# Complete Immigration Drama (And Medical Tools For Persecution Of Dissidents)

Лев Гунин

Гунин Лев

Complete Immigration Drama (And Medical Tools For Persecution Of Dissidents)

Origin: http://samlib.ru/g/gunin_l_m/bio12eshtml.shtml

Создан: 11/08/2003, изменен: 01/07/2006, 576k

Эссе: Публицистика

Series: (Biographies)

____________________________________________________________


LevGUNIN'sBiographies.ImmigrationDrama

 | Л | М | Г

BIOGRAPHIES

L.GUININ

SelectSelection Introduction LevGUNIN--byKorovin Sitkevich'sDisagreement ShushkevichDeclaration Witness.Autobiography Svisky.Appeal Augestad_byGUNIN Kotlarsky.Interview LiteraryBio MusicBio FamousAboutL.Gunin(Ru) ImmigrationDrama SomePhotos


Select

Selection

Introduction LevGUNIN--byKorovin Sitkevich'sDisagreement ShushkevichDeclaration Witness.Autobiography

Svisky.Appeal

Augestad_byGUNIN Kotlarsky.Interview LiteraryBio MusicBio

FamousAboutL.Gunin(Ru) ImmigrationDrama SomePhotos


LEV GUNIN'S BIOGRAPHIES


IMMIGRATION DRAMA


BIOS GUNIN'S IMMIGRATION DRAMA


THE FOLLOWING TEXTS WERE WRITTEN BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE

WITH DIFFERENT LINGUISTIC ABILITIES.

Please, forgive them some mistakes and non-perfect English

Some Parts or Places Were Written By L. GUNIN

Folder of Documents about abuse and injustice, partial decisions and inhuman actions

by Canadian Immigration on request of the State of Israel against a peaceful and

talented family

Order of documents:

INTRO

#1 To the Federal Court,

# 2: Post DetermI.tion Appeal ,

#3: Translator's Sabotage,

#4: Appeal (Alert) to Amnesty International,

#5: IRB's Conclusive Decision,

#6: List of Documents,

#7: BRIEF DESCRIPTION

#8: From Alla GUNIN to the Federal Court,

#9: Appeal to UN Refugee Tribunal,

#10: Humanitarian Appeal (Humanitarian and Compassionate Grounds),

#11: To QUEBEC's Children Rights Committee (in French),

#12: From Elisabeth GUNIN - Humanitarian Cases ,

#13: Events in March-August, 1999, in Hebrew, French, English, Russian and Polish ,

#14: Declaration ,

#14-a: The WITNESS (Autobiographical essay)

#15: The Enforcement of Immigration's persecutions against Gunins (list of 1998-1999 events)

#16: Grigory SVIRSKY: Appeal to Prime Minister of Canada

#17: Another short description of GUNINS case

#18: New Persecutions - April - May, 2000

#19: Leo's Old Mother Is Under Persecutions

#20: Zionist Medical Doctors-Assassins Want to Kill Leo's Old Mother

May, 2000 After been denied the

refugee status and the rights to appeal

to the Federal court (after years of

humiliations and abuse of justice),

family Gunin received a positive

decision to their humanitarian reasons

appeal. However, in spite of granting

them the landed immigrant status

Immigration have attempted to freeze

their file: to avoid giving them the

permanent residents papers, and

continued persecutions. To punish

Lev Gunin they began to humiliate

over his old mother (check the link)

Complete update of GUNINS tragedy

(see below)

Next Document <<> Main Page

For The Federal Court, Second-Stage Appeal Procedure

FROM Lev GUNIN (FILE Number 2948-6524/ 95/76/23/18

ID: 3082-7125/7174/7220/7231/7317/ )

FOR THE FEDERAL COURT, AFFIDAVIT February 24, 1998

LIST OF ITEMS

INTRODUCTION:

An explanation why some important

(from my point of view) details have

never appeared in my refugee claiM..

(This document)

1. Why the refugee board's decision has formed an additional

risk of return for my family, and me.

(This document).

2. How my lawyer's translator torpedoed my chances to get a positive decision.

(Document #3).

4. My observations regarding the hearings and the negative decision (Document # 3).

(Group of Documents #4).

5. My observations regarding the text of the negative decision ("Conclusive Decision").

(Document # 5).

6. My fI.l statement.

(This document, paragraph 1.7.).

In any decision in our case I ask you to take into consideration the next documents, which I have submitted on

November the 7-th, 1997, for post-determI.tion revue.

7. Adjustment to my refugee claim as an essential explanation of that risk.

(Document # 2).

8. List of supporting documents.

(Document # 6).

9. Supplements.

(Group of Documents # 7).

10.List of Organizations.

(Document AC) INTRODUCTION Introduction.1. There are some important, from my point of view, details, which never appeared in my refugee claiM.. My advisers were strongly opposed to the next passages.

a) Anything that could throw a shadow to the state's of Israel good image.

b) Statements, which would mention Israeli army.

c) Any claims, which could include politics or politically motivated persecutions.

Introduction.2. They said (may be, indirectly) that the influence of Israeli lobby is very strong everywhere. They said that by mentioning about the violations of Russian speaking people' human rights in Israel, discrimI.tion of them in Israeli army, or politics behind persecutions, from which we suffered in Israel, we could make the commissioners just furious. They could accuse us in exaggerations (a word, which became very popular when an excuse must be found for an inhuman action) and refuse to accept us as refugees. Introduction.3. These advisors (including my wife) partly convinced me, partly sounded ultimate. Now I see even better then before, that they were right, and I must completely recognize their marvelous competition. Now I could understand that my lawyer's, maitre's Le Brune, recommendations were very wise. In the same time my lawyer's translator inserted 2 statements into my refugee claim, which I never authorized her to insert and which were in complete contradiction to my lawyer's recommendations. The 1-st is a statement that I was a well-known dissident in ex-USSR. The 2-nd is a declarative passage about slavery. In the Document #3 you could read more about this. Introduction.4. Suspending some information from entering my refugee claim I did it because I was afraid that the IRB members - instead of defining my chances to be a conventional refugee - would define my "guilt". Introduction.5. But during our refugee hearings (because of my lawyer's translator's distortions and because of commissioners' aggressive behavior) I was forced to mention such things, which I decided not to mention before. When it became clear that the commissioners were extremely partial towards us, and that we had no what to loose, all three above-mentioned "self-restrictions" became not important any more. Introduction.6. In the same time events, which I was afraid to mention in my refugee claim and my lawyer did not recommend to mention, were accessible for the Immigration Board as others (besides my main refugee claim) documents in my file. I handed them over to my lawyer, and he adjusted them to my file before or between the hearings. It means that the information, which I enter now in Document # 2, is not new, and was in my immigration file before. In the same time, it was up to my lawyer to share this information or not. Recently I took all documents, which were in my file, away from my lawyer, including letters to Jerusalem Post (see Document # 5 in Supplements), and others. My lawyer's notes were written on top of them, what you can see on one of the copies. It means that I have rights to mention them now because by time of our refugee hearings they were accessible for the commissioners because were part of my immigration file. 1

1.1. In this document, I am going to explain, prove and show, why and how all my family members, and I, would face risk to life, extreme sanctions and inhuman treatment not just because of the danger for us in general, but also because of the refugee board members' actions.

Please, do not make a fI.l decision in my case without studying all supporting documents, because they content the main argumentation about this risk.

1.2. This risk of return to Israel has been increased during our residency in Canada because of the next actions of IRB members.

A). IRB, assigned to our file, contacted Israel and informed Israelis about our refugee claim in Canada

(see Group of documents # 4, Document # 3, p.p. 1,2,3; Document # 1, page 1, paragraph # 3, point 5), also p.2, point 11), also p.3, point 8); and also Supplements, Documents # 6, 7).

That would increase the possibility of vengeance to us from Israeli authorities.

B). Even if a definite information - that the embassy of Israel in Canada could already know about the content of our immigration file - is wrong, sooner or later they would know it. Trying to find defense and justice, I have submitted a short description of our immigration hearings and of the fI.l IRB' negative decision to hundreds of human rights organizations and to thousands of other destI.tions. I made them available on Internet for the same purposes. So, Israelis know them, too, anyway. C). In the same time the IRB commissioners and the immigration officer instead of defining whether or not we could face persecutions in Israel (as we claimed), concentrated on accusing us as if it was a crimI.l court. They characterized me as an exaggerator and defamator, dangerous (they do not use this word but it is the only characteristic of what they meant) to the state of Israel* (see commentaries in the end of this part). Their insinuations that I turned to innumerous places in Israel, including human rights organizations, MP's, police, Amnesty International

(see the list of them in Supplements, Document # 8; see also copies of documentary proof of my appeals to various organizations in Supplements, Documents # 9,10,11,12)

not because I looked for protection but to "spread slender about Israel"**

(see comments 2 at the end of that part),

looks absurd and outraged only in Canada, but not in Israel! Even here (in Canada) they were used as an excuse to deny our refugee claim, and the negative decision was logically presented as a "punishment" for "slander" and "exaggerations"

(see Document #5, p. 1; 2 last paragraphs on the bottom of the page, p.2, paragraphs 1, 2).

Israeli authorities would consider Montreal's "immigration court's" (IRB) decision to define us as enemies of Israel and dangerous exaggerators, as a leading order (not just an excuse) to persecute us. As a Jew and, probably, an Israeli, the immigration officer, Mrs. Malka, expressed her almost open hatred and partiality towards my personality in such tones and colors, which could perfectly correspond to the manners and mentality of Israelis. Their most sensitive feelings would be touched by her words, and that would make my destiny even more miserable if I would be removed to Israel

(please, read the whole Group of Documents #4, and Document # 5).

She also expressed open threats, including a threat to open a crimI.l procedure against me...

(see Group of Documents # 4).

D). By their attitude, the commissioners during the hearings and in the negative decision somehow separated me from other members of my family. They almost openly let know that my family suffering and refused the status only because of my political views. That could provoke Israelis to separate me from my family or even take away our children (I know several precedents). Rejection of my refugee claim because of my attitude towards the state of Israel (in other words, my political views) is the main topic of the negative decision. That would encourage Israelis to do just anything to me (if Canadian court did what it did, why should they wait?): to imprison me, place to a mental hospital, or kill. I am absolutely sure that within days or weeks I could be imprisoned in Israel and, probably, killed in custody not just because of objective factors, but also because of what the commissioners' did. E). The political situation in Israel has been changed, too, since we left, to the worse. I present documents (see Supplements, Document # 19), which shows that the present extremist government is not ready to maintain just any tolerance. This is why the commissioners' actions would lead to more severe consequences if we would be removed back to Israel. By the time of the hearings these changes already took place, and the commissioners had to know pretty good about that.... F). Policemen in Israel could still remember my wife's, mother's, and my own complains; I also turned to the Ministry of Police and Ministry of Internal Affairs. Now, - when in their brief description of my refugee claim members of IRB severely distorted my claim

(see Document #5, page 2, Comments), -

how could we turn for defense in Israel any more? The IRB members' action made us completely insecure and unprotected in Israel (if removed there). [Since the context of their negative decision is already known to Israeli authorities]. * The negative decision mentioned the paragraph about slavery in my refugee claim (which Mrs. Broder inserted) in ignorance of:

1) my words that the translator distorted my statement,

2) my explanation that this paragraph correspond to a specific tendency in Israel called "kablanut",

3) two newspaper articles, which described "kablanut" and openly denounced it as slavery.

(See these articles in Supplements, Doc. #81). }

An affidavit about the event, on which "my" statement about slavery was based, was given to me in Israel by Lev Ginsburg (see Supplements, Doc.82). We became victims of extreme generalization, when submitted by partial Israelis "affidavits" were respected more then even human life - and thousands of affidavits, articles and other documents provided by another side were totally ignored. Documents, which demonstrated non-competence and partiality and were provided by the members of Israeli government (Mr. A. Charanski), its institutions (Israeli embassy) or committed to Israeli government fundraisers (Dr. Livny) were presented as only reliable and "independent" sourses! ** After expressed by IRB members' insinuations that I turned to various organizations and institutions in Israel not for protection but to "spread slander" I could have no protection in Israel any more if removed there. IRB's insinuation is a verdict for non-protection in the state of Israel! How could we go back there now?! CHILDREN.

During our refugee hearings, the commissioners had chances to observe our children.

They could not ignore that the children are deeply suppressed and still not in norM..

Because of abuses and insults, both I. and M.. had nervous tics and hyperkinesys. It stopped only about one year ago. We possess a videocassette as a proof that during the period of refugee hearings the children still had impulsive face muscles' contractions and other visual neurological disorders. We also had a psychological evaluation at this point concerning I..From observing our children, the commissioners could understand that because the children are shy and timid they could be abused or even killed by Israeli children. That would bring additional danger to their lives. Such children as ours have always much more chances to be abused or even killed in the countries with the domI.ted "east temper". Because in spite of the time, which passed since we came from Israel to Canada, both I. and M.. visually reacted to the discussion about their life in Israel with horror and fear, the commissioners had a chance to see how deep the psychological trauma affected the children and also how easy such children could become targets for abuses in Israel. The description of multiple assaults of our children were also ignored by the commissioners. The IBR members also probably knew that by the time of our hearings Israeli authorities could take children away from Christian, atheist, mixed, or non-traditional Jewish families... In the text of their negative decision the IRB members seriously distorted some paragraphs of our

refugee claim, which described multiple abuses against our children.

Through all mentioned above (active or passive) actions, the IRB members had shown themselves as

people with no mercy, open to cruelty and ready to commit abuses themselves. If they had no attention

or mercy even towards the children, who then they are and how could such people make a decision in

our case?!

WIFE.

The commissioners had also a chance to observe my wife.

My wife Alla (look over our refugee claim) suffered very much from multiple abuses, batteries, insults,

and discrimI.tion in Israel. That all caused already serious damage to her mental and physical health.

During first two years in Canada, she suffered from the consequences of that damage. (A surgery was

done to her in relation with what happened to her in Israel; she often cute her hands, stroke herself not

on purpose because of her mental disorder; once she spent several days in an emergency; by then a

danger has threaten her life).

A psychologist found her mental disorders serious enough. He told us that they came in result of her

previous life period, what means in result of our life in Israel. (See her medical reports: Supplements,

Documents #13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18).

Only about a year and a half ago her mental and physical wounds started to heal, and she came almost

completely back to norM.. But even now more time is needed and the danger of deportation back to

Israel has to be liquidated for complete improvement of her health.

During our refugee hearings, the IBR members had to see that she was paralyzed by fear and horror so

much that hardly could speak. They could see that she was near an emotional collapse, and they had to

understand that it must be connected with what happened to us in Israel.

By observing us, by listening to my wife's, and my, replies IBR members could easy understand that we

belong to a rare type of people, for whom any suppression of their own pride is unbearable. We could

become refugee claimants and agreed for all the degrading procedures only because of a threat to our

lives, only! We care about our children lives, and we know that they need us. Otherwise, we would

never let a person like Mrs. Judith Malka humiliating over us! It was absolutely clear that something

really serious (like a threat to our lives) had to happen to force people like us to become refugee

claimants.

To ignore their observations the IRB members had not to care about our fate at all. Their indifference

demonstrated that they came with prepared in advance negative attitude towards all Russian speaking

refugees from Israel in general. Nothing could change this attitude, no matter who is sitting in front of

theM.... It was visually clear that such a partial attitude could not be affected by their emotions, by

compassion; or they rather had no emotions, no compassion at all...

Please, read my wife's statement in Group of Documents # 4, Document # 2.

MY MOTHER.

Everything that corresponds to my children and my wife corresponds to my mother as well. If the

commissioners had no mercy towards the children and towards the woman, who suffered so much, then

may be they expressed compassion towards an old mother who might loose her single son (she told

them that her younger son died) if we would be removed to Israel? No, they had no shame before an

old mother to use their unfair methods and demonstrate no sign of a mercy!

ME

I am the very person, whom Israelis persecuted long before then I was taken to Israel (see Document

#2). I was taken to Israel by force, against my will (see Document #2, page 4, paragraphs 2.16.,

2.17., and the NOTE). When I was in Israel, Israeli State radio (RADIO RECA) called me in one of its

auditions (3 December 1993, around noon) "a racist." The radio correspondent Daniela Linor gave an

opposite meaning to one of my articles (see Supplements, Document # 27). In that article ("Israeli

(Jewish) Apartheid") I denounced the discrimI.tory practice of Israeli authorities against some of the

ethnic minorities, including Buchara origins. If not my good relations with some of the Buchara people

and my attempts to help some of them to fight discrimI.tion, I could be in a serious danger. The

community of Buchara is one of the most sensitive and united communities in Israel. This event was

already discussed during my immigration hearings, but the IRB committee did no comments. One

newspaper ("Vremja", 5 September 1994, page 18), which published my article "Why Israel is against

the Victory Day?", in its comment called the public to destroy all my works and presented me as traitor

and enemy. It was very well known that this newspaper was by then close to the right opposition led by

Mr. Netanyagu, and expressed its opinions (see the origI.l and its translation in Supplements,

Document #28). IRB members did no comments to that, too. The same newspaper ("Vremja", 1

August 1994, Supplements, Document # 29) placed an interview with me, distorting my words and

trying to discredit me. The interviewer, Mr. Mark Kotlarsky, was my friend, and I trusted hiM.. But he

composed that interview in a humiliating manner, portraying me as a traitor, pathologically tiresome and

stupid person. Pretending to be half serious - half joking he told about me things, which he never

discussed with me and which could turn the whole anger of Israeli ultra-patriots against me. He had no

personal reasons for that provocation and it could be explained only by the involvement of the

authorities. (This interview and circumstances, which surrounded it, were discussed during my

immigration hearings). During one of our immigration hearings Mrs. J. Malka, the immigration officer,

used non-conventional methods to distort the reason, why I presented this article, and did not let me

speak. In the same time, she used some information, which I shared with Mr. Mark Kotlarsky only. In

1993, I was attacked in Tel-Aviv after my conversation with "MAARIV" and "Yidiot Achronot"

correspondent, Avraham Pelet. (See my refugee claim). Mrs. J. Malka's attitude towards this event

and her "evaluation" of it was the same: not to let me speak! Multiple attempts by the governmental

structures to confront me with anger of the most sensitive and dangerous in anger social and ethnic

groups could lead to my death and were equal to assassI.tion attempts. Even here, in Montreal, Israelis

threaten me through people, whom I knew in Israel (listen to the tapes of my last immigration

hearing), or via E-mails, or by telephone calls (see Document #30 of Supplements). I also presented a

letter from Israel to the Immigration Board. This letter also informed about such threats (see my file).

These threats are not jokes! To send such a person (who was considered by such a sensitive - towards

ideological opponent - state as Israel as an enemy) back - means to sign him (me) a death penalty. Know

that by sending me back to Israel you would kill me! I am writing this just to remind you what you

might be responsible for.

But Mrs. Malka several times threatened me directly during the hearings, one time even suggested that

she will start a legal procedure against me in civil (or - may be in crimI.l?) court.

But if even a politically motivated threat to my life could not exist, even then risk to my life could

always exist in Israel because a person like me could never accommodate in strictly regulated -

ideologically, religiously, ethnically, socially, politically, and military - society as Israeli. And it had to be

evidently clear to the board! It clearly evaluated from the refugee hearing procedures! I had innumerous

incidents in Israel, which were already described in my refugee claiM.. It had to be evidently clear to the

IRB members (from the background of our conversation) that I could add a description of others less or

more serious incidents and conflicts, which used to happen to me in Israel practically every day. They

were caused by my I.bility to use to growing demands of ultra-orthodox, by my entire and

psychological incompatibility with the Israeli society, by my softness, which provoked harsh by nature

Israelis to attack (abuse) me. Often conflicts erupted because I did not understand the tough

subordI.tion within the Israeli society or could not use to it. In my refugee claim I described only some

events, caused by fully developed incidents. But there were thousands others, which merely did not

developed completely, and if would develop themselves, could lead to severe consequences, including

my death. Since we left Israel political and social situation there became even tenser. It is more possible

now that I would not only face the same incidents and conflicts (if removed to Israel), as in 1991-94,

but more tense, which could soon lead to my death.

Risk to my life would immediately erupt in Israel not only because of above-mentioned reasons. The

commissioners could see from my claim and all documents (if they wanted to see) that in Israel the state

of my health in 1991-94 became so bad that it could make me an invalid or cause my death. I possesed

multiple medical documents, which could illustrate that. In Israel I got a hyper-tonic disease (which - I

believe - came as a result of a battery; I gave explanations and necessary proofs already during my

immigration hearings), I had multiple infections, flues, terrible headaches, heart disorders, tics... In 1994

I had such a heart disorder, which was suspected as a minor heart attack. I suffered severe heart pains

and other hard disorders during 2 weeks, and I was sick much longer. In mentioned-above interview

Mr. M.. Kotliarski wrote about my infarct (heart attack). (See this article in Supplements; document #

29). I already presented medical documents to the IRB. I supply you the new copies (Supplements,

documents #35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40) in terms if they somehow disappeared from my file by the time of

the hearings or were not presented to the board.

Danger to my life could be even wider because during our life in Israel there were multiple conflicts with

doctors-Israelis, and they refused to serve members of my family, and me, several times. We were also

expelled from medical center "Ramat Verber" in spite of the money, which we paid for membership.

