document 15 plus
September 2000 - letter from IMS ordering another urine test and
then a visit to an urologist.
Document 16
An offensive letter from my mother's new immigration officer from
September 18 2000.
Document 17
My mother's, Elisabetha Epstein, response (September 20 2000)
to an offensive letter from Immigration (see Document 16).
Document 18
Copy of the positive response to our humanitarian appeal
Document 19
An order from January 11 2000 to my wife, Alla, to undergo the
medical examI.tion. Only my wife's name mentioned in this letter.
This letter is a proof that refusing to include all family members
Immigration stalling the completion of our file almost one year
now.
Document 20
An order from October 26 2000 to me and my daughter M... to undergo
medical examI.tion. Was submitted in contradiction with the previous
Immigration's assurance that only my wife has to undergo medical
examI.tion.
Document 21-a
X-ray result from Le Centre Radiologique Clarke from November
14 2000, which tremendously contradict the Immigration's x-ray
from November 01 2000 evaluation. In response to TB double-check
request (see Document 21-b) it said "NIL ACTIVE". The film was
evaluated by 3 medical doctors, which came to the same "nil active"
conclusion. I was seen and evaluated by 2 medical doctors since
October 29, who found the TB suspicion ridiculous.
Document 22
X-ray result from November 22 1994 from the Centre Hospitalier
Reddy Memorial. On request of W. Brzezinska, M..D. if there is
recent pulmonary infiltrate it said "no recent pulmonary infiltrate
shown".
Document 23
Mr. Z. JAST's certificate for Immigration in relation to the x-ray
dispute.
Document 24
Internet-links to two publications, which might accelerate persecutions.
Document 25-a,b
IMS fI.l decision in my mother's case from Dec. 5 2000.
Document 26
Document 27
List of "civil" events. Relates to our will to contribute to the
society.
Lev GUNIN December
2 2000 Montreal
COPY
- DOCUMENT NUMBER ONE -
To Immigration's Canada Complaint Board
(faxes: (780) 632-8101 (514) 283-8237) November 30 2000
From Lev GUNIN (514-499-1294)
This is the complaint on actions and decisions, which my advisers and
I found I.dmissible, like attempts to cause damage to my mother's and
my heath. Theoretically falsification and blatant manipulation of medical
data can lead to a forcible treatment from diseases, which one do not have
(it could be lethal).
.
I submit you 5 documents. The First is this one. Second is a complaint
against refusal to allow all my family members medical examI.tions half
a year ago. Third is my disagreement with the decision of Immigration Health
Services from November 23, 2000. Fourth is a shortened description of events,
which manifested abuse of power, ungrounded secrecy, misconduct and crimI.l
manipulation of medical data. Fifth is a copy of a complaint made to Montreal
Chest Institute. Sixth is a wider description of events, with more astonishing
and outraged details. However, because of the length of the Sixth document
its submission by fax could be found offensive, so, please, tell me where
to send it by post or e-mail.
I would like to know:
A) Who made all mentioned in six documents unjust decisions (names,
position, what their role in my file).
B) On what ground (law, paragraph, circumstances).
C) Who made a decision, based on a single x-ray: to consider me a potential
TB carrier and submitted it not to Mr. Giannakis, M..D. but to the Royal
Victoria Hospital, depriving me and doctor Giannakis of a minimal choice
to choose where to turn for further evaluation. Is the MCI radiology unit
a part of IMS (ImmMedSrv)?
D) If the x-ray film (made at MCI) could be obtained for copying. My
legal advisers and me - we want to ask you to show it to us at 1010 St
Antoine, Montreal. We want to check:
E) If a) there is any technical defect or underwear shadow, which was
offensively interpreted as "TB" b) this x-ray matches my body constitution
c) an obviously normal result was blatantly interpreted as "abnormal".
We would like to be given a permission to take this film or its copy to
medical specialists to determine it.
F) How all contradictions, deceptions, violations can be explained
(each event).
G) Examples: a) Half a year ago IMS officials refused to submit us
ruling and forms for medical examI.tion for all family members assuring
us that only my wife has to go through theM.. Now in contradiction with
what was said before they ordered my younger daughter and me (now omitting
my older daughter) to do examI.tions. B) Why my mother's file was illegally
attached to mine. c) How could so many ungrounded medical tests be ruled
for my mother, keeping her more then one year (!) in limbo, etc.
H) How all such decisions might be appealed?
I) Has my mother and me same IMS agents or agents of the same unit?
Who are supervisors of all agents, attached to our files (including Immigration
Medical Services - IMS).