Since we came to Canada my health improved. But it could not stand stresses of eventual removal and

life in a thrusted on me society.

My life would be under an extreme danger in Israel also because my past life there has already shown

that no institution, no organization would defend me. I would have no legal or other defense. IBR

members could express insinuations that I used to turn to many institution and organizations not for

protection and help but to "spread slander," but they did not want to comment (in their negative

decision) the fact of refusals or I.bility of all these institutions and organizations to help me. In reality

this fact is one of the most essential. If I was (and would be) completely unprotected in Israel - then

how would I go back there?

The Immigration Board members also did not let me speak about my confrontation with Mossad. In

reality this confrontation might become one of the main threats to my life if I would be removed to

Israel. This confrontation has begun in my native city (see Document #2). In Warsaw it jeopardized

(see the same document, p.p. 4, 5). When we were placed in the hotel in Warsaw, our guardians have

repeatedly told us that we are going to pay a hard price for inviting our Polish friends to the Central

railway station. They accused us that we almost destroyed the whole operation of transporting the

Soviet Jews, and that Warsaw was almost closed as a transit point because of us. Later, in airplane,

other guardians told us that our flight was postponed for almost two hours (that was true) also because

of us. I could not by then and can not now verify if there was any real information behind their words,

but I am sure that there were Mosad men, and they were very angry on us. In Ben Gurion airport, in a

room, where all fresh arriving males were called, another Mosad man told me that I have to face the

full responsibility for what happened in Warsaw, and there would be severe consequences for me. He

was also angry because of my refusal to answer his questions. He told me that he knows that I had

problems with KGB. He told also that they know from some of my friends (I immediately thought about

Rodov) that I used to collect information about KGB. He asked me where I keep this information - in

my memory or in writing - and asked me to share it with theM.. He spoke Russian with Hebrew accent

(probably, studied Russian somewhere), and he has a wound, probably, from the battlefield. He was

tired and sad, and I felt sympathy to hiM.. But I could not share my observations about KGB with him

because I remembered that (according to my conclusions and some books) KGB and Mosad worked

together. Because of my sympathy to him and because I was disoriented, desperate and afraid I could

not keep silence. I told that the only KGB man I saw in my life close was the chairperson of local KGB

in Bobruysk when he came to read a lecture to the Jewish club. He asked me who invited him to the

club. I told that the chairman of the club, Rodov, invited hiM.. Or he might order Rodov to invite

him...He wasn't satisfied by my answers. He started to speak to me in a sharp manner, even shouted

on me. He expressed his anger clear enough and told that because of my refusal to cooperate fully I may

be contacted later. During the refugee hearings the board members just did not let me speak about that

all... Some of that facts were not described in my refugee claim or during the hearings because of 3 reasons:

my lawyer's recommendations (see p.1 of this Document), his translator's sabotage (see Document # 3),

or IRB members refusal to let me speak (see Group of Documents # 4, Document #1). My lawyer's

recommendations were good until the IRB members started to use "unconventional" methods and

aggressive behavior. Analyzing my conversation with Mosad (Shabak) officer at Ben-Gurion airport I

came to conclusion that information they could collect some additional information about me from my

manuscripts, which were confiscated during (after) our flight Warsaw-Tel-Aviv (Lod). Protesting against

confiscation of some of my belongings I turned to Ben-Gurion's airport administration, to other

institutions and organizations. You could see a copy of one of my complains composed in 1991: and, if

you would doubt that it was composed in 1991, I could give you the origI.l, which could be checked

and which age could be determined in one or another way. (See Supplements, Documents # 40, 41,

42).

I was contacted by Mossad in Israel after the airport's conversation. Defense, suspension of

persecutions, and help in obtaining prosperity were proposed by then in exchange to suspension of my

human rights and journalistic activity. To prove that I could present not only a letter from Israel (which

was discussed during our last immigration hearing), but also other material proofs like business card with

the name and telephone number of the person, who contacted me, and so on. (Supplements,

Document # 43).

Here are just several examples of how important were the things, which the IRB did not let me to tell. I could give more examples of the most

vital for the valuation of my case things, which description was blocked by the IRB. They used aggressive behavior, psychological pressure,

administrative orders, and even threats for preventing me from the particular things' description. In the same time, these things might be

critical for the question of not just mine, but all family members' life or death!

One of the most significant indications that the danger to my life always exists in Israel is that Israeli

police abused me. IRB members could speak non-stop about how it was not typical, but they could not

deny the fact of abuse itself. In Israel, where tortures by police or army are legal (see Supplements,

Documents # 44), army or police could always torture and kill me or any other member of my family.

In context of all that I described and explained above police action against me does not looks occasional.

To show how police in Israel is dangerous for innocent unprotected people I support this paragraph by

several documents (see Documents # 45, 46, 47).

Please, believe me that I am not exaggerating the risk to my life. I have enough experience to detect it as

real: and it is real!

1.4.

Our removal from Canada back to Israel could be an extreme sanction in itself. Because what

happened in 1991 was not our freewill immigration to Israel but a forcible deportation to Israel

executed by both communist and Israeli authorities (see Document #2). Our removal to a

country we do not belong to and which citizenship was thrust on us against our free will is

immoral and inhuman. To extradite us to Israel means to return us back to captivity.

During more then 3 years I was refused a special permission, which is required for immigrants, to leave

Israel (listen to my 1-st hearing's recording). In supported documents I explain why I did not mention

that in my refugee claim but only during the hearings (see p.1 of this Document). We quit Israel with

such extreme difficulties that we never could leave it any more if removed there, and could not fly

persecutions any more. We, adults, and even our children could stay in captivity there to the rest of our

lives!

If we would be removed back to Israel extreme and most vulnerable sanctions could be adopted against

us there. Such sanctions not just highly expected, but are obvious since Israeli authorities already

practiced extreme administrative pressure on us in 1991-1994. There were next administrative sanctions.

A). a) Refusal to give my wife, and me permission to work in our professions. b) Refusal to give me an

employment authorization at all after 1992. 1. We were not given an appropriate language course as all fresh immigrants.

2. The Ministry of Culture and Education refused to make equivalents of my wife's, and mine diplomas,

when they had to do that automatically according to Israeli rules. I have already presented all material

evidences to the Immigration Board, and the board did not express any doubt in these documents

authenticity. That fact was also mentioned during our immigration hearings.

3. Without these equivalents, we were not legitimate for a permission to work in our professions, as well

as for the most of the professional courses available.

4. I was legitimate to enter only one course - "Talpiot", - which was denied me. The reason of the

denial was not given.

My protests and demands to provide me with a reason of the denial were lost without notice. Maitre

Stanley Levin, the only Israeli lawyer who agreed to defend me in Israel, composed a letter to the

Minister of Culture and Education Mr. Amnon Rubinshtein. Maitre S.Levin's letter and Mr. A.

Rubinshtein's response were presented to the IRB (see Documents # 48 in Supplements). That topic

was widely discussed during my immigration hearings; the Immigration Board expressed no doubts that

this conflict took place in reality. In the same time the commissioners did attempts to misrepresent this

event and to place it in dependence of mentioned in my wife's Israeli eternal passport nationality. Maitre

Dore, who replaced my main lawyer during the time of the hearings, did a mistake, allowing the

commissioners to lead him in that question. In reality, I would reject "Talpiot's" administration demands

to show my wife's passport-related nationality even if it was marked as "Jewish": because for the people

like me such a demand was disgracing and racist. And I do not think that this little incident was the real

reason of the refusal. But I could not name the "reason" because the term "political persecutions" is too

abstract for the commissioners.

5. The Ministry's of Labor governmental Labor Exchange refused to register me as unemployed after

the first accommodative trial period in Israel. Israeli regulations by then put some restrictions on

employers to employ a person who was not registered by the governmental labor exchange. In reality, it

was equal to a refusal of an employment authorization. In the same time this refusal prevented us from

getting any social assistance, too. (See letter from Maitre S. Levin to the Labor Exchange

administration: Supplements, Document # 49).

(This also was discussed during the refugee hearings).

6. When - in spite of that - I had found an official job and was employed, and my wife was employed,

too, we were paid less then the minimum wage. We had to be paid by the government an additional

amount of money till the level of the income security, but were refused.

7. We struggled till our last day in Israel for the right to obtain an official explanation in writing of the

refusal to register us at labor exchange, to pay us welfare, and to get an adjustment till the subsisting

minimum, which had to be paid us according to the law. We demanded to present us the reasons of all

these refusals, but we did not succeed in our demands...

8. We also turned to the Civil Court, and the court recognized me as an unemployed. But the labor's

exchange administration refused to register me even then, in spite of the Civil Court's decision. (See this

decision in Supplements, Document #50). All these above-mentioned items were mentioned during our refugee hearing but the commissioners avoided evaluating them

in context of our refugee claim but transferred the discussions to the demagogical and political spheres.

This justify the next question: was it a refugee hearing or it was a political process or a pro-Israeli propaganda

forum? 9. My wife, and me - we turned to a number of personalities, organizations and institutions like lawyer Maitre

Stanley Levin, Histadrut, Sochnut, Civil Court of Petach-Tikva, Ratz (Movement for Human Rights and Peace),

municipality of Petach-Tikva, municipality's legal consultant, and so on, without any result. (See the whole list in

Supplements, #8).

This topic was one of the most widely discussed during our refugee hearings! 10. The commissioners could easy conclude that this situation removed our legal status in Israel from us. We

became people without any legal status because we were socially (and legally) totally deprived. We could not

obtain a bank card, credit card, take a loan, be responsible for any business operation, in other words, had no

rights of citizens.

11. After my wife was bitten on her job and turned to police, she was not paid her salary. No institution (this event

was discussed during our immigration hearings) expressed a will to defend her rights.

To examine documents related to this part see our file and also Supplements, Documents #51,52.

B). Incredible fI.ncial pressure through illegal billing, taxation, or fines.

1. Illegal billings. Exaggerated telephone bills, bills for long-distance calls, which we never did, etc., were coming.

We had to pay all of them because it was no place where to turn to dispute theM..

2. Taxation. We had to pay taxes for TV, which we did not have by then (in Israel you must pay taxes for radio

and TV), for medicine and medical services (some of them fresh immigrants or - in other cases - people with

small income - did not have to pay). We were also forced to pay municipal tax instead of the owners of the

apartment, which we rented. In that case as new arrivals we were eligible to pay reduced tax for immovable

property, but were given this privilege only in 1994, short time before we left for Canada. In spite of the law that

new immigrants do not pay taxes I was forced to pay taxes from money I earned playing concerts. Ministry of

Taxation and Revenues has also submitted us an application form for paying taxes as if we had an enterprise and

refused to pay taxes. This form was submitted to us not from Tel-Aviv, as normally was practiced, but from

Jerusalem - as if I was a special person. There were other examples of such taxation.

(Examples of such bills were presented to the commissioners).

3. We had to pay fines for things we did not do and for violations we never committed.

Supporting documents are enclosed (see Supplements, Documents #53,54).

C). Draft Board has submitted me orders to appear sometimes every several days. I know that the compulsory

military service for people of my age, who never were in the army in any country before, was not practicing. I do

not think that they had intentions to take me to the army anyway. But they called me to appear there so often

that it distorted my whole life and became an obstacle for work or social activity. I had also to spend a lot of

money for bus tickets to appear at draft board, at Tel-ha-Shomer. They also refused to give me a permission to

leave the country during more then 3 years.

Supporting documents are enclosed (see Supplements, Documents #55). They were also presented to the

commissioners.

D). I could not say that the whole issue with my wife's eternal passport ("Tehudat Zehut") - during the refugee

hearing - was a well-coordI.ted with the Israeli side provocation (conspiracy) only because I have no material

proof. But there are a lot of coincidences and indications in favor of such a suggestion. When (first I, and later my

wife) we were given "Tehudat Zehuts", clerks told us that this document is the property of Israeli government

and do not has to be shown to any foreigner or taken abroad. I knew many other Russian-speaking people who

were told the same. Even Mrs. Malka, the immigration officer, has to recognize the existence of this regulation

(please, listen to immigration hearings tapes, the last hearing), but she suggested that (as some of Russian

speaking people did) we had to violate the law and to bring (smuggle!) our "Tehudat Zehuts" to Canada illegally!

When the day of our departure from Israel came, we had completely forgotten about this regulation, and our

"Tehudat Zehuts" among other papers were taken to airport. That happened because for us it was a tremendous

moment. (Only a person with sick imagI.tion could suggest that a family like ours could take a hard decision to

fly a country where we (nomI.lly, but...) were citizens and spent more then 3 years just because of economic

reasons or "exaggerations"). Car, in which I was with my friend Igor Puchinsky (my family went to airport in

another car before me) was stopped at the military post by a solder - a Moroccan origin. He told us to get out

from the car and to show our identities. I had only my foreign passport (my "Tehudat Zehut" was with my wife).

He began to shout on me and threaten me by an arrest "because I had no Israeli ID". He claimed that the

foreign passport is considered in Israel as a document for departure only and does not recognized as an ID. He

told that a real ID is only "Tehudat Zehut", which is not permitted to be taken abroad. And he said that he

suspect me in an attempt to smuggle my "Tehudat Zehut" abroad. May be my friend Mr. Puchinski's

respectability, may be the intervention of the officer- an European origin, helped, but I was released. This

incident reminded us that we still have "Tehudat Zehuts" with us. From another hand, even if we had an intention

to smuggle them, we were too much afraid, and we destroyed them in airport.

This I told Mrs. Malka during our last immigration hearing.

(Any one, who had a chance to hold in hands an Israeli "internal passport" ("tehudat zehut") had a chance to

notice that there are not one but two nationality-related marks in it: one is the brutal disclosure of the

genetically-related information about a person, another one mentions his country of origin. Even if Mrs. Malka or

her parents do not possess one, she held Israeli passports of refugee claimants in her hands - and knows that. It

is also obvious that Israeli regulations oblige people to carry "tehudat zehuts" everywhere with theM.. It was

understandable from the context of our immigration claim - and even more clear from the context of the

discussions during the hearings that not the first (genetically-related) mark in "tehudat zehuts" but the second

one (the country of origin) actually corresponds to the described by us events. Artificially replacing the first by

the second one Mrs. Malka already used a non-conventional, unacceptable "method". But she committed even

more severe violations in this question by other methods - as I explain in next documents).

I do not know if there were precedents of contacts between IRB and the Israeli embassy when the similar issue

was raised, but I could name dozens of examples when this issue was raised during immigration hearings, and no

requests were sent to the Israeli embassy. Anyway, this is such a rare and exceptional measure that only an

exceptional need could justify it. In reality there were no needs in that at all (see Group of Documents #4,

Document 3). No event was based on indication of nationality in my wife's "Tehudat Zehut", no event related to

this indication was discussed during our immigration hearings.

Mrs. Malka based her decision to send a request to Israeli embassy on Mrs. Broder's faken translation of my

wife's birth certificate. Mrs. Broder already distorted or sabotaged translations of all documents of my case:

from my refugee claim to newspapers' articles. This is why there were no doubts that she did it on purpose. There

are two logical questions: If it was not a well-coordI.ted with Mrs. Malka or the Israeli side provocation, then

why Mrs. Broder distorted the translation of my wife's birth certificate only, but not mine or my mother's, or the

shildren's? If it was not a well coordI.ted with Mrs. Malka or the Israeli side provocation, then why Mrs.

Broder did this translation at all since two official translations of our birth certificates already existed? I also ask

the Federal court to investigate where the origI.l of my wife's birth certificate translation (that we made in Israel

before coming to Canada) is kept now. (We gave the origI.l of my wife's birth certificate and the origI.l of its

translation through Maitre Dore to the IRB in relation with that question. We got my wife's certificate back only

after more then half a year but never got back the translation. The point was that Mrs. Eleonora Broder had no

need to translate my wife's birth certificate at all since a professionally-made and exclusively-looking official

translation already existed and was given to my lawyer before. By suspending this translation, somebody did an

attempt to destroy evidences of Mrs. Broder's sabotage. (See also Maitre Dore's note and a copy of existed

before Mrs. Broder's translation legal translation of my wife's birth certificate: Supplements, Documents

#57,58,59 ).

By sending such a request to Israeli embassy Mrs. Malka violated 3 main principles, on which the legal status of

refugee claimants' immigration hearings are based. She:

a) Reported to Israel about our refugee claim in Canada, what is unacceptable and goes in contradiction with the

very essence of International human rights charters and conventions about refugees. b) Used situational

blackmail in violation of the crimI.l code to extort my wife's signature under a document (authorization of

request), which authorization was against my wife's personal interests and interests of her family - because gave

Israelis an additional reason to persecute us and put our lives under an additional danger. c) Violated the

principle of neutrality and non-approval of non-democratic, racist laws, which existed in 2-3 countries in the

World, because Israeli passport regulations about the indication of nationality in eternal passports are in deep

conflict with Canadian rules and the principles of Canadian democracy; she also breached of our confidence to

Canadian government abusing our belief that no part of our confidential statements to Canadian immigration as

well as the very fact of our refugee claim in Canada could not be betrayed to Israeli government. In my opinion

Mrs. Malka also abused her power as an immigration officer violating the border of distinctions between the

crimI.l court and the Immigration Board. As Maitre Dore correctly pointed (see Supplements, Document #57 ),

Mrs. Malka's interpretation of the answer, which was given by Israeli side revealed her clear partiality because

she reject in advance any other versions (interpretations). In her response to Maitre Dore's letter she repeatedly

pointed to Israel's answer as to an absolute. In the same time she could not ignore other eventualities (because

they are obvious): that Israelis could take advantage of giving that answer as a revenge on me, or that the

Ministry's of Eternal Affairs record was different from what was written in my wife's passport, or that it is just a

mistake (Israel is well-known as a country, where bureaucratic mistakes, casualties or disorders became a norm

(please, read, for example, Efraim Sivela's book "Stop the airplane, I have to go out!", "Stav", Jerusalem,

1979). She was not aware even by the fact that the answer from Israeli embassy was incomplete, and (from some

points of view) suspicious. It means that she rejected another main principle of justice - presumption of

innocence, replacing it by presumption of guilt!

E). There were many tiny events of administrative terror against us in Israel like sanctions at school or in

kindergarten, such as these, which described in our refugee claim, illegal and unfair sanctions made by the

owners of apartments, unfair decisions against us made by House Committee, and so on.

The administrative terror, which we faced in Israel, turned our life in Israel into a nightmare. It was unbearable

and tormenting in itself, but we also faced physical abuses, assaults, discrimI.tion, and batteries. This is why the

health of all members of my family was so much affected.

These sanctions would be in force immediately from the very moment of our arrival again if we would be removed

back to Israel. It had to be absolutely clear to the commissioners!

But in case of our arrival we could expect this time more severe sanctions because of the next reasons. 1-st:

authorities' attitude towards us were constantly changing to the worse during our life in Israel, and came to the

most dangerous for us point just to the moment of our departure for Canada. If we would be sent back, this

attitude would not start from "zero" (it was not zero even in 1991!), but would continue the most tense period of

1994. 2-nd: after our refugee claim in Canada and my complains to the human rights organizations we could not

expect that the Israeli authorities would like me more now. This is why I am so sure about more severe sanctions:

1. Imprisonment within days or weeks since our arrival.

2. Forcible "treatment" inside a special mental hospital, where some political activists are placed. (Rabbi

Meshulam, leader of an upraise in a town Igud, told me over the phone about existence of such hospitals).

3. Imprisonment inside one of Mossad's secret cells.

4. Children's separation from us, parents.

5. Confiscation of our foreign passports, so that we would never been able to leave Israel any more. 1.5. INHUMAN TREATMENT

If we did not face inhuman treatment in Israel we would not come to Canada to claim a refugee status. (As - by

the way - thousands of other Russian speaking peoples. Only by the very number of Russian-speaking refugee

claimants from Israel to the Western countries a conclusion could be made that they are not "economic

refugees". And the economical situation in Israel is not so bad, too!). We came not because of the economic

reasons. We did not escape from hunger or from extreme poverty. First two-three months in Israel we were in a

shock because of what happened to us and because of the general social atmosphere in the country. But we could

not go back to our native country, and we were ready to stay in Israel forever. When we discovered that a

permission to leave the country is refused for me, we began to try even harder to accommodate in Israel. We did

everything to use to Israeli society, to find our place within it. This was already discussed during our immigration

hearings - when I said that we tried our best in our attempts to live in Israel.

In their negative decision IRB members did not expressed any principle doubt in the events, which we described

in our refugee claiM.. They even recognized in one sentence that some negative "reactions" causing conflicts

could be expected from ultra-orthodox towards people, who (as mention the IRB members avoiding word

"respect" but mentioning it) do not respect their supervision.

During the immigration hearings the immigration officer spoke about events of inhuman treatment, which we

faced in Israel, in a humiliating manner. The same manner, absolutely identical, presents in the negative decision.

Humiliation appeared because of their attitude towards severe inhuman treatment like assaults and batteries as

towards minor events. They discussed, mentioned, or described inhuman treatment, which we faced in Israel, as

well as our reaction to it, as something humorous. They let us know that we took such events too seriously, and, if

we could take them lighter, it could prevent other similar events. But I am absolutely sure that if the IRB

members could find themselves on our place, their reaction could not be different from our.

After everything that happened to us in Israel, after characteristics, which I got in Israel as an "enemy", after

contacts between Montreal's Immigration Board with Israelis, after their negative decision, which defining me as

a dangerous "exaggerator" and "found me guilty" in "spreading slender" against Israel, what other treatment

except of inhuman could we expect in Israel?

1.6.RESUME

In this document I explained why my family, and me - we would be not like other people if removed to Israel:

because my personal confrontation with Israeli political structures began long before we were taken to Israel,

because we did not want to go to the state of Israel and were taken there against our will, because of the scandal

at the Central railway station in Warsaw, because I refused to cooperate with Mossad, because in Israel I

became relatively well-known for my articles against human rights violation in Israel and was defined by Israeli

authorities as an "enemy", because our personalities are not compatible to Israeli society, because we do not

practicing Judaism, and because of a number of other reasons, which were described in that document.

Our 3 years in Canada proved that I am not a pathological troublemaker. 3 years in Canada could show that we

could live avoiding conflicts, respecting the laws and regulations, and quickly accommodating. My children are

good students, they have a lot of friends, and they are completely suitable to the local society. My older daughter

is an advanced piano player, and she passed exams at McGill University with the best mark. My younger

daughter is a talented ballerI., her pictures are everywhere in Ballet studios, she is an advanced dancer, and

she also was chosen to enter the National Ballet School in Toronto from dozens of other pretendents. Their

French is nice and literary, they also advanced in English. And we are not on welfare any more! We could be

peaceful and useful members of the local society if we would be given a chance to stay here. (Group of documents

# 4 in Supplements are corresponding to this paragraph).

THIS IS THE BEST PROOF THAT OUR TROUBLES IN ISRAEL ERUPTED NOT BECAUSE IT WAS OUR

FAULT (as the commissioners tried to show), AND NOT IN RESULT OF OUR "EXAGGERATIONS"! WE

FACED PERSECUTIONS IN ISRAEL BECAUSE OF OBJECTIVE REASONS AND COULD NOT GO BACK

BECAUSE OF RISK TO LIFE, EXTREME SANCTIONS, AND INHUMAN TREATMENT. OUR REMOVAL

TO ISRAEL WOULD BRING US TO A TRAGIC END.

Theoretical suggestions if people like us could face a tragic end (without figuring out the impact our personal

claim events: as commissioners did) in Israel are completely useless in our case because our case and our

personalities are unique.

Please, give us a chance to stay here, because if we would be removed back to Israel lives of my children, my

wife, my mother, and my life, would be termI.ted! Please, do not send us towards tragic end. Try to understand

your full responsibility for what will happen if we would be sent back to Israel.

1.7. MY FI.L STATEMENT

As the most honest people I am not impudently self-confidential. I might be shocked by aggressive and ironical

interrogators (as Mrs. Malka): but this is just one more proof of my honesty and innocence. To support our

refugee claim we presented to the Immigration Board so many documentary proofs as probably no refugee

claimants in Canadian Immigration"s history! All of them, including legal, and medical documents, official

correspondence and newspapers" articles, related to me, other documents, were ignored, and only one document

was considered as "non-related" without any reasonable explanations. If the forces, which acted against us, could

encourage such an outraged injustice and unfair treatment of us even here, in Canada, in Israel they could

elimI.te us for sure. Sending us to Israel you must realize that you send us to death. Removal to Israel means

for us a death penalty. But Canada has no death penalty even in Canadian crimI.l code! ! ! Especially, for

children! I ask you to think about it while composing you fI.l decision. Please...

Sincerely yours,

Lev Gunin

Next Document <> Main Page  PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: DOCUMENT 1 FROM DOCUMENTS Four Mrs. Louis-Phillippe SIMARD, Manager, Post DetermI.tion Review

FROM Lev GUNIN (FILE Number 2948-6524/ 95/76/23/18

ID: 3082-7125/7174/7220/7231/7317/ ) DOCUMENT NUMBER 2

2.1. I was in grade 9, when voluntarism and vulnerability of my class teacher, PERFILOVA Maria Michajlovna, converted me from a good school pupil and a promising young musician into a person without future, persecuted by KGB. She was a communist party member and an outraged careerist. She took one of my school essays - and took it to KGB. She also made an open public court over me at the school, not waiting for KGB command. Officially KGB rejected her accusations. They found nothing, which could be considered as anti-Sovetism, in my composition. But in ex-USSR an obstruction, which Perfilova made me at school, and the very fact that she was in KGB building to report on me was enough to devastate my whole life and to cause what it caused. It is also possible that rejecting Perfilova (what made her insane) they secretly put my name on their black list already by then.

2.2. I was prevented from becoming a student of a Music College or university, and later, when I entered music studies by a miracle and graduated, I was prevented from a good musical carrier. In 1979 I was brutally beaten because of an order from KGB. During many years my social and professional status, my health, my privacy, my security, even my freedom and my life were every minute under a threat. Nobody knows what I came through -, and did not become an alcoholic, or sadist, and never violated any crimI.l rule.

2.3. Because I felt more secure among other persecuted people, I started to cooperate with a number of human rights groups and movements and with some other groups and organizations. Most of them were non-conformist art and poetry \ prose groups. I formed my own poetry circle where I was a leader. I also organized a movement in opposition to ideologically motivated demolition or levelation of Bobruysk's 18-19 century architecture, mostly Jewish. I organized mass photographing of the center of Bobruysk. The local authorities have unofficially forbidden that. "Militia" several times arrested my supporters, and me, our photo films were confiscated. Only in the end of 1980-s I contacted Mr. V. Senderov, Mr. V. Batcshev, Mrs. Elena Bonner and other world-famous dissidents and human rights activists, and also correspondents of the west media in Moscow. Only by then I already had permanent contacts with some representatives of foreign parliaments and embassies, but never with any intelligence. I also maintained close cooperation with two different forces: Frankfurt-based NTS and National Front of Belarus.

2.4. As a person who was deeply involved in the cultural self-determI.tion process of the Soviet Jews I also was the first activist in Belarus, who combined several goals together. They were: studies of Yiddish and Hebrew languages and the Jewish history, revitalization of Bobruysk's Jewish cultural and historical heritage, restoration of Jewish religious community, foundation of a Jewish club, newspaper, theatre, and schools. Nobody - except me - believed by then that it might be possible. My poetry in Yiddish was published in "Sovetisch Heimland" (Moscow) and "Der Arbeiter Stimme" (Warsaw). I also became a co-editor of one underground Jewish magazine, based in Minsk. I also became known in cultural circles in Moscow and Leningrad (St.-Petersburg). I have maintained contacts with the most famous personalities like composer D. Shostakovich, poet A. Voznesensky, singers like V. Tolkunova, or L. Leshchenko, and others. In Minsk (where I studied and worked 2 times a week) I maintained almost close relationship with the whole cultural elite: composers (D.Smolski, L. Obeliovich, G. Vagner, U. Semeniako, and others), historians (Tarasov, Zenon Pozdniak (later leader of the National Front), V. Posse, my relative, A. Gritzkievich, O. Dadiomova), pop-rock musicians, and so on.

2.5. During short periods of time (in 1986-87) it looked like persecutions against me were suspended or lightened. But in the same period of time I started to be persecuted by another political force - by Israeli missionary stuff in Minsk and Bobruysk. By that time my brother Vitaly - a talented painter and brilliant businessman - organized one of the first free ("capitalist") enterprises in Belarus. I was an administrator of one of its section, which arranged invitation of famous artists for tours in Minsk and Bobruysk. So, my brother, Mr. Pinchas Plotkin, an Yiddish poet, I, Mr. Marat Kurtzer, and Igor Gorelik - we formed a first circle, which achieved good results in restoring Jewish life in Bobruysk. A course of Yiddish, a library, a club, and other activities became a reality and refreshed the local Jewish life. This was what Israelis did not want to allow. They wanted to elimI.te the whole Jewish social and cultural life in ex-USSR. They suggested that if life in USSR would become non-attractive for the Jews, they could more easily leave for Israel. They also did everything to terrify Jewish population by rumors about pogroms, and by other exaggerations. Missioners like J. EDEL, Arie ROTENBERG, or Dorit HE came to USSR to arrange total control over the local Jewish life and to put down any competitive power. I new dozens of other missioners who came to Minsk and Bobruysk to devastate local Jewish life and to jeopardize mass migration to Israel. They often expressed their hatred towards Soviet Jews.

2.6. Israelis started to build their own activist infrastructure, alternative to ours. They attracted young aggressive careerists, convincing them that they are totally protected, could commit any crimes - and go unpunished. Those boys and girls in their 20-s like Boris Kagan, Dmitry Levin, Vova Kazinetz, Z. Fridburg and others were nothing without Israeli leadership. Their local leader became Ilia Rodov, my brother's school colleague. Rodov became a known local figure only because my brother's, and my help. My brother Vitaly helped him in everything during their studies at the Art College, he presented Rodov to prominent and influential people, and even helped him by giving him money or work at his enterprise. Rodov was a well-known collaborationist: he cooperated with the communist authorities. He also was considered in intellectual circles as KGB informer and "comsomol" activist. He often accused and "denounced" Jewish "nationalists." But very soon he rapidly changed his views, expressing interest to Yiddish culture (when the group of Yiddishists was the most powerful in Bobruysk). When the influence of Israelis increased, he rapidly changed his opinion again "denouncing" Yiddish and calling to "forget Yiddish and study Hebrew." He was supported not only by Israelis, but by the local communist authorities as well.

2.7. Even by then I already suspected close cooperation between Israelis -and local communist authorities. When Bobruysk was a military zone, and a special authorization was needed for foreigners to visit that city, Israelis went to Bobruysk easily. They also had free meetings with people, which was impossible for any other foreigners, for example, for Finish Baptist missioners. They openly called people to emigrate to Israel using lie, deception, threats and profanation. They did everything to discredit my group, and me. Rodov's group has the full freedom to operate and to work with people. We were stopped by the authorities, disrupted and persecuted. Supported by the communists Rodov announced himself as a chairman, avoiding open and free elections and his followers formed local "Jewish council." People - like me - who restored the Jewish life and created the Jewish club, were expelled from that life and from that club.

2.8. As soon as they seized the power, "Rodovers" started to suppress all activities and cultural events in the Jewish society. They ruined everything that we created: very soon, including Yiddish course and all other courses and activities. They concentrated only on pro-Israeli propaganda and propaganda of immigration to Israel, Hebrew course and religious propaganda. When religious in Israel became the most influential force in institutions, which maintained work among potential immigrants in USSR, Rodov supporters converted themselves into ultra-orthodox. (Before that they were fighting atheists). They also used to confiscate the huge wave of help, gifts, money, which was streaming from the west Jewish communities to Soviet Jews. They have stolen about one thousand valuable gift sets from Baptist community of Finland to the local Jewish community. That gift was handed over through Iakov Gutman, an independent from Israelis leader of Minsk's Jews, to me. The sets were given for free delivery. I wanted to deliver them directly from my home to the people in exchange of their signatures in confirmation that they got them free. But Rodov's group forced me (and Iakov Gutman) to hand them over to the club, using dirty manipulations. Rodov and his group sold the sets as their private property. They openly violated the crimI.l code not only by then. They also robbed our Jewish library 2 times, they threaten people by death, they corrupted local officials, and they demanded money from people for information about Israel and for Israeli visas. They also demanded money for the "club needs", threatening people that - if they would refuse, they would be punished in Israel. Israelis also paid them for their services. In ex-USSR, where an imported TV with video could be almost as valuable as an apartment, they got expensive valuable things from Israelis as gifts. I suspect that they were paid by money, too. A special telephone number was given to Rodov, which enabled him to call Israeli embassy in Moscow and to Israel for free (according to his own words, and I believe that it was true).

2.9. Rodov and co "punished" me in different ways. They spread discreditible rumors against me, they posed intrigues against me at my work, they threaten me, they did so, that I was not invited any more to play in restaurants, on wedding parties, in dancing clubs, and so on, they tried to confront my wife with me. I am absolutely sure that Rodov's actions against me were correlated with the persecutions, which I faced from the local authorities. In Minsk I used to visit Mr. Garik Chajtovich, - my friend and a kind person. He was a Jewish activist and Hebrew teacher. Practically all the Israeli missioners have visited hiM.. I met few high-ranked Israeli representatives through Garik or in his place several times and spoke to theM.. I tried to convince them that they should stop supporting odious persons like Rodov and to stop suppressing the development of Jewish cultural life in USSR. They usually answered that their priority is to convince people to leave for Israel, and they do not care about anything else. But one time I got an unusual answer. The man who gave it to me was a very important person. I could admit how Garik respect and treat hiM.. Even Israelis who were with this man obeyed hiM.. He told me that I have to stop talking about such things. He also told me that he has a pity to me because, according to him, I would pay a high price for my "nihilism" and freethinking, my family, my relatives would suffer, and my life will become miserable...

2.10. Because with time people were convinced that Rodov is a crook, and were too angry on him, I, brothers Strupinsky, Marat Kurtzer and others took the power in our own hands, discharging Rodov and his company. Only then I understood very soon that the problem was not in Rodov. Without him Israelis have found other ways to achieve their goals. And very soon my position became as weak as before. Israelis also took revenge in Minsk, displacing Iakov Gutman, the main figure in opposition to their policy in Belarus. Now nothing might stop them from forcible (in the deeper sense) transportation of hundred of thousands Jews from Belarus to Israel.

2.11. From 1988 my brother's health became more and more bad. He has a blood cancer, but I was sure that his disease was caused because he was exposed to radiation. During many month doctors Kustanovich (she died recently in USA from cancer), Cherny and Petrusha did not report Vitaly's bad blood tests. They also accused him in simulating to "avoid military service" and threaten to kill hiM.. Since he became sick I fought to get his true diagnose and to win an appropriate treatment for hiM.. In the end of 1987 we understood that for saving my brother's life we have to move to one of the West countries. I tried to get an immigration visa to US, but America was "closed" very soon because of a treaty, which Israel demanded: about leaving the only one way for Soviet Jews - only to Israel. I also tried to get a visa in the German embassy, but it was too late. Then we had to request a visa only from Israel. We did all necessary steps to obtain it, but we did not get any visas. Hundreds of people whom I helped to get visas (I told them that I do not recommend them to go to Israel, but they kept asking me with passion, and I helped them) got them, but not my brother and me. Even Genady Shulman, one from the Rodov's group, who was kind to us and arranged visas for thousands of people, could not obtain visas for my brother, and me. I went to Moscow, to Israeli embassy, where they knew me very good as one of the activists and where I always had an access to, and spoke to Ambassador Mr. Levin, but without any result.

In 1988 Israel have submitted special visas-invitations for Jewish activists for a free trip to Israel. In spite of my detestation of Rodov I phoned him in an attempt to save my brother's life (because he composed a list of names for these invitations). "What did your brother did for the Jewish movement, for Zionism? - he asked. Avoiding tensions I did not tell him that my brother did for Rodov more then he deserved and that my brother put his business under a risk organizing Jewish events when the local authorities did not approve theM.. I only asked him about compassion. "There are more valuable things then human life, - he responded. Later I had a chance to see what these things are. Nobody from Rodov's group went to Israel with that free invitation, only Rodov's father went to Israel because he did small speculation trade under the table, and used that occasion as a shield...

In August, 1989 my brother, and me, we went to Poland, where a blood test, which was made to him, had shown strange processes in his organisM.. In September I started a new Jewish magazine "Vos Herzach?" and participated in a current issue of "CONTACT." My brother Vitaly gave his caf? (he was the owner) again for the Jewish club meeting. In September also came a telephone threat that my brother Vitaly would die. In January 1990 another person called and told the same.

2.12. When in 1989 first letters began to arrive from those who already settled in Israel, their relatives discovered that Russian speaking people are persecuted in Israel, that Israelis hate us and treat us as second-class people, many of the Jews in Bobruysk cancelled their tickets and visas. It seemed to be a total disaster for Israeli plan to capture half a million or more Soviet Jews. But they have found a solution very soon. Somebody began to spread rumors about possible pogroms. Every day brought a "reliable" information that Jews are in danger. Jewish cemeteries were vandalized everywhere. By that time I was a member of a group that investigated this wave of vandalisM.. Most active members in that group were Baltic Jews. A small Baptist team and NTS representatives also participated. We discovered that vandalism started in west regions of USSR and moved chronologically from the Northwest to Southeast. Pogroms in Muslim region were not known. It was absolutely clear that a team of "vandals" traveled by train from town to town, from city to city, starting from Riga. They had a steady pace, so, Soviet authorities (if they would want to stop hooligans) could figure out very easy where should be their next stop and next pogrom - and catch theM.. But the authorities did not want to stop theM.. Israelis also used different methods to calm down information about vandalisM.. I personally (as well as others) took the description of our conclusions about vandalism to Israeli embassy, but they became furious and refused to send this information to Israeli press. I have submitted the description about vandalism against Jewish cemeteries (without our conclusion) to Washington Post and Chicago Tribune correspondents in Moscow, as well as to Israeli newspapers (enclosing photos of vandalized graves), but no newspaper outside USSR published this information. I was sure that Israelis used their influence to prevent newspapers from that publication. I was even more convinced about Israeli involvement when such a pogrom happened in my native town. Graves that related to non pro-Israeli activists' were mainly targeted, when pro-Israeli families' graves were not touched. My father's grave was vandalized, the monument was broken.

2.13. I informed US president's special representative, Mr. Nikolai Petro, that Israelis are using illegal methods to force people to leave USSR for Israel. I also contacted several US diplomats including Mrs. Daria Arturovna Fein. I met Daria Arturovna at hotel "Ukraine" in Moscow. She took a look at the photos and asked if they are not a fake. I told her that I could give her an origI.l film from which the photos were made. And I gave the film to her. She held the film several minutes in her hands. I saw that she is trembling. After some hesitation she gave the film and the photos back to me, refusing to admit them and giving no explanations. I told to prominent personalities in Frankfurt, in Warsaw and in Paris about these acts of vandalism, but they could not organize even a single publication.

2.14. In January-February 1990 I came to Paris hoping to obtain a visa for my brother. I was warmly welcomed by all Jewish organizations in Paris and Lion, which I visited, and also by Russian immigrants' organizations, including NTS. They gave me money, shelters, they bought me train tickets to Lion several times. My French friends also helped me a lot. I could not tell Jews that I do not want go to Israel. They supported Israel's plan to get from half to one million people from USSR. To justify my request for help in obtaining the French visa for my brother I told them that during almost 2 years we could not get an Israeli visa. After that some leaders of the Jewish organizations in Paris, including M-me Helman from COJASOR, proposed me their mediation in my request for an Israeli visa. They told me that Jewish communities in France have collected so much money for Israel, that Israelis must listen to theM.. M-me Helman and others arranged a meeting for me with Israelis in Israeli embassy. A visa for me and for my brother had to be given for me there. I knew that local AVIR in Bobruysk could not accept a visa, which came not by mail, and could not give us a permission to leave USSR. But I had no solution. When I came to Israeli embassy, which situated down the Le Sacr? Coeur de Monmartre, they did not let me in. I called the doorbell, and also phoned them several times with no result.

2.15. My brother Vitaly tragically died in May 1990. Half a year after his death I discovered just occasionally that the Jewish community in Lion have collected money for his treatment and have submitted a medical treatment visa for hiM.. This visa was confiscated by the Soviet authorities.... After his death I did not need an Israeli visa any more - because I never wanted to immigrate, and from 1987 I understood very well that my place is not in Israel. Before my brother's death we sold some of our property and did other steps expecting a visa from Israel, but now we suspended all such steps.

2.16. One day - when Rodov already left for Israel - one former "Rodovetz" called my doorbell when my wife was at work. I opened the door, and then he told me that he missed my door with somebody else's. In that very moment another person have approached. He asked, "is Gunin lives here?". I recognized hiM.. Living near KGB building I often saw him entering it. I also saw him at the Jewish club where he was with Mr. Sheremetiev, local UKGB chairman. Ilia Rodov has invited him by then to the club to read a lecture. Later I saw this man (who came to visit me) with Rodov in Bobruysk as minimum two times. He started to speak to me without entering my apartment. He told me that I have to quit USSR for Israel within two months. He said that this decision about me is non-reversible and can not be appealed. I was so terrified that I could not speak. But I only asked him what about Israeli visa. "Visa budet"" ("visa will come"), he told in response. And he also told me that I should go directly to Israel, without tricks. 2 days after visas started to arrive. All visas - a whole package, - which were suspended before, came in 2 envelopes (see Supplements, Documents # 20, a,b,c,d,e, etc. - total number is 11).. Where these visas were and who kept them, I do not know, but it convinced me that the situation is very serious, and I must go. When after two months we did not leave USSR yet, such terrible, even monstrous events occurred that I understood: I must go.