J) How to reach them?
K) If Immigration's agents (IMS included) are subjects of CrimI.l
Code - or they are completely uncontrolled and impunitive.
L) If they are not (impunitive) what is the way to complain about
1. Deliberate damage of my (my family's) fI.ncial, social, and psychological
situation.
2. CrimI.l manipulation of the medical data
M) How could I know if W. Brzezinska's M..D. rapport with a "concern"
about my health presents not only in my mother's but in my file as well?
N) Why my file is proceeding not on Montreal - as normally - but in
Ottawa?
I must warn you that I will contact police or RCMP in case of any further
anonymous calls ("private call" indication) from Immigration and will disregard
any letters, until they will not be signed and carry the name and phone
number of the person who is responsible for the decision. All anonymous
telephone calls, which accuse me of concealing a number of infectious diseases,
must be stopped. Anonymous letters from hospitals on behalf of Immigration
with same insinuations are unacceptable as well. I have also received a
receipt for a blood test for syphilis, which I never did, from a Lab, where
I never went. I was also called by two other laboratories, which pretend
that I did tests for infectious diseases, and this is not true. All such
provocation must be stopped immediately!
.
All 5 (or 6) documents must be evaluated to consider and answer my
complaint. Please, answer all questions, which arise from the documents.
I ask you to respond to this complaint in writing. However, another solution
is just to consider my case as "finished" with no further demands. Will
appreciate your cooperation.
Yours,
Lev GUNIN
November 30 2000
|
Chronology in GUNINS' case
November 1994 -
refugee claim
March 1997 -
refugee claim rejected.
(In the negative decision our refugee claim description was severely distorted;
document includes such direct and indirect statements as a) nothing
bad could happen in such a beautiful country like Israel, b) people
who were taken to Israel for Sochnut's expense are property of
Israel, c) people who refused to change their believes and opinions
are guilty on persecutions themselves because provoked them c)
no minimum of confidence). January
1998
- Federal Court closing our case on a ridiculous ground of Immigration's
"no minimal confidence" ruling.
January 2000
- positive decision in response to our humanitarian appeal.
March 2000 -
an interview lead to the Certificat de selectione du Quebec issuing
by Quebec's Immigration
March 2000 -
bureaucratic humiliation and blatant manipulation of medical data by
Federal Immigration starts to torpid the completion of the case
Chronology in
Elisabetha GUNIN (Epstein's) case:.1994
-
refugee claim + Wanda Brzezinska, M..D. makes a false report (see Doc.
4b, 7a, 7b).
March 1997 -
refugee claim rejected.
January 1998
- Federal Court closing our case on a ridiculous ground of Immigration's
"no minimal confidence" ruling.
November 1998 -
marriages a Canadian citizen
November 22 1999 -
my mother's marriage interview.
Nov. 23, Madame Helene ROY replaces the
initiative negative decision, based on "medical concerns" (dr. Brzezinska's
rapport), by a positive one.
January 2000 - Certificat de selectione
du Quebec was issued for my mother.
January 2000, a ruling from IMS ordering
my mother additional tests: strum creatinine (blood test) and echocardiograM..
June 30, 2000 - IMS ridiculous demand
of a resume from "the last visit to cardiologist".
July 27 2000
- rapport of Dr. Gordon Creenstein (anatomy, not pathology) was submitted
to Immigration.
September 2000 -
another letter from IMS ordering another urine test and then a visit
to an urologist.
September 19 2000 -
offensive letter from Immigration officer. December
2000 -
IMS fI.l negative decision confirming the illegal prejudicial
decision from Nov. 99.
|
|
|
|
|
- DOCUMENT NUMBER TWO -
To Immigration's Canada Complaint Board
(faxes: (780) 632-8101 (514) 283-8237)
From Lev GUNIN (514-499-1294)
A COPY OF DOCUMENT SUBMITTED TO IMMIGRATION
ON MAY 15 2000
By this letter we ask Immigration's agent assigned to my file to make
a special ruling to order medical examI.tions for all members of our family,
not only for Alla GUNIN, my wife. As we know from our legal advisers, this
procedure is required for all family members for the landed immigrant's
status. If you insist that only my wife has to do the medical examI.tion,
please, send us a written warrant. We have a well-grounded suspicion that
somebody might use the delay in ordering the medical examI.tion for all
members of our family for artificial sabotage of issuing us the landed
immigrant's status. We will appreciate your cooperation.
YOURS TRULY
Lev GUNIN
in name
of family GUNIN
The 15 of May 2000