2.17. It did not mean that I agreed to go to Israel. I secretly asked my friends in Poland to meet me at the Central Railway Station in Warsaw. I had to try to visit foreign embassies in Warsaw, and, if it could give nothing, then we had to go to Germany (my friends had to buy us tickets to Frankfurt). When our train came to Warsaw, and my Polish friends already approached to the wagon, a group of unknown people surrounded and captured us. One of them, probably chairman, spoke Polish with a Hebrew accent. It was a big man in his middle ages. Mostly he spoke to me, and also an aggressive woman. They were ready to take us with them immediately by physical force, but only the presence of my Polish friends made them hesitating. I am sure that they started negotiations with us only to win the time: they probably used it to find out through Mossad sources who are my friends and what they able to do. They probably also wanted to find out what consequences Israelis would have in case of an eventual scandal, what tactics to use against us, and what their supervisors recommended. They disagree immediately to let us go with my friends. Meanwhile my friends called 2 Polish policemen. I told the policemen that I do not want go to Israel, I asked for their help. The policemen told me that if I was agree to obtain Israeli visa - then I probably must go to Israel. Then I shown them a temporary visa for staying in Poland 3 days, and told them that only after 3 days I might be expelled from Poland, and not by Israelis... The policemen then went to hear what Israelis could say theM.. I did not hear what they discussed - because they moved farther from me (my family stayed with the Israelis as hostages while I spoke to policemen), but when they finished talking, the policemen left. We were taken to a hotel, completely surrounded and guarded by Israelis, from where we could not escape, and then - to the airport.

So, my family, and me, we were taken to Israel by force, against our will, this was a captivity! Israel is not our country. Our native country is Belarus, and we still consider ourselves as citizens of Belarus. We are not Israeli citizens because that citizenship was thrust on us.

NOTE: I could support this statement by my declarations, which I made, when I lived in ex-USSR and in Israel. You could see obviously that these declarations were written many years ago or even make a criminological test to define their age. They are: 1) My declaration to the procuratories of the both districts of city Bobruysk (Lenin and Pervomay), and to the General procuratory of Bobruysk, in which I tried to protest my ultimative deportation to Israel. (1990) 2) My declaration about Israel's illegal activity in Belarus (1988-89). 3) My declaration to the Israeli authorities (1991-1994). Please, take it into considaration ! ! !

NEXT DOCUMENT: Document Number 3  PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: Document number 2

For Mr. Louis-Phillippe SIMARD, Manager, Post DetermI.tion Review

FROM Lev GUNIN

(FILE Number 2948-6524/ 95/76/23/18

ID: 3082-7125/7174/7220/7231/7317/)

DOCUMENT NUMBER 3

TRANSLATOR'S SABOTAGE

3.1.The very first time went to Mr. Le Brune's office when we were in a hotel for refugees (YMCA) yet.

3.2.We also came to Mrs. Broder's apartment to "complete the PIF" and to "compose the story" in November 1994.

3.3.I told Mrs. Broder that I have already composed my refugee claiM.. And gave her the text of my claim in Russian and in

English. I refused to cooperate with her in "composing the story." She was extremely persistent and ultimate, but also flexible

and cunning in achieving her goals. When she understood that she could not break my will not to participate in "composing

the story," she told us to come later. Between that and the next appointment my wife was worked upon by Lucy (our relative,

whose negative attitude towards me in ex-USSR and in Israel scared me a lot in the past) and by Mrs. Broder. They told her

that all direct or indirect criticism of the state of Israel must be excluded from my statement. They also told that I should not

mention Israeli army, censorship in Israel, human rights violations, police brutality, and provocation against me made by

police; my tensions with Mossad and Shabak, or persecutions against me ordered by Israeli authorities. The psychological

pressure on my wife and on me was so strong that it could push us towards a suicide. We also met Mr. Le Brune in that

period of time, and he also suggested that our claim have to be based on everyday occurrences and social conflicts, but not

on political persecutions. When we met Mrs. Eleonora Broder next time I started to fight each sentence, but it was very

complicated since my wife had arguments with me taking Eleonora's side. But I want to make it clear: MY WIFE AND ME -

WE NEVER AUTHORIZED MRS. BRODER TO CHANGE OR MODIFY OUR REFUGEE CLAIM.. We only agreed

to allow some shortening.

3.4.Very soon Mrs. Broder called us and told us to sign her translation. I asked her to read us the context in Russian, but she

refused motivating her refusal by the lack of time. She also told us that only 5 more days are left (to complete the PIF and

submit the claim; and that the total number of days is 14), and if it would not be submitted, then a deportation order is going

to be issued for us. (In reality 20 days or even more are given, but we did not know about that). Then I told her that I could

type my story with her shortenings just in 1 hour in English myself - and give her or another translator to sign it (because I

wanted to control its context, and I was not good enough in French by then). She told me that in Quebec only French-written

claims are accepted. Because of her threats and because my wife was near a hysterics I was forced to sign it.

3.5.In December 1994 and January 1995 I gave a copy of Mrs. Broder's translation of my refugee claim to several people;

they knew French very well. Using their help I discovered that the context of our refugee claim was seriously distorted and

sometimes even converted by Mrs. Broder. Some details were given in such interpretation (translation) that they contradicted

with other details. We also discovered that the text of her French translation was different from her back translation into

Russian made after my request and written by her own hand. (I wanted to verify her translation). When Lucy's purposes of

what she did to us might been explained by various reasons, the purpose of Mrs. Broder might be only one: to sabotage the

translation. I repeat that she distorted the translation not because of incompetence or unconsciousness mistakes but on

purpose. And I have good evidence: she excluded one paragraph from my story without even discussing it with us. It was a

description of humiliation over other Russian-speaking workers and me by employers-Israelis in August 1991. Instead of

typing this paragraph she made a statement in my name not just generalizing the situation, but placing an abstract declaration

about slavery in Israel. When I asked her later why she did it, she answered that immigration commissioners would never

believe that something like this exist in Israel. "They would call it "slavery" - and tell you that slavery doesn't exist in Israel.

Why then she inserted that pure statement about slavery in Israel in my name? If even a description of real events, which

could be treated as a denunciation of slavery is "bad", a pure statement about slavery (without any explanation) is "more

worse" then?! I could only explain that by favor, which Mrs. Broder did to the commissioners (immigration oficer in

particular) - because they later used this exactly paragraph (in Mrs. Broder's translation of my refugee claim) as a key

indication of "exaggerations" and based their rejection of our refugee claim mostly on it. Mrs. Broder also told me that she

inserted this paragraph because I mentioned slavery in one of our conversations. I said that it does not mean that I permitted

to insert it.

3.6. I said that I do not remember if I really said that. In response Eleonora said that she secretly recorded all our

conversations and now could prove that I told it. She never agreed to correct her translation. She even threaten me by telling

that she is going to present above mentioned tapes to the immigration tribunal - and she claimed that I spoke enough on these

tapes to make a conclusion that I am dangerous to Israel and "was persecuted correctly".

3.7. The translation of our claim was also made in a sarcastic and humiliating manner as if the translator not just repeated the

Russian text in French, but wrote a humorist story about what was described. 3.8. Lucy constantly threatened us during my

dispute with Eleonora, and I think that her threats came as a reaction on my pretensions to Eleonora. She was threatening us

from February till May 1995. She told that she did a lot for us - but we are not thankful - and we are going to pay for it. She

often told us with bravado that she knows everything about us. She said that some people follow us, that my phone is

bugged, and that my mails are searched. And she demonstrated her knowledge about really discreet information, which

should be known only to my lawyer. I asked my lawyer and demanded from Mrs. Broder not to make publicly known

information, which should be discreet, but Lucy demonstrated her access to everything, what took place in my lawyer's office

-from the dates of our appointments with him to the dates of our immigration hearings, and so on. She used to come to the

immigration tribunal each time when our hearings took place - and even appeared in the room where the hearing took place:

each time without our permission.

3.9. One time she told me with the same bravado (it was in February 1995) that a very partial committee is going to be

assigned to my file. She told me that an especially aggressive immigration officer would be called from Toronto "to calm" me

down. She was right.

3.10. Later it came out that Mrs. Broder sabotaged not only our immigration claim, but also translations of the articles, of

documents, in other words - everything, what she has to translate. Her distortion of the my wife's birth certificate data

enabled immigration officer to excuse her report made to the Israeli embassy about us.

3.11. Not only Lucy was related to Israel, but also Mrs. E. Broder. Soon after we met she married a businessman from

Israel, who maintained all business contacts in Israel - according to his words. She was born in Odessa, but lived several

years in Cuba: it is also an information to reflect.

3.12. It is too painful for me to believe that my lawyer did not remove two above-mentioned paragraphs that Mrs. Broder

inserted without our permission because he acted on purpose. I still want to trust him, and I prefer to think that he was tired,

and this was what caused his mistake. When he was finishing to fix "mistakes", distortions and non-authorized "adjustments",

which Mrs. Broder have did in her "translation", it was late at night, and both him, and me, especially, my mother, were tired,

and I did not check the translation properly. I also trusted him, and this is why I signed the new version without a proper

check. I also prefer to think that he did not let me verify translations of all the documents in my file before the hearings (I

asked him many times to give me documents of my file for a control) because he was constantly busy, and could not prepare

them to me. If he would give me that chance, I could discover before the hearings that Mrs. Broder falsified the translation

not only of our claim, but of all other documents as well (like my wife's certificate). I know that the immigration committee,

which gave no positive decision to "Russians" from Israel at all, would answer "no" even if there were no distortions in

translations at all.

3.13. Some sort of misunderstanding - I believe - happened between my lawyer and me, in result of which the most

important remarks about IRB's negative decision in our case were not submitted with the appeal. This is why I am asking you

to take this submission in consideration when decision in my appeal will be considered.

I submitt examples of Mrs. Broder's sabotage in Supplements, Documents # 92,93, 94, 95, 96, 97.

NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4]]]  PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT 3 of DOCUMENTS]]]

GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4     APRIL-MAY 1997

DOCUMENT 1 (2-nd version)

(Was submitted to Amnesty International via E-MAIL)

MY COPY OF APPEAL TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Why I appeal? 1) Because my complains, which I once submitted to Amnesty International from Israel, played if not the

main, a very important role during all the 3 immigration hearings in our case. 2) Because if not directly, then indirectly (from a

particular point of view) IRB members insinuated that I must be punished for my contacts with Amnesty International. 3)

Because what happened during my immigration hearing here in Montreal (Quebec, Canada) is so incredible and horrible that

will encourage human right violations everywhere on a wider scale. 4) Because in the former USSR as well as in Israel I was

a human rights activist and was considered a human rights activist by the people and press. 5) Because during the hearing the

immigration officer falsified Amnesty International's (and other human rights organizations') documents and lied about theM.. 6)

Because if a family comes to a country (which accepts refugees in general) but faces abuses, ungrounded accusations, threats,

hatred and injustice within an immigration court room - that means a mayhem for the human rights, placing the very basis of

human rights in jeopardy. 7) Because I'm absolutely certain (and I have presented undeniable evidences to the immigration

board) that I'm going to be killed and the members of my family are going to be killed if we will be turned back to Israel since

I could suggest that something like a death penalty was considered there against me for my views.

Why I Appeal Before I Have The Immigration Board's FI.l Decision In My Case? 1) Because I have to dispute the very

procedure of the hearing in our case, which abused us and placed our lives under the definite danger. 2) Because I know of

some examples when a fI.l negative decision was sent to refugee claimants together with a deportation order without the

rights to appeal. 3) Because after what happened during our immigration hearing I feel insecure even here. 4) Because it

looks like they violated some legal and moral norms while hearing our case not for giving us later a positive decision. 5)

Because now, when the information about us was submitted by the immigration officer to Israel there can be a wave of wider

pressure from Israel to turn us back. I was actually expelled from the former USSR, where I was persecuted for my artistic,

philosophical, ideological and political views, where I was beaten, prevented from social and professional success, watched

and threatened. I was deported to Israel. When we moved away from the USSR we tried to escape to a third country but

were captured by Israelis and were taken to Israel by force.

We were systematically assaulted, beaten, disgraced, threatened, discrimI.ted against (persecuted) in Israel. We were

denied a permission to leave the country, and could not go away for 3 1/2 years. We collected thousands of evidences in

discrimI.tion and persecutions. Israeli state radio made a provocation, aiming to elimI.te me, Israeli newspapers called to

destroy all my works - but for this immigration board it's still not "enough"...

*Why I Think My Human Rights Were Violated By the Court?

Inside The Courtroom: 1)Some of the main documentary proofs (statements, affidavits, letters, receipts, articles, etc.) have

been disappeared or were ignored as if they were (disappeared).See pages A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5. 1-a)Only my college

diploma was mentioned during immigration hearings, and the commissioners acted as if my university diploma does not exist.

In reality I mentioned it during the hearings and the copy of this diploma also was in my file. 2)Other extremely important

documents were mentioned but were ignored (if not - they might be an obstacle to what the judges incrimI.ted me). Pages

B-1,B-2,B-3,B-4.B-5. 3) Other documents were mentioned as incomplete proof of particular events, when in reality they

were given to support other events. In the same time documents which relate to these events were ignored. Pages C-1, C-2.

4) In the same way my words were ignored, too. For example, I was asked an insinuating question. My answer closed that

question by a clear and unbeatable contra-argument. So, what then? Then the same insinuation was repeated - but this time in

an affirmative form: As if I said nothing. The same question could be given 2, 3, 5 times non-stop. If I gave the same answer

again and again they shouted on me, used threats, aggression, incredible accusations to force me to change my answer. It's

clear that such a method violates moral and legal norms - and any hesitation by a refugee claimant under such an illegal

psychological pressure can not be taken into consideration. D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4. 5) Too often they questioned me giving me

no rights to response. They shouted me down replacing my eventual answer by their own - and later based their conclusions

not on my answer but on their own statement posing it as my - not their - words. E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4. 6) It was repeated

again and again that they doubt about our rights to appeal (for a refugee status) because our actions (when we were in Israel)

weren't a good solution. As examples of "good solutions" were mentioned: A demolition of our family, a crimI.l offense -

and so on! F-1, F-2. 7) Several times the board members expressed their disapproval by the norms of democracy or by my

approval of the democracy laws. G-1, G-2, G-3. It is absolutely clear that our case was treated not according to Canadians

laws but according to the rules and norms of Israel since - in the judges' eyes - we belong not to Canadian but to Israeli

jurisdiction. G-4, G-5, G-6. This position - neither being ordered to the board or being the product of the board itself - made

the courtroom a part of Israel's territory. G-7, G-8. 8)The procedure of our immigration hearing wasn't an investigation in our

case but a pure pro-Israel's propaganda. Its goal wasn't to detect whether or not our claim for refugee status is justified but to

defend the image of Israel as a "good" country in an imprudent and abusing forM.. The depersonalization of our claim was

done in an extreme form ignoring our personal history. So the only criteria chosen to support the board's point of view was

the very fact that we came from Israel. But the only admissible attitude to refugees has to base the decision on what

happened to them personally, not on which country they flied. H-1, H-2, H-3. 9)The members of the board expressed their

detestation of the human rights defense and verbally denied (directly or indirectly) a number of recognized human rights.I-1,

I-2, etc. 10)They also (indirectly, but clear) expressed a point that if I'll be punished in Israel for my views - it's justified

because I'm "guilty" J-1, J-2, etc. 11)Sending faxes to Israeli embassy and demanding some definite information about us, the

immigration officer violated another moral and judicial principle: Not to announce asylum seekers claim to the government of

a country refugee claimants escaped from .K-1, K-2, etc. 12)Reading Amnesty International's and other reports the

immigration officer distorted and sometimes falsified their meaning.L-1, L-2,ect. 13) Documents submitted by the Israeli

government, by it's dependents or by it's embassy were considered as absolutely reliable and were voluntarily represented by

the tribunal as non-debatable. In the same time documents that were represented by my lawyer (or my documents) -

newspapers, statements, declarations, and so on - weren't treated as equal to Israeli propaganda papers. More then that: At

least our documents were completely ignored: As if they never existed. In the same time the documentation presented by

Israeli government can't be treated as an arbitrary source: Because Israel is involved. Meanwhile a number of my documents

may be considered as more objective and independent. M-1,M-2, etc. 14) The immigration officer used 1) an open lie 2)

threats 3) desinformation; 4) expressed an unexplained malicious anger towards us; 5) claimed one thing to defend her

position during our hearing and claimed the contrary during the hearing in Metelnitsky family case (our cases are related, and I

was called as a witness to their hearing); 6) she lied about what I said, about what she previously said , about what was said

about the situation in Israel and so on; 7) her behavior towards us and Metelnitsky family was so incredibly aggressive as if

she had a personal reason to punish us, or to extermI.te us. N-1,N-2,etc. 15)A "yes" or "no" answer was demanded in

situations when it was clear that such an answer is absolutely impossible. Demanding "yes" or "no" answer only they justified

their decision not to let me speak.O-1,O-2, etc.

Outside The Courtroom: 1)When we came to Montreal I put everything that happened to us in Israel in writing and gave that

piece of paper to my first lawyer's translator, Mrs. Eleonora Broder. She sabotaged the translation distorting the sense of my

story, inserting her own inventions and sentences which sounded like provocation. I demanded a translation back to Russian

from her, and she did it. She wrote it by her own hand. That manuscript is quite different from her French version. So, she did

it to smoothen the distortions and to prevent me from complaining. I have also other proofs of her sabotage.2-A, 2-A1,

2-A2, etc. 2) Mrs.Eleonora Broder sabotaged the translations of newspaper's articles as well. From one hand she

exaggerated a number of descriptions of persecutions against Russian-speaking people "to do me a favor" (I think her goal

was to discredit these articles). But on the other hand she excluded the most important paragraphs in her translation and gave

the opposite meaning to the most important facts and conclusions.2-B, etc. 3) Mrs.Eleonora Broder also sabotaged the

translation of some official papers and other documents which I prepared to support my claiM.. She told us that she has

translated some of them and that she would find a translator from Hebrew - but it was a lie. If not our complains to the lawyer

and an alert note we gave to him: Then no documents were translated. 2-C,ect. 4)Mrs.Eleonora Broder and her assistant

organized a psychological warfare on my wife causing her deep depression, and also provoked us to attempt suicide.2-D,ect.

5) Mrs. Broder inserted some particular phrases into my refugee claim, which I didn't want to see there. Later, in the

courtroom, these phrases were used against me. These phrases were taken from articles, which I wrote before we escaped

from Israel. Among them were the articles, which I hadn't presented to Mrs.Broder or to my lawyer when she was doing the

translation of my refugee claiM.. The members of the immigration board have exploited these phrases again and again: What

leads to a suggestion that it might not happened occasionally.2-E, etc. 6) There is a visible connection between the

immigration officer - and information, which might possess only Mr.Mark Kotlarsky, who lives in Israel. This gentlemen acted

once as an informer and a provocateur for Israeli authorities. He wrote an article about me in 1994, in Israel. This article was

written in a humiliated and sarcastic manner. Mr.Kotlarsky used the information, which I shared with him (as with a close

friend of mine) against me. This article is outright slander, mystification, false insinuations and lie... Before I discovered that

Mark Kotlarsky might act as a government's agent I told him some things which I never told to any other person. During our

immigration hearing and during the hearing of family Metelnitzky these things were used by the immigration officer (against

me). I have no other explanation but that she's might be in a contact with Mr.Kotlarsky. 2-F, etc. 7) a) A campaign of lie and

slender against me inside Israel coincide with a number of actions against me in Montreal, which source might be the

consulate of Israel. If such things are happened - then Israel could eventually influence the immigration board decision in my

immigration case, too. b) Then, I know from reliable sources that the immigration officer, the member of the immigration

board in my case, is a Jew. I have nothing against her nationality. But, from the other hand, if the immigration officer is a Jew

and the patriot of Israel (the last is too clear), what an arbitrary role in our case she should play? She has no moral and - may

be - legal rights to judge in refugees' from Israel cases. 2-J, etc. 8)When we came to Montreal we gave my wife's birth

certificate and it's legal translation to our lawyer. Dispute the submission of that legal translation Mrs.Broder did her own

translation. Now we discovered that she sabotaged ("refused") to translate my wife's parents' nationality. There is a clear

connection between that sabotage and the immigration officer's tactics in that issue.

CONCLUSIONS: our 3 immigration hearings have nothing in common with any legal procedure. They rather remind of an

inquisition court or a secret political tribunal. This tribunal was arranged to punish me for my ideological views - not to decide

whether or not our (my family's and mine) claim for a refugee status is justified. It was used for the political purposes: To

"show" how just any information about human rights violations in Israel, which not concerns Arabs, can be calmed down -

and to express a huge pro-Israel propaganda. They made clear that they treat our escape from Israel as a mutiny and will

never admit the very fact that we are in Canada, in Quebec, not in Israel. Their words, their behavior - everything - was

meant to show us that we could only deserve to be treated according to the Canadian rules after getting a status in Canada.

Before that we don't deserve to be treated by Canadian rules. That's why we were treated according to the rules and norms

of Israel!!! It hard to find a more offensive ritual of humiliations over the juridical norms then that... It was absolutely clear for

the judges - as well as for ourselves - that we were severely persecuted in Israel, that all members of my family were severely

abused and that the definite casualties were inflicted to our health, including the children. It was also absolutely clear to the

judges that the deportation back to Israel is a death penalty for all members of our family. The tricky thing is that the

immigration board expressed almost no doubt about persecutions we survived in Israel or even recognized the harshness of

these persecutions.(2-J-4). But the point is that they claim ... we are guilty in the persecutions ourselves - and therefore they

don't worry about our souls and our lives... So, this is not even a tribunal, but a brutal act of a vengeance.

SUPPLEMENTS:

1.A LIST OF TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH OR FRENCH ARTICLES. 2.DOCUMENTS. 3.TAPES FROM THE

IMMIGRATION HEARINGS. 4.OTHER MATHERIAL PROOFS. 5.OTHER DOCUMENTS. SINCERELY YOURS,

Lev GUNIN

< e-mail address: leog@total.net

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 THREEUPDATE 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

COPY                                                             - DOCUMENT NUMBER THREE - To Immigration's Complaints Board  (faxes: (780) 632-8101  (514) 283-8237)  December 1 2000 From Lev GUNIN (514-499-1294) I disagree with the Immigration Medical Services decision "ev 7001-850497Z" (with date mentioned: November 23, 2000) from Ottawa, received by me on November 29, 2000 (anonymous - no name or signature). The goal of this ruling is not to establish the medical truth but to put a hardship on my family (and me).  My arguments.  (See the decision's text - as it was red to me by dr. Giannakis - in Document N4: on the bottom) 1. The decision ruled that Mr. Giannakis's respond should be submitted before November 30, 2000. Why then the letter arrived only on November 29? Does it mean that the date in the letter - "November 23" - was incorrect? Or the letter has not been sent in 2-3 days? Or - if it is known that a letter from Ottawa to Montreal goes 5-6 days - why then I was not given more time? I ask you to submit me an explanation what November 30 means and why not December 10 or January 15? I want to know how the agent justified that particular date. Was that small misconduct planned in advance?

2. The suggestion that somebody else went and did the x-ray instead of me was another serious assault. That suggestion was made in ignorance of the fact that on Clark Lab's official (origI.l!) paper IMS (Immigration Medical Service) officer could see my name, date of birth, telephone number, name of the ordering physician, and the number of my medical card (which - everybody knows - has my photo on it). Besides, it mentioned the "MILD PECTUS EXCAVATUM", a cosmetic defect, which I have since birth. Besides, it is known that the film itself has a negative image of the whole ID data! Then - this ungrounded abuse was based on nothing and went far beyond any medical or even legal matter.

3. The demand to send an origI.l film from the November 14 x-ray in the light of two above disputed demands might be ungrounded. This x-ray film was already seen by 3 medical doctors: the radiologist at the Clark Lab, dr. Jast (who referred me and evaluated the film), and dr. Giannakis. All three came to a conclusion that there is NOTHING abnormal, not a slightest possibility. Both dr. Jast and Giannakis also examined me. The official conclusion is NIL ACTIVE. Besides, it was informally evaluated by a chest specialist: with the same conclusion. What else the IMS agent needs? I have a well-grounded concern that 1) he/she will find a black spot even on the whitest paper - because he/she is determined to; and 2) after he/she will find "a black spot" the film will vanish, but not the IMS's "evaluation". Immigration pretended already many times (dates, documents might be provided) that lost our applications, medical data, etc.

4. It was an abuse to mention that "After overview if necessary applicant may have to be referred to the chest specialist." It is a prejudgment and prejudice. "...if necessary", "may" are just a forM.. It is a very clear message that he/she will not let me alone! Why to speak about next medical procedure before seeing the x-ray?

Lev GUNIN      Dec. 01 2000

Copy                        - DOCUMENT NUMBER FIVE - From Lev GUNIN ( 514-499-1294) Document 5 LETTER TO THE MONTREAL CHEST INSTITUTE                     - A Copy - (The letter was submitted on November 09 in respond to an anonymous letter from the Montreal Chest Institute received on November 6 2000; below you can find a modified version (November 12-14), which was submitted to the same destI.tion on November 15).  . Lev GUNIN address telephone From Lev GUNIN to anonymous person, author of the letter (the copy of the letter is enclosed). Montreal Chest Institute 3666 St-Urbain Montreal, QUEBEC  H2X 2P4 Sir or Lady! Please, forward this letter to an appropriate Immigration department, which you mentioned on page 1 of your letter. First of all, any suggestions that I could be infected by tuberculosis were ridiculous. I had some other suggestions, but later a medical doctor I spoke to - as well as my legal advisers - told me that the only answer of what happened is that Immigration might just make a false report on my x-ray. Besides, a x-ray could not determine whether or not any of such shadow means tuberculosis, or simply any kind of pneumonia, bronchitis, or a combI.tion (see medical books). Any conclusions based on only one x-ray are ridiculous, partial, and prejudicial. In modern time - when there are so many flu infections accompanied by pneumonic consequences (side effects) - such conclusions are a complete nonsense. It is obvious that your decision to attach me to the Infectious Disease Unit (IDU) before you have a 100 percent proof of any tuberculosis infection and initiate an appropriate legal procedure was a drastic misconduct. The only admissible way to handle the situation was (before sending me to the Infectious Disease Unit)

1) to request a second opinion in existing x-ray

2) to send me a letter for my physician for another x-ray.

On November 14 I did another x-ray. It revealed that there is no any suspicious shadow, no abnormalities - and (as my medical advisers told) could not be 2 weeks before, especially tuberculosis-like shadows. Was my x-ray photo (a negative) replaced by somebody else's or IMS (Immigration Medical Services) just falsified the reading of my x-rays, - I do not know. That all is a subject of a crimI.l investigation.

Because I am depressed, I did not notice that the Montreal Chest Institute (MCI) belongs to Royal Victoria Hospital, an institution I had several formal conflicts with. Somebody from the hospital's administration used to submit me an offensive number of requests for donation to the hospital even after I have sent a note that by then was on welfare. The hospital's administration also did an attempt to extort money from me for services, which were covered by Medicare. In that hospital I heard several times that people like me are "illegal in Canada and should not be given medical help "for the cost of Canadians". Then I was treated by negligence at the emergency room, then - it was a medical misconduct over my CSST claiM.. Dr. Evenson's M..D. (Royal Victoria) secretary played games with me, actually denying an appointment from May till November 2000. A number of legal and medical violations used to take place there. And in all such minor incidents immigration matters or even Immigration itself were involved. One of immigration specialists advised me not to turn to Royal Victoria because that hospital is "enormously influenced by Immigration".

The fact that a page with a request for a donation to the Royal Victoria Hospital was included into your letter was another outraged abuse.

Eventually it is possible that doctor Giannakis had sent me for x-ray not to "La Cite" - as my mom and my wife, - or another medical institution but to Montreal Chest Institute because he received an order (not a request but an order, which he could not disobey as an Immigration representative) from Immigration to do so.

By this letter I declare that I am considering your way of handling the situation dangerously offensive and depriving me of my constitutional rights because of the above mentioned as well as the next reasons:

FIRST, I will DISREGARD any anonymous letters like your present one until a letter from you would be signed, addressed from a real person with his/her clear name and telephone number.

SECOND, you have no legal rights to treat me as a contagious carrier until an undeniable medical proof is established.

THIRD, by sending me to the IDU you may expose me to contacts with real infected carriers.

FOURTH, you are not a police, Immigration, secret police or death squads to a) act secretly-anonymously refusing to sign your letter, b) to write me anything like "by Immigration law, you are requested (...)". Since you are not immigration layers or Immigration officials, you are forbidden to judge in a case like mine what Immigration law requires. Such a statement in a case like mine must be submitted only directly from Immigration. If you are part of Immigration (officially) - then my rights were violated when I wasn't informed about that before doing the x-ray at your unit.

FIFTH, my legal advisors, and me, we are confident that you have no legal rights to deprive me of choosing between medical institutions for medical tests or evaluation. You can not bring me to do a test or an evaluation exclusively in your institution by a forceful order. This will violate my basic human rigDocument 5hts. Even KGB had no official rights to oblige anybody who was not an imprisoned suspect or convinced crimI.l to do a medical evaluation without some sort of choice.

SIXTH, I would ask Immigration to allow me do another x-ray before doing anything else.

SEVENTH, evaluating my case, some human rights activists think that somebody at Immigration is so furious, so angry about me and that such an outraged misconduct was demonstrated in my case that Immigration is eventually ready to do any damage to my health through blood, e-ray tests or sadistic bureaucratic humiliations.

EIGHTH, I think that the most realistic explanations of an eventual abnormality, which could be seen on the x-ray picture, were:

1) eventual shadow from the underwear, which I did not remove from on beneath of the hospital robe, and the robe itself, which I've putted on in a wrong way

2) a dust spot or another kind of essence on the hospital robe

3) traces of somehow inhaled gas different from air

4) reading of a normal x-ray (with no abnormalities) was deliberately falsified by IMS

NINTH, before doing the e-ray I received a strange call from Immigration, through which I was accused of refusing a "medical treatment".

TENTH, your medical ethics should not allow you to send me to the IDU before making your own medical conclusions (decision) based not on Immigration's rapport but of your own evaluation of my x-ray test result.

ELEVENTH, my legal advisors have told me that I have rights to ask for a possibility to discuss my x-ray result with any of your medical institution specialists dedicated to such evaluations before going further. It is you (on behalf of Immigration or not - it is does not matter) who are sending me to Infectious Disease Unit. Because you are sending me to such a unit, you can not deny me such a discussion. I would like to see the x-ray origI.l, which was made in your institution on November 1 2000 - and also show Document 5it to my medical advisors.

TWELVETH, I prefer not to go through further tests or evaluations in immigration matters (for medical purposes - it's different) at your institution.

Yours truly,

Lev GUNIN

November 2000    Montreal

- Document Number Nine -  RESUME of my visit to Montreal Chest Institute on December 2 2000 OBJECT Of the Visit:  1) to receive an official result (medical resume-evaluation) of my x-ray test done on November 1 2000  2) find out where is the origI.l film and try to obtain it for making a copy REASONS:  November 23 2000. I have managed to find out who sent me the anonymous letter (described in Documents 5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6) from Montreal Chest Institute (MCI). It was M-me Lucy Gefroy (Jefroi or Joyfroid?). According to the same sources: she's never seen that x-ray. I left her my message on 849-5211 (ex 2166). She called me at 2.15 p.M.. anonymously ("private call" indication) - and asked me what I want. She confessed that she is M-me Lucy only when I told her that recognized her voice comparing it to her answering machine message. That only could tell about her insincerity and guilt. I spoke with her in French, but when I did not know some medical terminology in French, and used English, she pretended that does not speak English at all. However, when I switched to French again, she started to speak bad English, which I could not understand. It was difficult to get along with her, but fI.lly I convinced her to speak French again - and asked her a couple of questions.

Here they are:

- Did you see the x-ray?

- Yes, I did.

- What kind of a shadow did you see, mild? bright? what its form? On the right or left side?

- I can not tell you.

- Where is this x-ray film now?

- I can not tell you.

- Is it at MCI?

- Immigration took it from us, and, I think, it was lost.

- What do you mean - lost?

- Vanished somewhere at Immigration.

- Can I obtain the result?

- Listen, your case here is closed. You don't have to come here. Not any more. We disabled our previous letter's order. Bye.

She disconnected.

RESULTS of the visit.

At MCI's medical archive employers did not find any records about my x-ray in the computer. They told me that a mistake might occur - because if even I did the x-ray for Immigration, its data (result, date, etc.) since November 1 had to be entered into the registry.

Before I could enter room number 28 a small blond man appeared and approached me as in espionage novels (how could he react so quickly, who warned him during my descending from the second to the first floor?) "You will receive nothing here. And you will be prosecuted for refusing to see the doctor, - he shouted to me. "I was told that my x-ray has vanished, and came to check, and also to obtain the result". He became almost pale - so visually he was frightened, as if he lost a million of dollars. He disappeared behind the gray door and soon came out with an envelope (my name and photo on it) and signs of a deep relief. "Here it is, - he told. - You must visit a doctor because you have tuberculosis". "Are you confident about TB you mentioned?" - "Yes, I am". - "I was told that my case here is cancelled - and I don't have to appear". - "Nobody could tell you that. You will be prosecuted for your refusal!" - "Your conclusions about the x-ray was a mistake, Sir, and the film reveals a technical defect or a shadow of underwear, which I did not remove. Take a look - and let me see". - "It is possible. But the law says that you must see a doctor anyway, if even this is our mistake". - "What law, what paragraph? Then - I have a constitutional right to choose another institution, not yours, to pay such a visit". Then he started screaming on me: "You don't want to pay, ah? You don't want to donate to our hospital? You came to Canada and want to enjoy our good life without giving anything back? If you don't pay by your fucken money - you'll pay by your fucken ass!" - I tried to say "This is not only because of money, this is because I can not trust you!" but he kept screaming on me - and I left hiM.. Before I left the hospital I could find out that there is no official result in my case. No paper, no evaluation. Only a checkpoint on the envelope, in category "4". What if somebody just made a wrong hand movement - and checked a wrong place?

I did not go to MCI any more. Later I discovered through other ways that the category 4 means "pulmonary noodles", which was completely I.pplicable to me!

RESUME: Anyone can see that drastic misconduct toward me (or in general), and hatred towards me (or towards all immigration-seekers in general?) could explain what's going on in that institution and what happened around my x-ray.

REMARK: This is not a documentary story. To show the emotional impression I have distorted some small details. This is more like a literary piece. However, it is precise in revealing what we are dealing with. Also the words of Madam Lucy and Mister Doctor were cited with a precise accuracy.

Yours truly,

Lev GUNIN FOR QUEBEC's OMBUDSMAN     ==== POUR LE OMBUDSMAN DU QUEBEC (Protecteur des cytoienes) 1. English2. French 1.

Dear Sir! Lady!

I am an innocent person, who lived an honest, lawful and honorable life. I've always maintained my word and my professional, social and family duties.

Now I am an old person, I've lost my property, my younger son, and almost all my relatives. I have survived an escape from the German occupation, persecutions in the Stalin's era, and other persecutions, which I would like my judges, who turned down my refugee claim, to experience...  I should be left in peace, without pressure.   I suffered enough in my life.

However, somebody in Immigration thinks, that my extremely tragic life should be adjusted by a fI.l misery, a limbo situation - and again persecutions.  They decided to punish me for my refugee claiM..

When my refugee claim was refused, I appealed for humanitarian reasons, and soon met a person, whom I was glad to call my husband. He's a rare, intelligent, delightful person, who did my life a bit brighter.

However, during a marriage interview, an immigration agent, assigned to my file, did everything to ruin my health and by vicious illegal tricks took away years of my life. She - not a medical doctor - intervened into pure medical matters, and decided not to recognize my marriage "because of medical concerns". A false report of immigration MD about my health was used. Later the initial "decision" was replaced by a doubtful counter-decision, and since then (more then 3 years!) I am kept in a limbo, targeted by humiliation and abuse. In spite of clear evidences that Immigration's "medical concerns" were unjustified and of alternative medical opinions, they keeping me in a limbo, accompanied by forced "punitive" immigration procedures. Hundreds of people, who were in contact with my case, believed that my case is unusual, unfair and astonishing.

A usage of medical matters for persecutions is one of the most amoral things. The same dirty methods were used against my son, a human rights activist and author of few "unwelcome" books.

Some time ago I've turned to the Minister of Immigration. However, a response from the Minister was build on a persistent denial of my marital status, in many accents interpreting me as a humanitarian claimant, but not a wife of a Canadian citizen! Cynically a "ministerial permit" option was presented as a "solution of my problem".  Because after 70 years old age (time) is a factor, I suggest that in next 5, 10 or 20 years of waiting (no decision in my case) they could receive a proof that I am "sick" and even that I am mortal!

I think the reason, why it all happens to me, was expressed by deputy Mr. Cotler's (a famous Zionist) secretary. She told my son that claiming a refugee status from Israel was "against Canada" (because Israel = Canada?), and that a disagreement with Immigration means an "anti-Canadian position".

It is also unacceptable that all lawyers, to whom I've turned, refused to take my case: "a "mandamus" option + an Israel-related case is a bad case".

Because no other lawyer took my case, I'm turning to you, Sir or Lady, to enable my rights for a legal defense. Otherwise it'll be an ex-USSR's situation with no rights for legal defense.

Yours truly, Elisabetha GUNIN You can see the details of my case on Internet at

1) [http://www.total.net/~leog/Rights/LevGunin/Mother.txt]

(a copy of the letter to the Minister of Immigration)

2

Les gens, qui йtaient en rapport avec le cas de ma mиre, le considйraient  comme une des plus terribles violations des droits de l'homme. Il est significatif que les mкmes mйthodes d'exploiter des problиmes mйdicaux pour des persйcutions politiques vicieuses et sauvages йtaient employйes par l'Immigration dans mon propre cas. Les forces, responsables des persйcutions politiques contre ma mиre, veulent maintenant poser la responsabilitй sur les йpaules du gouvernement du Quйbec. Selon mes sources d'information, l'Immigration Fйdйrale veut initier une revendication au gouvernement du Quйbec а dйcider du destin de ma mиre. Autrement dit, а mettre pression sur le gouvernement du Quйbec а ne pas accepter ma mиre. En rйalitй, c`est l'Immigration Fйdйrale et son dйpartement des Services Mйdicaux d'Immigration sont  pleinement responsables des crimes si sйvиres  comme la dйstruction  consciente de la santй de ma mиre, la gardant dans un limbo, exploitant des problиmes mйdicaux pour des persйcutions politiques. Vous pourriez dйcouvrir presque tous les derniers dйveloppements dans la lettre de ma mиre au Premier ministre du Canada, que nous entourons.

Tous dйtails fondamentaux du cas de ma mиre:

1) [http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/Mother.txt]

2) а comparer mon cas avec le cas de ma mиre:

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/update.htm]

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/update2.htm]

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/update3.htm]

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/appealX.htm - le complete "GUNINS" cas] Salutations distinguйes,

Leon GUNIN

Vous pouvez me contacter: (514) 499-1294leog@total.net A Mme. Frances Hudon Szigeti

de fils de Mme. GUNIN (Epstein)

Ch?re Dame!

Les gens, qui ?taient en rapport avec le cas de ma m?re, le consid?raient  comme une des plus terribles violations des droits de l'homme. Il est significatif que les m?mes m?thodes d'exploiter des probl?mes m?dicaux pour des pers?cutions politiques vicieuses et sauvages ?taient employ?es par l'Immigration dans mon propre cas. Les forces, responsables des pers?cutions politiques contre ma m?re, veulent maintenant poser la responsabilit? sur les ?paules du gouvernement du Qu?bec. Selon mes sources d'information, l'Immigration F?d?rale veut initier une revendication au gouvernement du Qu?bec ? d?cider du destin de ma m?re. Autrement dit, ? mettre pression sur le gouvernement du Qu?bec ? ne pas accepter ma m?re. En r?alit?, c`est l'Immigration F?d?rale et son d?partement des Services M?dicaux d'Immigration sont  pleinement responsables des crimes si s?v?res  comme la d?struction  consciente de la sant? de ma m?re, la gardant dans un limbo, exploitant des probl?mes m?dicaux pour des pers?cutions politiques. Vous pourriez d?couvrir presque tous les derniers d?veloppements dans la lettre de ma m?re au Premier ministre du Canada, que nous entourons.

Tous d?tails fondamentaux du cas de ma m?re:

1) [http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/Mother.txt]

2) ? comparer mon cas avec le cas de ma m?re:

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/update.htm]

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/update2.htm]

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/update3.htm]

[http://www.total.net/~leog/Redressent/LevGunin/appealX.htm - le complete "GUNINS" cas] Salutations distingu?es,

Leon GUNIN

Vous pouvez me contacter:

[Tel] [Address] LIST OF EVENTS

1. 1991. Deportation of my son and his family from our native Belarus. I had no chance but to go with theM..

2. 1991. Warsaw. Here we were kidnapped by Israelis - and taken to Israel by force (instead of going to Germany - as we planned).

3. 1991 - 1994. Persecutions, batteries, discrimI.tion in Israel.

4. 1994. Coming to Canada (Quebec): applying for a refugee status.

3. 1997. Refugee status denied. An intervention of Israeli embassy - and the Jewish organizations took place.

4. 1998. A primary decision of the Federal court in our case was abolished after an intervention of the Jewish organizations and (personally) Mr. Rosenberg.

5. 1998. My humanitarian appeal.

6. 1998. I was married a Canadian citizen.

7. 1999. My humanitarian appeal was cancelled by Immigration without my participation "because of my marriage".

8. 1999. Marriage interview: my marriage was not recognized "because of the medical concerns". However, this decision was later replaced by another - unclear - document, which made impossible to appeal to the Federal court.

9. 2000 - 2001. Immigration"s "medical attack" against my son: medical data was falsified, attempts to treat my son from sickness he did not have, tool place.

10. 2000 - 2001. The same "medical attack" against me. I think that the real reasons behind it was my son"s criticism of the human rights" violations in Israel [http://www.total.net/~leog/Library/essays.htm] - and my former refugee claim against Israel. The usage of medical matters for political persecutions is the most tremendous outrage in the human rights field. I believe that Immigration"s Medical Services and other divisions were systematically damaging my health and my social / mental state on purpose. I suggest that I personally - and the Quebec as a province, where it took place - should be compensated for the damage it caused.

11. Immigration"s refusal to produce any decision in my case since the marriage interview in 1999. An open statement by Mr. Chiu, Immigration officer, that there will be no decision.

12. Minister"s of Immigration office (where I"ve appealed) was avoiding to treat me as a wife of a Canadian citizen. They suggested that I should go on Ministerial Permit, which is impossible because of my fI.ncial situation, and in principle.

13. Mr. Cotler"s (Federal deputy) secretary opinion that I "should be punish more" for my refugee claim against Israel.

14. Since 1994 I am still in a limbo. Help me!

P.S. In some letters from the Ministry of Immigration was mentioned indirectly that I was fI.lly considered as "medically ineligible". However, I never received an official and direct decision. Labeling me as "medically ineligible" was a crimI.l misconduct, and included falsification and misinterpretation of the medical data, deception and administrative mischief. For more details read Document 4.

Yours truly,

Elisabetha GUNIN

Next Document is a LIST of DOCUMENTS (presented documents with brief comments) DOCUMENT # 2

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

Remark: not all documents listed here were submitted. However, it is important to know what documents are available. If any of documents from the list is needed, it could be sent at any time.

1-5: Letter from Mrs. E. Epstein (GUNIN) to the Minister of Immigration

5-a: Letter from Mrs. GUNIN"s husband, Mr. I. Chmiel, to the Minister

6. Letter from Mrs. GUNIN to Mr. Chiu, Immigration Cansellor

6-a: Letter from Immigration with information about my file (spouse of a Canadian citizen) transfer to Montreal

(November, 1998)

7-a, 7-b, 7-c, 7-d: Decisions of Madame Roy:

7-a - November 11 1999, copy - to W. Brzezinska, M..D.

Mrs. Roy decided after interview not to grant Mrs. Epstein (GUNIN) (me) a landed immigrant status, not to allow me required by after-interview stage medical exams because I have already "passed them in November 1994" by MD Mrs. Brzezinska.

7-b - marked by the same date; modification of the document 7-a; still no sign of recognition of the marriage; said that Mrs. Roy and IMS department already made a prelimI.ry decision based on exclusively Mrs. Brzezinska"s medical testimony, without giving me any chance to present an alternative medical opinion (s)

7-c - marked by the same date but issued later: authorization to pass post-interview medical tests

7-d - marked by the same date but issues later: an "accepted" decision

8. A letter from the Medical Insurance: part of proof of the hardships, caused by inhuman approach to my case

8-b. Marriage Certificate

9-a, 9-b:

9-a: Illegal demand (in response to forwarded by me Immigration Canada"s demand) from Israeli consulate, which violates international norms

9-b: A certificate from the Consulate General of Israel in confirmation that I have been voluntary submitted them my Israeli passport without demanding another Israeli passport; it proves that I have no passport or a travel document at the present moment. My son, and his family, and me - we asked to cancel our Israeli citizenship.

10, 10-a, 10-b, 10-c, 10-d, 10-e: documents, which show that absolutely medical tools were also used by Immigration against my son. His x-ray was falsified, modified or replaced (etc.), and ungrounded diagnosis "tuberculosis" was issued based on this single x-ray. However, other exams and another x-ray (document # 23), made at an independent from Immigration laboratory, completely excluded that.

11. A receipt for a blood test, which my son never done, was issued to him in connection with immigration matters (other receipts for tests, which he never done, used to arrive as well)

12, 13: dangerous threatening games around my son"s medical exams for Immigration

14. Letter from Immigration from January 12 2000. In this letter was written that the results of the medical exams made by Dr. Giannakis were received in Immigration. However, IMS Immigration Department pretended that required additional information (tests). This was because the results of Dr. Giannakis"s medical resume about my health contradicted Mrs. Brzezinska"s insinuations.

15. Letter from IMS from June 30 2000. The content of the letter is similar to the previous letter (doc. 14)

15-b. Letter from IMS dated August 22 2000. The content of the letter is similar to the two previous letters (documents 14 and 15).

16. Letter from Immigration officer to my immigration MD (Dr. Giannakis) pretended that I refused to pass additional tests, which were demanded by Immigration, when in reality I already passed them by then, and the results were submitted

16-a. Letter from the same Immigration officer (see doc. 16) to me pretended that I refused to pass additional tests, which were demanded by Immigration, when in reality I already passed them by then, and the results were submitted. Comparing to the text of the similar letter to my immigration doctor (compare with the document 16) this letter was written in harsh words with affectation, which is a proof of a psychological pressure tactics

17. My response (dated September 20 2000) to the letter 16-a

18, 19, 20 - documents, which reveal IMS illegal methods to keep Mrs. GUNIN"s (my) son and his family in a limbo forever - as I am kept now (During one year ruling and forms for medical exams were refused for my son"s family members (he was told: only his wife must do them). Then in contradiction exams were ordered for his younger daughter and him (omitting his older daughter). When the last medical exams should supposed to be finished, the validity of his wife"s exams should expire (Doc. X2, 19, 20).  Such illegal tricks could keep them in a limbo forever.  My file was illegally attached to his to put us in dependence of each other"s situation (Doc. X1, 4). The same Mrs. W. Brzezinska made false reports about my son as well (tuberculosis, etc.)

21 - 25. Other document related to my son"s case to show similarity in our immigration cases

26. Letter from Immigration Counsellor Mr. Chiu dated December 04 2000, which said that I was found a danger to the Canadian public health system and that my application for permanent residence might be refused. The letter was advising me to send additional alternative opinions before February 04 2001

26-b. Another letter (called by Mr. Chiu "amended") from Immigration Counsellor Mr. Chiu dated February 26 2001, which was a copy of the previous (doc. 26) letter and advised me to obtain other medical opinions as if I never sent two alternative medical opinions to Immigration already by January 2001. (My response to Mr. Chiu is marked as document 6.)

26-c and 26-d. Letters from two medical doctors with strong disagreement with IMS" conclusions

26-e. Two post receipts in confirmation that the above mentioned two letters (documents 26-c and 26-d) were submitted to IMS in January 2001. (Also a header from the fax to Mr. Giannakis of the same two letters submission might be presented on demand)

26-f. A certificate from the English course, which I am attending: in confirmation that I live a socially active life

27. Call-in notice from Immigration Counsellor Mr. Chiu dated March 26 2001, which relates to my husband"s and my disagreement with the tactics of unnecessary calls to Immigration (see documents 1-5-a)

28. Letter from the Minister"s of Immigration office. A response from the Minister was build on a persistent denial of Mrs. GUNIN"s marital status, in many accents interpreting her as a humanitarian claimant, not a wife of a Canadian citizen! Cynically a "ministerial permit" option was presented as a "solution of her problem"

29. TermI.tion of the humanitarian program

30 (a,b,c,e). Documents related to medical insurance extension hardship for me

31. List of documents (the present document) From December to February, 2001 - 2002, next events happened.

In November and December, 2002, Immigration has submitted a new demand to find and submit them another alternative medical opinion. It was as if several medical letters never were already sent to them! We already had alternative opinions of Dr. Creelensten, Dr. Kesner - cardiologists, Dr. Giannakis, Immigration's assigned wide-profile medical doctor, Dr. Jast, my mother's second family doctor, and Dr. Yvan Rohan, her main "family doctor". All of them considered my mother's heart problems as minor and not demanding excessive medical care.

Iwent with her to Dr. Hyman Reisler, who examined her - and did not find any major heart probleM.. However, when my mother gave him the echocardiogram' result, he became thoughtful. My mother motivated the reason of her visit as next: Immigration claims that she has a grave heart problem, and, because she is hypochondriac, she can not live in peace until she'll find out, what is truly with her. Dr. Reisler was the first MD, who began to doubt the result of the echocardiogram, which Immigration ordered and my mother did at the New Brunswick Medical Center. He told us that the echocardiogram looks very suspicious. Besides the medical data, there were mistakes in the echocardiograM.. My mother's address was incorrect, the name of the doctor, who was doing the echocardiogram, was incorrect, and the name of the MD, who sent my mother to do the test, was incorrect. Name of a non-existing Peter Rohan was writen, when in reality my mother was referred by Dr. Giannakis, and even Dr. Yvon Rohan (with the same connotation in his name) wasn't by then her family doctor (so that the name "Rohan" appeared absolutely accidentally)!

However,wedecided not to redo the echocardiogram yet: who knows, what it could show after all these turmoil with Immigration, my mother's suffering, and her depression, caused by offensive Immigration's attitude. No one can really understand what my mother was going through. All inconveniences, the hardship and offensive, intimidating behavior of Immigration officials - was only a half of the probleM.. One of the most difficult psychologically tasks was the knowledge that an organization - a group of people - was constantly waiting for my mother's health deterioration. If somebody is constantly looking into your mouth while you eat - you then can not eat. If somebody is permanently waiting for you to develop a disease, to become sick, you really begin feeling sick. I remember that this kind of a psychological torture was mentioned in one of Eastern medieval tractates, I just don't remember its title. It was considered as one of the most vicious tortures.

Quebec Ombudsman was already involved in my mother's case, and it already attracted attention of many lawyers and public figures. When Dr. Kostiuk, whose opinion we decided to obtain, issued my mother another echocardiogram, we decided to go through it to see what is wrong with my mother's heart. The new echocardiogram was done at Montreal General Hospital, and we were told that the decoding will take from one to two weeks. I was astonished: because at New Brunswick Medical Center we obtained it (they handed it over to us) right away, immediately after doing the procedure. Next day I've picked up the phone and called New Brunswick Med Center. I was lucky that the secretary has agreed tp call the echocardiogram personnel. Speaking by a tone of a mighty business person or somebody powerful, I've claimed that I'm intended to go through an echocardiogram test, but I need to know how long the decoding will last. They told me that it normally takes from 5 to 7 days to proceed the decoding. I pretended to be surprised - and claimed that one of my friends has this test done - and received the result immediately, waiting less then ago 10 minutes. However, it was around one year ago. They told me that one year ago or more, - it does not matter. It is impossible now, and it WAS impossible. Well, maybe in some cases it could take from 2 to 3 days, but IT IS ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE to decode an echocardiogram having a result right away. So, I've understood that my mother's echocardiogram at New Brunswick Med Center WAS prepared in advance on illegal Immigration's request: a faked one, and that means that Immigration somehow managed to commit this crime.

Now, when I knew that Immigration have purposefully distorted results of two medical tests - my fluorography (x-ray), and my mother's echocardiogram - I've understood an obvious danger, which any visit to any medical doctor or med. laboratory, or another med. facility, can pose. Now I was aware that the authorities in Canada, whether acting on their own or on the Zionist extremists' behalf - could theoretically kill a dissident through a medical tool.

I have tired many times to receive my mother's full immigration case (file), and have submitted a proper request from my mother's name. However, I was refused with no explanations, why. Then we have turned to a public organization "Hirondelle", which takes care of the legal matters for people, who have no money to pay the lawyer. An employee of that body, Mrs. Lolita Kiselev, has submitted a proper request to Immigration to receive my mother's complete immigration file. She was refused as well. Then the Quebec Ombudsman's lawyer, Madame Maitre Scighetti, has submitted the same request, authorized by my moM.. She wasn't refused, but the Immigration was delaying the submission of the file. 2 months have past since her request - and the file was never sent.

We decided to hire a good lawyer, Maitre Doyon, and she has sent a similar request to Immigration. And again - Immigration was postponing the submission of my mother's file. However, Madame Doyon was more persistent. From some indirect sources (she never told it herself) I found out that she has turned to some important people stressing her astonishment about Immigration's unwill to send an ordI.ry immigration file of an old age person. It is possible that some deputies were involved. A possible scandal was forming little by little. We also could go to the Federal Court - with all related repercussions. Only then Immigration has submitted the file. However, it wasn't complete. Everything related to the medical concerns was confiscated from the file. It meant that Maitre Doyon could not defend my mother: since the whole case was based on the medical issues.

Only after a severe struggle we managed to receive my mother's immigration file. However, even by then it wasn't complete. The most important (from my point of view) documents were still missing. First of all, a rapport of the medical exam done by MD Mrs. Wanda BRZEZINSKA (an MD assigned for Immigration) in November, 1994, was still missing. Doctor BRZEZINSKA has examined my mother for Immigration and on Immigration's behalf. It was a routine exam, issued by the existing regulation for all refugee claimants arriving to Canada. Then my suggestion that it was Doctor Brzezinska's initial rapport, which generated a medical ground for Immigration's mockery on my mom, could find its proof. However, there are several indirect documentary leads to the missing Brzezinska's rapport, which may be insufficient for an eventual lawsuit against Mrs. Brzezinska, but are completely meanful in term to conclude that she was responsible for a false medical claim that a) my mother had a kidney abnormality, and b) that my mother had a grave heart disease, which will obviously lead to a heart surgery. Reporting to Immigration about my mother's "illnesses", she told nothing to my mother or to me, her son, and never sent my mother to a cardiologist or neurologist; she never sent my mother to undergo a cardiogram or an echocardiogram, never sent my mother for a strum creatinine blood test to check her kidney function, etc. By that Mrs. Brzezinska has purposely did a serious damage to my mother's health, social, administrative, fI.ncial, and psychological situation. She was deliberately avoiding sending my mother to medical specialists - because in favor of Immigration she was making Immigration's medical I.dmissibility claim unexpected for us - and therefore - prevented us from taking any legal and medical steps. Besides, other medical opinions could disagree with Mrs. Brzezinska and Immigration's evaluation (diagnosis).

Brzezinska's report on my mother's health was evaluated by two immigration medical doctors in Ottawa, at Immigration Medical Services department. Here is what known from the file. Immigration File Number -

7001-836625

CIC file number -

9518-3082-7317

Vegreville

Epstein Elisabeta

Date of Exam 1017 - 06 Dec. 1999

(I omit the diagnosis and formulas) THE APPLICANT IS DEEMED MEDICALLY I.DMISSIBLEUNDER SUBPARAGRAPH 19 (1) (a) (li) of the Immigration Act 26 Sept. 2000

J. Saint-Germain, MD

W. A. Waddell, FRCSC

On 05 / 13 / 2000 an Immigration officer in Montreal, Vivian Kirimkiroglou, sends an e-mail to Ann Hislop in Ottawa, to find out about the reasons behind the postponing of my mother's landing immigrant procedure by Ottawa. He's writing that my mother "was assessed M5 in 1995, and as of 29 - 12 - 99 registers that she has been furthered".

Anna Hislop responded that in spite that the applicant did "a new medical in December 1999", they have requested additional medical tests (based on their former approach towards the applicant).

No comments needed.....

Indirectly another person, Elenor Morgan, was involved in my mother's case. It seems that it was she behind the whole affair; it probably she pushed the trigger of my mother's persecutions. She was presented indirectly in a number of documents. Main of these documents are: doctor Giannakis' (whose role in my mother's case is still blurry: some documents of his reports about my mother's health situation are missed in the file; however, his initial medical rapport from December, 1999, was favorite to my mother) repport to Mrs. Morgan (09 / 26 / 2000), to fax number 613-946-0948 (which is in Ottawa), and Mr. St-Germain's rapport to the same Elinor Morgan, to the same fax.

Another strange document in the file is a rapport of a consultant, who was probably invited by Immigration to judge in my mother's case. This medical consultant's rapport was based not on my mother's real exam (the consultant never examined my mother), but on the medical documentation on my mom, provided by Immigration. There is only a non-readable signature; no name or academic rang of the consultant. So, he's fully anonymous (as the GESTAPO murderers). The consultation is dated by Aug. 4 2000 and marked as for EPSE 2553 2113

A radiologist, MD Francis M.. Boston, at La Cite medical center at Leo Pariseau, has intervened in the process of the medical tests, and (it wasn't required by the "regalement") wrote a statement about my mother's "serious cardiac condition", based on the x-ray done at La Cite. This comment was a pure volunteerial initiative, which looks as conspiracy between Immigration - and this MD.

Another document is the Immigration Medical Services' in Ottawa conclusion, based on an exam of my mother, done by Wanda Brzezinska. This document says the following:

"HEMATURIA - HYPERTENSION - CARDIOMEGALY

This 69 year old refugee claimant was noted on examI.tion to have cardiovascular and renal abnormalities.

The findings are such that a serious disorder which may be expected to cause excessive demand cannot be excluded at this time as the applicant has only been assessed under the medical provisions of Section 19 (1) (a) (f) of the Act (public health and safety).

Due to the presence of these abnormalities, the applicant should be informed to seel medical follow-up. A new medical is required if the Immigration status changed. Entered in FOSS

Feb 10 1995

Ottawa Doctors

S. Bertrand, MD

J. Beltran, MD, FRCPC"

There are well-grounded suspicions that the both names are anonymous. In the same time doctor Brzezinska never sent my mother to an cardiogram or a renal tests. If not from doctor Brzezinska, then how and where "Bertrand" and "Beltran" obtained the medical data and based their sinister "conclusion"?

However, an x-ray done at the Reddy Memorial Hospital for the same medical exam (Nov. 18 1994) - ordered by doctor Brzezinska, - said that "The cardiopericardial silhouette within normal limits... - Dr. Armanious".

Therefore, in 1994 Immigration had nothing in particular to support their claim about my mother's "medical I.dmissibility". She had by then a chronic hypertension, and a moderate atherosclerosis. She had no kidney abnormalities at all, and a specific heart augmentation was not a sign of a disease, but a non- pathological natural individual difference, which she had from birth. However, she had a cataract and glaucoma, but this could not become a bias for Immigration's medical assault. So, in 1994 she was relatively a healthy person for her age. Two things were needed to support her health: an honest medical assistance and non-stressful life. These were two things Immigration decided to deprive my mother from: as they wanted to torpid her landed immigrant claim, they have decided to achieve it by destroying her life and health....

Indeed, the "medical case" was invented by Immigration in 1994, when the law about medical I.dmissibility was not yet in motion! They needed it to backup their offence against our refugee claim! They wanted to secure their position in case if my mother will marry a Canadian citizen, or receive a positive response in humanitarian appeal. In violation of the law, a claim about my mother's medical I.dmissibility was missing in the file. It wasn't among documents, which were in disposition of our lawyers Maitre Le Brune and Maitre Beauchemin. Both of the lawyers gave me a full access to the immigration file: and I was carefully looking over Immigration medical records. The reason was that Immigration claimed that my wife Alla, and me - we both had tuberculosis! We were denied an employment authorization under a "medical excuse"; it was done to put more pressure on us - and topple our eventual future humanitarian case (which required an employment situation). Wanda Brzezinska claimed that she was "defending" us from Immigration; only in 2000 I have found records pointed at her as an initiator of this matter. That's why I was searching for my mother's immigration medical records. I felt that they might do something against my mother, my intuition was just crying about that. However, I found nothing - because the February 1995 S. Bertrand's and J. Beltran's insinuation was missing in the file!

In the same time doctor Brzezinska also said nothing about my mother's "heart and kidney abnormalities", while Immigration MS have undoubtfully based this "diagnosis"on Brzezinska's "conclusions".

In violation of the law, in violation of my mother's human rights, they kept their medical insinuation in secret from us, and our lawyers, which was already a vicious crime.

However, the whole sequence of events shows that the Immigration and her medical doctors were deliberately destroying my mother's health, in other words, they were gradually killing her - to refuse her the landed immigrant status by any means!

First of all, doctor Brzezinska gave no medical treatment to my mother. At Immigration they wrote by big letters HEMATURIA - HYPERTENSION - CARDIOMEGALY - but Wanda did not provide my mother by any treatment for exception of the blood pressure regulating pills. My mother was systematically asking Wanda Brzezinska to send her to a cardiologist (to find a proper treatment for her atherosclerosis) and neurologist (to see, what is the best treatment for her hypertension and prevention of an eventual stroke (in the future). And Wanda was constantly denying her a reference to specialists. She was denying it because of two reasons: 1) a conclusion of a cardiologist or / and neurologist could confront doctor Brzezinska's and the medical doctors' in Ottawa medical insinuations, and 2) she and her superiors in Ottawa have decided to destroy my mother's health by any means....

If my mother was by then treated at least by aspirin, or by some other medications, was advised a proper diet, and a proper kind of exercises, etc. - was sent to a cardiologist and neurologist - it could prevent some deterioration in her health in 1995 - 1999. Wanda has also denied my mother an anti-flu vaccine, which could prevent her exposure to viruses with all the consequences (complications) for my mother's health. However, Wanda's real goal was to destroy my mother's health as much as possible.

A sinister personality of my mother's cousin (her mother's brother's daughter), Sonia (Sony) Kisin (Sony's daughter Lucy was also involved) was also behind this sequence of tragic events. Sony was a "brain center" behind innumerous scam and cheating affairs. She was connected with many godfathers of Russian and international Mafia, and her brain was always playing a number of crimI.l, fI.ncial, and "political" combI.tions. A daughter of a big-scale combI.tor, vice-commissioner of the intendment material part of the Leningrad front, connected with Mafia, and a wife of another big-scale combI.tor, Leonid Fishman, one of the most successful underground enterprisers in ex-USSR, who was always thinking about deals, combI.tions, and cheating. And she hated us: my grandmother, her husband, my mother, and me.

Wanda Brzezinska was not just her family doctor, but her close friend. And it was Sony and Lucy, who referred us to doctor Brzezinska. (Attempts to destroy our refugee case by Lucy and her friend - by then a translator for Maitre Le Brune, - were already described in other chapters of our immigration drama).

Only years later I understood that a surgery, done by doctor Waldron, an ophthalmologist, who worked with Wanda Brzezinska, could be connected to Immigration's conspiracy against my mother. The surgery was done at Montreal General Hospital. When we arrived, doctor Waldron was with a nurse; he prepared my mother to the surgery, and told me to go out. So, I've waited outside. Later my mother told me that the nurse, who was in the beginning with Mr. Waldron, wasn't his assistant. As soon as I left, she disappeared. He did the surgery alone, and nobody assisted hiM.. He claimed that he did the anesthesiology, but my mother told me later that during the surgery she was suffering from tremendous pain. She cried, and she felt like she was going to die from this unbelievable pain. When she tried to explain to doctor Waldron that she's suffering from unlimited pain, he became angry, and said that she's exaggerating. However, I know that my mother is extremely patient. She complains only when there is really something unusual. When I tried to find out, what happened during the surgery, doctor Waldron became angry and started to shout on me.

Now I suspect more and more that he could act on behalf of Immigration, and by refusing to do a proper anesthesiology attempted to damage my mother's heart. I suspect also that after this surgery my mother suffered from some heart pains and other complications.

Another method to damage my mother's health was to keep her constantly under a stress. Madame Roi, Mr. Chiu, and other Immigration officers, who were assigned to my mother's file, systematically assaulted her, shouted on her, submitted aggressive, intimidating letters, committed unlawful, outraged acts to irritate us and to cause damage to my mother's health. This all already was described in different chapters of our immigration drama.

Immigration's tactics was to wast time "infinity" - until my mother will develop any illness because of her old age. (Nobody lives more then 80 - 90 years). I believe that they could sabotage my mother's landed immigration procedure for another 10 years, if we would not hire such a good lawyer as Maitre Doyon! Like vultures, like carnage creatures they were waiting for my mother's death. My mother could not be indifferent towards this cruel watch of Immigration officials, she always felt that they were monitoring time of her life, she always was under the pressure.

Methods and tricks, employed by Immigration against my mother, fully correspond and match methods, which they used against me: falsifying my x-ray result, sending me to a forcible anti-tuberculosis treatment without any proof that this diagnosis corresponds to me, etc.

Soon after my mother did a new echocardiogram, and its result has confronted the result of the previous one, it became clear that Immigration somehow used a fake echocardiogram to assume a false result. After new conclusions of medical doctors, cardiologists - Dr. Kostiuk, Dr. Creelensten, Dr. Reisler, and Dr. Kesner, as well as new statements of Dr. Jast, Dr. Rohan and Dr. Giannakis (all contradicted the "conclusions" of Immigration), and after our new lawyer's, Madame Doyon, sharp declaration - an Immigration officer, Madame Cauchesne, called Mrs. Doyon. She told her that there is no need to go public (this is what Madame Doyon was planning) or to appeal to the Federal Court (another option) because Immigration's claim of my mother's medical I.dmissibility was withdrawn now.

However, it was just a verbal declaration....

Me, and Maitre Doyon - we demanded a confirmation (in writing) that my mother's "medical case" is closed. Mrs. Doyon received such a document only in February, 2002, and warned me that now Immigration can stalk the proceeding of my mother's papers under various excuses for many months - until fI.lly her landed immigrant papers would be issued. She sent the above mentioned letter to us, but we never received it.

However, we have received another letter from Immigration, saying that my mother's file have benn fI.lized...

Our fI.l victory however did not mean that Immigration and the powerful people who stand behind it, just gave up, and now will undertake no steps to kill my mother and me. In January, 2002, my mother's purse with all her documents and with 200 dollars inside was stolen in the bus number 165. My wife and my daughters were in the bus with my mother, and they all were absolutely sure that the purse was stolen by a small young man, who looked and behave as an Israeli. I see here a connection with the fI.lizing of my mother's immigration case. In police, when we told that the eventual thief was looking as an Israeli, the policeman wrote "Arab" instead!

Of course, my mother was distressed by this event; nothing like that ever happened to her. We had to appeal for a new social security number for her, a new medical card, etc.

In February my mother's health has suddenly worsen. Her high blood pressure (hypertension) was sometimes out of control, reaching 180 or 190; her insomnia has deepen, and her legs became more painful because of the problem with the blood vessel systeM.. In the same time she've lost contact with both doctor Jast and doctor Yvon Rohan, her family doctors. She felt like they stopped to respond to her medical complains and symptoms. She was expecting that Rohan should send her to a neurologist and cardiologist, but he told her to wait a bit - because he was already sending her to so many specialists in connection with her immigration case, and now he can not.

In January, 2002, strange e-mails started to arrive to me from Israel. Their context was always the same: -----------------------------

Subject:

Be well

Resent-Date:

Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:51:50 +0300

Date:

Mon, 20 Jan 2000 12:21:30 +0400

From:

"=?ISO-8859-8?Q?=F8=E9=F7=E9?="

To:

leog@total.net

if social hardship does not warn you microbiology will be next

------------------------------

I've received around 6 of such e-mails, with confused dates (August, January, September, etc.)

In February Israeli most extremist right-wing party "Moledet" has criticized my essays on Israel, and the journalist of their official press organ - "Moledet" - wrote in his article on me that "if we were MOSSAD, we would put attention towards Lev Gunin's activity long before". Something like this.

Computer viruses attacks on my computer from Israel became almost an everyday picture. My friends' e-mail boxes were also used to attack my computer: like this one - Subject:Re: более полный вариант повести

Date:

Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:33:52 +0300

From:

"Faray Leonidov" <_faray@mail.ru>

To:

leog@total.net Part 1.2

Name:

Sorry_about_yesterday.MP3.pif

Type:

WAV (audio/x-wav)

Encoding:

base64 Then I became sick. The virus has manifested itself only in sniffing, but it was tormenting and painful. Then I started to have a migraine, then to urI.te every hour. Then pain in the kidney area appeared. There were other symptoms, which forced me to turn to a specialist. I went to an urologist, at St-Luc hospital. A urine test and a microbiological test were done. However, nothing was found. It was amazing! I suspect that the tests were falsified. Later I had pains in the kidney. But by then I've already started to treat myself, and it helped. However, I don't know, what it was. And this is frightening....

A bit later, January 21 2002, another strange event has happened to me. I've sprained my finger. I was just standing in my kitchen, when I felt a sudden pain, and understood that something is wrong with my finger. When I came to doctor Jast, he told me that this is like somebody has twisted my finger. I had pain in my finger 2 weeks, and till now I don't know, what happened. I even thought about an esotherical attack.

Exactly when I had this sprain, a suspicious ad about post-traumatic services to treat bones and ligaments, came to me via e-mail.

In February strange red marks appeared on my mother's skin around her neck. They became extremely big and looked like chancres. She went to Dr. Jast and Dr. Rohan, but they did not arranged a consultation with a dermatologist or an allergologist. She also had tremendous pains in her eyes, and felt like her eyes are burning. She even went to emergency, but there was advised to visit her ophthalmologist. She went to two ophthalmologists, but we had an impression that they did not have a serious attitude to her complains. Her eye drops were changed giving no relief.

From September to December Simcha, my mother's husband, fell two times in the street, and was injured. The second time he broke his nose. By nature of his injuries I've concluded that he did not fell but was beaten. At least, it looked like that. Since then he became more and more aggressive, and his aggressiveness often broke against my mother. He shouted on her, made aggressive gestures, even tumbled the chairs.

In the same time another problem - with my mother's new social insurance number - took place. They had to submit her a new one in 3 weeks, but more then a month has passed, and they didn't. I began to call them, and received a respond that they can not tell me, why a new SIN wasn't sent yet, but I have to call Immigration - "because they know". I called Immigration on February 25, at 10.00, and spoke with an ordI.ry employer-operator. She told me that does not see in my mother's file that anything has changed in her situation, and that a mark of her I.dmissibility is still there. Then another person, an aggressive male, took over. He started to shout on me and to accuse me. In an offensive tone he claimed that the landed immigrant papers will be never issued for my mother "until she's alive", and that we (my mother and me) are responsible for it.

My first intention was not to tell anything to my mother. Unfortunately, when she came to us on Sunday, Feb. 27, she began to provoke me to tell her. She accused me saying that I am not calling Immigration, ans so on.

This day I felt a strange pity to my mother, like if I'm seeing her the last time. I felt something, some fear, which I could not associate with anything in particular. So, when I was providing my mother to the bus, I've told her about my conversation with Immigration.

She became very worried; I don't remember her in such an irritated, distressed state. In the same moment the wind has turned her umbrella inside out, and she was very frighten. I was more worried, and wanted to accompany her to her home, but could not. My neighbor and friend, Errol Babwah, has asked me to help him to fix his computer, and it was urgent. I have a lot of sympathy to him, and also I owe him a lot. In all cases of emergencies like illness, my computer problems, moving furniture, etc. - he was trouble-free - and always helped and offered his car to give us a lift in cases of any trouble. I also like to speak to him and enjoy his company. So, I've returned home and went to Errol's apartment.

By Errol I've quickly found out that the CD drive, which he bought, was detective. However, he did not trust completely my conclusions, and we ran new and new tests one after another one.

My mother called my family, and told that she came home. I did not speak to her - because I was by Errol.

At night I've seen a nightmare, which involved a "science fiction movie" about persecution of a dissident (me?). He (or I?) was hiding within something that probably was a sort of a transportation station. Then he was hiding among strange cisterns and other things. However, t h e y used a smart navigation device - and managed to kill him (me?). In the same moment a strange replacement occurred. The dissident was again alive, but his mother was ill (or dead), lying on the floor instead of hiM..

Then a telephone call has waken me up. It was Errol, who asked me to go with him to the store to replace the CD drive. Because he was in a hurry, I had no time to call my mother. They gave us a computer, a mouse, a keyboard - everything, and told to test the drive. It was really defective. Then I found a professional and super good computer monitor for Errol , which he managed to buy for only 80 dollars. He was happy when we came home.

When I have entered my apartment, M... told me that the grandmother has called and asked me to call her. I've immediately dialed my mother, and she told me that she has a paresis on her face. I took my daughters - and we left instantly.

We found out that on Sunday, when my mother has returned home after visiting us, Simcha made a scene. He shouted on my mother, threatened her, demanded, why she was absent so long....The same evening my mother felt unusual. When she was brushing and washing her teeth, she felt like her left eye is squeezing. She felt also like pricking. However, she did not understand, what happens to her - and did not alarM..

At night she felt some dizziness, but it might be a kind of dizziness, which she often has "because of her insomnia". Only in the morning, when she looked at herself in the mirror, she noticed that one half of her face has been asymmetrically de-placed. However, she thought that this might be an inflammation of the facial nerve.

Even when we came, Simcha was aggressive, and tried to object our arrival saying "why did you have to come? what happened?" - and later said that there is no need to go to the hospital; we have to book an appointment with a family doctor. Well, he's not educated, and non-educated people have a tendency to think that they know everything better then all others, and to reject complicated for them schemas as "fantasies".

In last 2 months I heard from many anti-Zionist dissidents about accidents with their close relatives. One of them even told me (after listening to my story) that my mother became sick actually now, in the time of Israeli major offence against Palestinian people and against freedom-minded people around the world, not occasionally..... He was also suspicious about the fact that my mother's illness coincided with this interview in Immigration, and happened just 2 weeks before it.

I've begged my mother not to go to the Jewish General Hospital. I was intended to transport her to the Montreal General Hospital. Unfortunately, she was stubborn in her decision to go to the Jewish General. What could I do? WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MONTREAL JEWISH GENERAL HOSPITAL IN BRIEF

My mother, who during 3 years was persecuted by the Medical Department of the Federal Immigration, was admitted to the Jewish General in March 2002. She went to this hospital against my advice. I've advised her not to go to this hospital: because I had a well-grounded impression that behind GESTAPO-style actions of Immigration Medical Services were very powerful in Canada Jewish Zionist extremists' circles. "Punishing" my mother they wanted to punish me for my criticism of the human rights situation in Israel.

Unfortunately, often my mom did not listen to advice: in a number of cases she went against our immigration lawyers - and mine advises.

From the 1-st day of her admission Jewish General Hospital's administration has initiated and triggered an unprovoked, senseless conflict over a telephone in my mother's rooM.. This incident was pushing my mother, who was suffering from a stroke or another severe physiological disorder, to a permanent stressful situation.

Doctor Cohen (a neurologist at Pavilion "C", Post-stroke Unit, Floor 4) was hostile and aggressive since her first visit to my mother's hospital rooM.. She refused to explain, how serious my mother's condition was, what's the prognosis, how long my mother has to stay in the hospital, and whether or not the diagnosis "stroke" was confirmed. After her first visit she refused to speak to us at all. When I used to say "hallo" to her, she did not responded.

Her conduct with my wife, my stepfather, and me was abusive and racist. She openly expressed her detestable attitude towards people from the Slavic countries, like Russia, Poland, Belarus and Ukraine. In her single racist remark she has mentioned only Russians, but her behavior clearly demonstrated that she detest all people from the world of Slaves.

In the presence of my stepfather and another patient, and her daughter, and in front of my mother (a post-stroke patient, for whom any stress is life-threatening) doctor Cohen was shouting at me and cried out that she's going to call police: without any gesture, or word, or action from my side.

Doctor Cohen has provided my mother with a commonly known post-stroke medication, without going into my mother's individual condition.

She refused to analyze, what reasons led to my mother's present medical state, or evaluate some unusual symptoms like red chancres on my mother's neck, yellow spots on my mother's back, etc. My mother's skin was burning, and she suffered from it hardly. When my mother complained that she's suffering from a tremendous pain in her eyes and left cheek (and dental areas), doctor Cohen ignored it claiming that these are usual post-stroke pains. (Later we found out that they were not stroke-related.

For more then 6 days my mother was left with abnormal pain, and only Tylenol was given to her for reducing the pain. When my mother's eye drops have been finished, a prescription was not renewed, and she was 4 days without the drops. We managed to obtain the drops from outside the hospital, otherwise my mother would have no drops at all! The eye drops are extremely essential for her: because it is a way to control the internal eye blood pressure.

We were promised consultations with a dentist, ophthalmologist, dermatologist and endocrinologist, but doctor Cohen lied about sending these request. As I found out later - no requests were done: until I personally went to other departments of the hospital.

Because it was clear that something very outrage is going on in the hospital, I asked Mrs. Brown, hospital's ombudsman, for help in transferring my mother to another hospital. She said that it is possible, and went to my mother asking her if she agrees. Unfortunately, my mother said that she wants to stay....

Another disagreement happened between me - and my mother over the issue of MRI scan. I was categorically against it, and my mother at first did not sign a required allowance to do this scan. However, when the hospital staff came with the same paper in my absence, my mother has signed it. I have information that not only my mother's brain was scanned but also her whole body. When the scan results were already available in the hospital's computer system, doctor Cohen lied to my wife that the readings of the scan are not yet ready. Later not just the results of the scan but the record that my mother had this procedure have disappeared from the hospital's computer systeM.. At Radiology, at Information, at Emergency, at Medical Records etc. people could not see them through the hospital's computer. Doctor Cohen never responded to demands to tell, what did the scan show. Only on the day when my mother was released from the hospital, she told that the white brain essence is damaged, and that the cortex is suffering from a damage. However, there were just common words - because without any reference to the scan we know that in patients with hemiparesis normally the cortex is involved. No paper or summary of the MRI scan was provided for us.

According to my opinion, my mother's condition has suddenly became worse in next 24 hours after the MRI scan, and since then did not improve.

On Sunday, (March 17) doctor Cohen was refusing to speak to my wife and answer her questions about the MRI scan and how long my mother must stay in the hospital. However, after my wife began to insist, and a conflict situation has formed, she told my wife that my mother would be released from the hospital on March 19, at 10.00. All nurses, the whole medical staff knew about this decision. Doctor Cohen never told that it should be a release under some conditions.

On March 18 my mother's husband received a call from Immigration. A female voice was asking to speak to Elisabetha EPSTEIN (GUNIN). According to my mother's husband, he did not tell that my mother was in the hospital. He only told that "she's not home". About the same time (11.30) they called me. A woman asked me if my mother will appear at the interview at Immigration. "Because she's in the hospital now, we afraid that she can not come - and we'll delay the interview for 6 months, - she told. I said in response that only my mother can know if she will appear at the interview, and that they have no legal ground to cancel the interview.

On March 19 a dentist found out that my mother's pain at her cheek was not a post-stroke pain: as I suggested before.....

On the same day, March 19, around 10.00 my mother was completely dressed - and ready to go. However, doctor Cohen has ordered us to wait. She claimed that "not all papers are ready". Then she tried to involve another person (Nadege, who was asking my mother if she can put on the bandage on her left eye for nighttime). We understood that doctor Cohen wants just to win time. Later doctor Cohen has changed an excuse to keep my mother longer at the hospital, and said that an endocrinologist must see my mother at 2 - because the level of cholesterol in my mother's blood is too high, she claimed. However, as we suspected, nobody came at 2 (and - as I think - did not have to come).

Then my mother went out asking me not to follow her (she was tired, and wanted to walk a bit). After several minutes I was also out of the room looking for her. I've found her standing near the desk, where she was asked to sign a paper that she went out from the hospital against the medical advise, and responsible for the consequences. I was near to stop my mother to sign this paper, but doctor Cohen then said that if my mother will not sign this paper - she will not be allowed to go out from the hospital, and will not be able to appear at the interview at Immigration. Doctor Cohen pretended that I told her about Immigration, but I didn't.

They wanted to force my mother to sign another paper saying that if she leaves now - she has to pay for all future medical services herself - until she returns to the Jewish General Hospital, but I said categorically that my mother is not going to sign this paper.

My mother was released without any document that she was in the hospital, without any medications, and even the prescription was given her after a brief fight. However, the dosage in the prescription was for some drugs incorrect, for others - skipped.

As soon as my mother found herself at home her pain have immediately decreased. However, comparing to the day of her admission to the hospital, her condition has been worsen. She could not stay at home in such a condition, and, after receiving the landed immigrant papers, made an appointment to a doctor, whom she has already visited before. He told me that without a formal paper from the Jewish General Hospital we can not do anything. He said that my mother can not be treated, admitted to another hospital, have other tests - nothing!

On the 21-st of March, at 11.00, I went to the Admission Office of the Jewish General Hospital trying to obtain the official discharge from the hospital paper. I was refused with no explanation!

After taking my mother to the doctor, my daughter M... went with an official request from this doctor to the Jewish General Hospital, and was told that they will submit an answer for this request in 10 days!

They knew pretty good that in 10 days my mother can die without medical help!!!!

Now the last doubts have been disappeared:

BEHIND GESTAPO-STYLE PERSECUTIONS OF MY MOTHER (BY THE FEDERAL IMMIGRATION) WERE THE ZIONIST CIRCLES!

TREATMENT, TESTS AND PROCEDURES:

4-th of March 2002 CT scan at Emergency (Jewish General Hospital) Diagnosis "stroke" is under the question. Dropper was installed.

IN POST-STROKE UNIT:

March 4 - 5 2000 Dropper with an unknown substance. Doctor Cohen cancels the dropper 34 - 40 after the admission.

Later: Medication: Atenolol, Hyazaar, Plavics, Norvask (this one - only in the last days in the hospital), Tylenol.

SYMPTOMS: Facial hemiparesis, that's all. Nurses carefully examined my mother in front of me; she had no symptoms, associated with the stroke. She could beg her neck close to her chest. She could get up her legs while sitting, and move her foots in all direction. No reflex was affected. She could follow an object by her eyes. She could point her nose precisely with her finger. Etc.

Nothing was matching the stroke.

However, she suffers from tremendous pain, which disappeared as soon as she leaves the hospital on March 19.

Her blood pressure immediately stabilized after she left the hospital - and became around 140 to 80 - 90 with only 1 - 1 and a half 50 ml Atenolol's tablets and 1 tablet of Hyzaar.

BLOOD PRESSURE The overage - 170 x 80 (90). 7 or 9 times in 2 weeks her blood pressure was 140 or 130 to 70 - 90. Hovewer, doctor Cohen deliberately distorts the measurements ("law" heart rate), and decreases Atenolol.

Her blood pressure immediately stabilized after she left the hospital - and became around 140 to 80 - 90 with only 1 - 1 and a half 50 ml Atenolol's tablets and 1 tablet of Hyzaar.

TESTS AND PROCEDURES March 4 - CT scan March 7 - echocardiogram March 14 - MRI March 15 and 19 - dentist's consultation Routine - blood tests

Written on March 22, 2002

P.S. A full detailed chronological description below

WIDER DESCRIPTION OF WHAT HAPPENED

As I've expected, troubles with the Jewish General began right away. The telephone near my mother's bed was not functioning. No dial tone, nothing. Normally telephones in Montreal hospitals work fine. This is only one thing that still works fine. I spoke to many people from the hospital staff - and they did not remember something like that. I've understood that the telephone was disconnected on purpose.

My mother was placed in the hospital on the 4-th of March. The next day a woman came to my mother from the hospital's Admission Department - and forced my mother to sign a document "that the telephone in the room is not working". However, it could be not what the woman claimed it was - but just anything else!

The next day a bill for paying for the telephone in my mother's room has arrived. It said that my mother has to pay starting from the 4-th of March. on the 7-th of March I made a copy of this bill and obtained a certified statement from my mother's hospital department's intendant that the telephone was not working from the 4-th of March. I also wrote next declaration: "From Elisabetha EPSTEIN

an after-stroke patient

at pavilion "C", 4-th floor,

room # 483

Home address:

5757 Lemieux, apt. 115,

Montreal, QUEBEC

H3W 3H1 TO THE GENERAL JEWISH HOSPITAL's ADMINISTRATION

I, Elisabetha EPSTEIN, have never used the telephone near my bed at the hospital room I'm in. Since my arrival to the room 483, floor 4, pavilion "C", on March 5, 2002, the telephone, installed near my bed, has never functioned. There is no dial tone, no calls can be sent from or received to this telephone.

My son, his wife, their children, and my husband have informed the medical department's staff immediately about this probleM.. Besides, my son went to the Admission room to report this problem there. A "0" was dialed from another telephone at my department, and the operator was informed that the telephone is not functioning.

However, today, 7-th of March 2002, I've received a telephone bill if I was using the phone.

I ask you to cancel this bill and submit me a reassurance that I'll not be forced to pay for the telephone, which is not working.

I must also inform you that I have no income - I am not receiving welfare, pension, nothing. My husband, Simcha (Israel) CHMIEL, is sponsoring me. However, he's not receiving a retirement pension, but he's on welfare. I have no relatives, only a son, and he's presently unemployed, and receives no unemployment or welfare. All of us - we have no assets, savings or any other property or money.

Any unfair billing will father exaggerate our already tragic health and social situation. Yours truly,Elisabetha EPSTEIN А сору of the above mentioned bill is attached"

At the billing office as well as at the Admission Department they refused to admit my declaration. I also had a 20-dollars bill with me - and said that I would like to make a deposit. However, the employer at the billing wicket refused to issue a bill or a receipt that I made a deposit. He told me that first the telephone must be repaired. However, he did not tell me where to turn to make the telephone working. I've found it out myself, calling the operator. Next day, on the 8-th of March, the telephone was repaired, and my mother could make and receive calls. I went to the Admission Department - and demanded to issue a right bill, starting from the day, when the telephone would work.

However, at the same day, the 8-th of March, 20.00, incoming calls have stopped to arrive to my mother's telephone at the hospital. When I called the operator, dialing "0", I was abused by her tone, and she also refused to admit that the telephone was disconnected from the outside calls, and said instead that "the line is busy". When I called next day, the operator has started barking at me: an incredible behavior! I have no idea, how she knew that it was me: I dialed "0" before calling the hospital.

The same day, 8-th of March, the same woman came to my mother from the Admission Department, and again in my absence. She presented my mother a bill and the document that my mother was forced to sign - and demanded to pay for the telephone starting from the 4-th of March. When I came to the hospital I went to the Admission Department and demanded to explain, what is going on. They told me that nobody from them went to my mother and forced her to sign anything. They said that only the person in the accounting (billing) wicket is responsible for that. However, he also denied that anybody from his department went to my mother and that he has anything to do with it. Then I asked hiM.. why the telephone at my mother's room was disconnected for the incoming calls. He said that this is because we are not paying. I reminded him that I was standing here with a 20-dollar bill, ready to pay - but he refused to admit my payment. The only thing I wish - I've told him - is to have a right bill, not from the 4-th of March, when the telephone was not working but at least starting from the 8-th of March, when the telephone was repaired. He promised again to "regulate everything".

Another vicious conflict has erupted because of my mother's doctor, Mrs. Miriam COHEN's, conduct (behavior).

Her first visit to my mom was at the 4-th of March, 2002, in my presence. When she entered, she immediately glazed at me with hatred. No one could misunderstand this look - full of abomI.tion and contempt. It was not just a look, but a message! In spite of that message I've decided to ignore it. There are lot of strange and extravagant people among all kind of professions. Besides, some people have psy complexes because of their law height, or non-classical profiles, or something else. I tried to be friendly and polite, generating a positive approach (into myself) towards doctor Cohen. Gradually I was admitting with horror that it does not work. Doctor Cohen was cold with me, she was knocking me down, abruptly cutting off my phrases. She posed a question to my mother, and then suddenly interrupted me while I was translating it to my mother in Russian or Yiddish - as if she new Russian and Yiddish and was angry because of my incorrect translation. She cut me off then more aggressively while I was translating to her my mother's responses. She refused to answer any question (given to her by my mom or by me) concerning medical evaluation of my mother's condition and the post-stroke complications' treatment. She has responded to just 1 question: when I asked her if the post-insult spastic hemiparesis in my mother could be treated. "It can not be said yet, - she told with a kind of a malevolence. In the same time she said it in a humiliating manner as if she was miming-teasing me, laughing at my semi-medical jargon. All the time she stressed my individual manner to speak - trying to abuse my English skills. It's rude and cruel to mock even at a foreign student's mistakes in English. It is much more rude and unacceptable to mock at a patient's relative if you're a medical doctor.

It was also strange that while just ignoring all my other questions doctor Cohen hecticly rejected questions about some unusual symptoms in my mother prior to the stroke: like skin chancres around her neck, burning in her eyes, hallucI.tions, pain in my mother's cheeks, gorge, nose, neck muscles and parotid, and other glands, etc. She had an unexplaI.ble reaction to these questions, like if she was personally impartial towards theM..

Besides, my English is good enough. It is true that it depends also on my mood and situation, but even in a worse situation my English is about TOIFL standards. I am taking part in live literary discussions in English, I've used to work as a translator, and nobody never told me that my English was so bad. For 1 and a half years I worked in telemarketing for "The Gazette" - successfully enough. I know that I sound awful in description (you can feel it from this testimony), but I mean literary standards, not a routine conversation. I am an author of poetry and prose in English; I am an author of English essays, which were published in English newspapers and on-line magazines. Anyway - my English is understandable, and that's obvious.

Another thing that has concerned me - strange manipulations with my mother's blood pressure measurements. If the nurse used to measure my mother's blood pressure as 178 x 80, in doctor Cohen's diary it appeared as 178 x 50. The law heart rate was used by doctor Cohen as an excuse to decrease the dosage of Haysar and Atenolol, which my mother was receiving. Because the dosage now was decreased against the dose that my mother was receiving usually at home, the picture was now distorted, and it became unclear, her high blood pressure has a post-insult or another nature.

I was shocked that the nurses have stopped to tell me, what medications my mother receives. Later I understood that they also started to avoid to bring her medications while I'm visiting my mother.

Meanwhile the patches on my mother's skin, around her neck, which shown up one month prior to the stroke, and then disappeared, have appeared again. They were burning, causing an incredible pain. My mother and I - we complained to the medical staff with no result. For several days doctor Cohen was refusing to see my mother. She did not respond to me greetings. When I used to say "hallo" - she did not answer.

When her second visit to my mother took place, I was with my daughters. Ignoring me, doctor Cohen turned to my daughters for translation. She has communicated with my mother through my daughter M..., ignoring my attempts to help. M... was in trouble to translate some medical terms and other phrases into Russian, but when I was trying to help M..., turning not directly to doctor Cohen, but to M...: even then doctor Cohen violently stopped me. She examined my mother only formally, briefly, as if she would like just demonstrate that she's doing her duty. She was with my mom less then 5 minutes. I tried to tell her that my mother is suffering from tremendous pains, but she did not let me speak. The pains, which my mother was now suffering from, were gradually increasing, until became unbearable. She was given only Tylenol, nothing else, and it did not help.

She felt pains in the same areas of the left side of her head and in her neck, where they appeared approximately 2 weeks prior to the stroke.

Doctor Cohen's refusal to explain, how serious is my mother's condition, what she's planning to do to improve it, which options do we have - was depressive for both me and my mother. She refused to tell how long my mother is supposed to stay in the hospital, what's the next step, if a rehabilitation hospital might be given to my mother after she'll be in a stable condition after an initial treatment.

I then came to Mrs. Cohen, who was sitting at the desk, and said that if she's not very enthusiastic to treat my mother, then maybe she would better transfer her to another neurologist.

She told me that she has 33 patients, and that she's very tired. This could be taken for the "lack of enthusiasm". However, it did not explain, why she wasn't answering, when I used to say "Hallo"....

I have expressed my concerns to some nurses, because I was very depressed, and asked the nurses to find out, what can be done to reduce pain, which my mother was suffering froM.. My daughters have catched a bad flu, with cough and rheum, and could not go to the hospital.

I did not see doctor Cohen for a while. On the 12-th of March she has appeared at my mother's room - very angry and impatient. "Do you think that your English is good enough to translate for your mom, - she told angrily, - don't even think to translate for your mom: because no Russian can speak English properly!" - I have told her literary the next ("word in word"): "Why are you doing it? You've already spoke to me in English, and you know that my English is understandable!" I did not rise my voice, did no movement, no angry sounds. She was not provoked by anything when she suddenly cried: "I'll call security, I'll call police!" - "Call security, call police, - and me and my friends - we'll turn to all human rights bodies, to all newspapers!"

Then she went out.

She shouted on me in front of my mother and my stepfather, who came to visit my mother. Another patient, in the same room, and her daughter, who came to visit her mother, witnessed this awful scene. I thought that my mother will have another insult right now!

After this awful incident I was afraid to speak to doctor Cohen any more. I tried to speak to her through nurses, asking them to tell her this or that.

On the 7-th of March an echocardiogram was done to my mother. After the procedure they did not take her back to her rooM.. She spent one hour in a wildchair, in a windy place, and then became feeling a cold. When I asked - what is the result of the ecocrdiogram, my question was ignored.

I was trying to convince the nurses - and doctor Cohen - that my mother is suffering from tremendous pain, which is much beyond of what she can stand. I tried to convince them that the pain, which my mother has in her cheek and in her eyes, has nothing to do with the post-stroke pains. I asked for a consultation of an ophthalmologist and dentist for her. Doctor Cohen told in my presence (because she was avoiding to speak directly to me) to a nurse that a consultation of an ophthalmologist and dentist for my mother was already filed and submitted according to the rules, but normally it takes several days. Later all the nurses confirmed (in conversations with me and my mother) that the consultation was ordered. However, on the 12 of March, when I've checked if a demand for an ophthalmologist was filed, I found out that it was not true. On the 13 of March I went down to the Dentology department, and found out that there were no requests, submitted from the Post-Stroke Unit (in Pavilion "C"), led by doctor Cohen, for a consultation for my mother.

By that time my mother was yelling and crying all the time

non-stop because of the pain - and still nothing was done

to reduce the pain. She was only given Tylenol every 4 hours. When I was going home from the hospital, strange

personages clearly waited for me at the bus station,

on the corner of Cote des Neige and Cote

St-Catherine: young black guys, who spoke Italian,

French, German, English, POlish, and even Russian.

They accused me in guilt in my mother's suffering -

and told me that "pride will have a fall". I remember

that when my mother once turned to a Russian speaking

rabbi Isia, and begged him to help me to find work, and

he refused to speak to me, on my way home a woman

was waiting at the bus station, and has began to provoke

me to speak and to tell, what I am thinking on Israel.

Now it was a very similar situation. With only difference

that by then they were probably evaluating if I deserve

any help in employment, and mow "they" (of course, I

don't know, who) were evaluating, if I am suppressing

my "pride", and - therefore - my mother deserves to be

treated properly.....

On the 12 of March doctor Cohen came into my mother's

room at the hospital, and told her to sign a paper: without

any detailed explanation or an advise. She told that it is

a pure formality. I have intervened, asking for explanation.

She told (to my mother, not to me) that it is for an MRI

scan. I have insisted that my mother has to consider if she

wants it.  Because of some intuitive fear and also because

of some ethical and esotherical concerns, I did not

recommend my mother to sign this allowance and do this

test AT THIS HOSPITAL.

In spite of my advise, she signed it under a condition that

she will be informed as minimum 2 hours before the test -

"because she wants somebody from her family should

accompanying her to the test.

However, on the 14 of March, at 3 00 p.M.. - they took

her to radiology without telling her where they are taking

her. After the stroke and under this tremendous pain, my

mother was extremely vulnerable, and they took

advantage of that. The MRI scan was done, while my

mother was staying in the "chacht" more then 50 minutes

(it means that probably not just her brain but the whole

body was scanned).

In my opinion, in next 24 hours after the MRI scan my

mother's condition became rapidly worse. Her face

has completely dropped on one side, pains have

increased, some symptoms of the stroke (which were

absent before) - appeared. On the 15 of March they took her to a dentist, but

the dentist could only find a cyst or a fat substance,

and a tooth that has to be repaired. They told me

that they will invite a rare specialist next time.

The same day I went to the Radiology Department

and asked them if some essential reading of my

mother's MRI scan are available. They told me -

yes, but sent me to doctor Afilello, at the Emergency.

He was absent, but at the Emergency Department

they could find through the computer network that

tha basic conclusions were done and some additional

notes must be ready on Monday.

However, when I tried to ask Mrs. Cohen about the

MRI result, I was abused again.

Two days before already I went to patients

representative, Mrs. Brown, and asked her if it is possible

to transfer my mother to another hospital. I told her that

I have no intentions to start a legal lawsuit or an official

complain. I refused to tell her what is the reason of my

request. I told her that I can just say that "some outraged

things happened in this hospital". She told me that she has

to see my mother and ask her if she wants to be transferred

to another hospital. However, when Mrs. Brown asked my

mother, she responded that now - when the MRI scan was

done - she wants first to have the results, and has no

intentions to leave the hospital before.

The same day I've received an e-mail form a professor in

Hungary, a specialist in dental medicine and neurology, who

wrote that theoretically it was possible that a facial nerve

inflammation or damage - or even a stroke - could start as

a dental inflammation. He wrote that according to the

symptoms I've described my mother could have not a

stroke but a severe vascular disorder and the facial nerve

diseases with serious neurological complications. If treated

not properly, these complication could lead to brain damage,

especially if brain injuries took place in the past.

The same day (15 of March) I went to Mrs. Brown again,

and she told me that my mother will be released from

the hospital on 19 of March, Tuesday. I did not received

any confirmation of that from the medical staff.

On Sunday, (March 17) my wife has approached dr.

Cohen and asked her in French about my mother's

condition, about the prognosis, the MRI scan results,

and when my mother would be released from the

hospital. Dr. Cohen listen to my wife politely. But

when she understood about what patient my wife is

asking her, she became angry, and said that she has

no time to speak to my wife now, and has no time to

speak to her at all. However, when my wife became

indignated, and began to speak loudly with the

nurses, expressing her feelings, dr. Cohen spoke to

her. She told my wife that the MRI scan reading is

not ready, and that my mother will be released from

the hospital on Tuesday after 11.00 - without any

preconditions.

Next day, March 18, I went to radiology again, and

they could not find the MRI result. Besides, they

could not find any records that my mother had the

MRI scan - as if she was never done it. I asked 2

of my friends, who work in the hospital, to check

that. My mother's friend's daughter also works at

the hospital, and she tried the same, and did not

find any traces that my mother ever had the MRI

scan at the hospital.

I was told by the nurses, what pills my mother was

given in the hospital, for exception of the dropper

injection substance, which she has received in the

first 48 hours in the hospital.

When my mother's eye drops have been finished,

and the small bottle was empty, they refuse to

renew the prescription, and my mother was 4

days without the drops, which are essential in term

to decrease the internal blood pressure in her eyes.

I am wondering if it did a permanent damage to her

eyes. After those 4 days she had problems with

seeing - which could be a post-stroke complication

as well as an effect of not taking the dropps.

On March 19 my mother's husband received a call

from Immigration. A female voice was asking to speak

to Elisabetha EPSTEIN (GUNIN). According to

Simcha, my mother's husband, he did not tell that

my mother was in the hospital. He only told that "she's

not home". About the same time (11.30) they called

me. A woman asked me if my mother will appear at

the interview at Immigration. "Because she's in the

hospital now, we afraid that she can not come - and

we'll delay the interview for 6 months, - she told.

I said in response that only my mother can know if

she will appear at the interview, and that they have

no legal ground to cancel the interview.

On Tuesday my mother was seen by "the specialist"

at the Dentology department. I've recognized hiM..

It was him, who examined my mother about one

year ago at the same place. My mother has turned

there in spite of my advise not to go there. She

wanted a "third" opinion. Two dentists already

told her that she has a cyst, which must be operated,

and that she has to remove all her teeth - because

there is an infection, and the teeth are half destroyed.

"The specialist" from the Jewish General has an

opposite opinion. He told my mother that she can

keep all her teeth until possible. Because of the

fI.ncial reason and because she trusted him more,

she decided not to extract the teeth.

By then, after that visit, my mother had some strange

symptoms, however, I did not remember, which.

N o w  "the specialist" demonstratively refused to

speak to me, and was speaking to my mother in

Yiddish. He ignored my questions about what's his

name and how he can be found. He found the source

of my mother's tremendous pain very quickly. It

wasn't the cyst, but a tiny area at her upper cheek,

probably - a muscle. She was crying and jumping

up when he touched this area. He told that he has

to inject something into this area. I asked - what.

He did not answer. However, my mother

immediately stopped me - and told that she

authorize the injection. After the injection the pain

went away - and did not came back. It was as a

miracle. When I asked - what is was - my question

was ignored again.

After that my mother has dressed herself - and

we were ready to leave the hospital. However,

we were told to wait - "because not all papers

are ready". An hour followed an hour - and the

papers "were not ready". My mother's bed was

prepared for another patient, and she had no

place where to go. She was very exsorsted, and

I started to insist that she must leave as soon as

possible.

Then doctor Cohen appeared - and told that

they have called an endocrinologist - "because

of the high level of cholesterol, found in blood".

She asked to wait one hour more - and then

my mother will be able to go. I asked, what

the MRI scan revealed. Doctor Cohen said

that it revealed that there is no tumor. What

tumor? - I was astonished. I am asking about

the stroke. - Oh, the stroke, the white tissue in

the brain is damaged. - What part of the

brain? - Cortex. - And what likely caused the

stroke? - First of all, diabetes. - My mother was

never diagnosed by diabetes. - Oh, I mean -

the high blood pressure.

The conversation was finished. Two and a half hours have passed - and nobody

came. I've understood that no endocrinologist had

to come. It was a lie. I went to the desk. Doctor

Cohen was still there. She told me that we can

go in several minutes, but a dietologist and a

post-stroke medical caregiver (Nadege) has to

solve several questions.

Then my mother went out asking me not to follow

her (she was tired, and wanted to walk a bit).

After several minutes I was also out of the room

looking for her. I've found her near the desk, where

she was asked to sign a paper that she went out

from the hospital against the medical advise, and

responsible for the consequences. I was near to stop

my mother to sign this paper, but doctor Cohen then

said that if my mother will not sign this paper - she

will not be allowed to go out from the hospital, and

will not be able to appear at the interview ay

Immigration. Doctor Cohen pretended that I told

her about Immigration, but it wasn't true.

They wanted to force my mother to sign another

paper saying that if she leaves now - she has to

pay for all future medical services herself - until

she returns to the Jewish General Hospital, but

I said categorically that my mother is not going

to sign this paper.

My mother was released without any document that

she was in the hospital, without any medications,

and even the prescription was given her after a brief

fight. However, the dosage in the prescription was

for some drugs incorrect, for others - skipped. CONCLUSIONS (MY MOTHER'S ILLNESS

HISTORY)

FAMILY HISTORY

My mother's grandfather (her mother's father) had a

stroke in age of 76

My mother's father had a high blood pressure, and

he died in result of the old age marasm and traumatic

incidents

Her aunt (father's sister) died from a stroke

Her cousin (here, in Montreal) - had a brain tumor

and a hypertension.

Her niece in Toronto has a funny blood pressure.

Her son (me) suffers from hypertension.

There are other family members, who had a stroke

or died from a stroke.

OBJECTION: all family members had severe brain

injuries, including my mother. Almost all were persecuted

by one or other authorities, and it means that their strokes

could have not a natural case - but a post-injury nature.

There is something in the family, which could be called

an epidemy of brain injuries. I myself was beaten 3 times

(the batteries were orchestrated by Soviet and Israeli

authorities). I had brain concussion 2 times. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

1. CONSULTATIONS

The echocardiogram was done to my mother without any demands or requests from me - or other people. In the same time the consultation with the dentist, and some other procedures were done only because of mother's family doctor (Yvon ROHAN) request to Mrs. Cohen, or a woman, who was hospitalized in my mother's room (Mrs. Lobelle) intervention, or Mrs. Lean Brown intervention. Why then the echocardiogram was done without on Mrs. Cohen initiative? I think - because a) she was saving her ass, and 2) because she has fully cooperated and coordI.ted her actions with Federal Immigration.

Last events with the calls from Immigration from one side - and Mrs. Cohen's awareness about my mother's interview from the other side - have proved it.    ILLNESS HISTORY

My mother began to suffer from migraine after she -

an investigator in the District Procurator - was fired

from her work with threatening her life consequences.

It was in the beginning of 1950.

Practically, she was persecuted by the authorities many

years, but refused to admit it even in her thoughts.

She was beaten by her husband, my father, and once

received a head injury.

When she was temporarily separated with her husband,

she once fell - and received another head injury.

Because of the injuries or her work as a teacher, which

in the Soviet school was a difficult task, she started to

suffer from moderate hypertension.

In 1973 she fell down in Mogilev because it was slippery,

striking her head. She's sure that it was a self-inflicted

trauma, but I think that the KGB assassI.tion squard

could have something to do with that.

She was afraid to be hospitalize in Mogilev, a stalinist

city with a vicious anti-Bobruisk (our native city)

agenda. That's why in spite of a tremendous trauma

she went to Bobruisk on a bus.

In Bobruisk she did not went directly to the hospital

(because her students had an exam but was admitted

at a hospital only 2 days later).

She was diagnosed with a subarachnoid hemorrhage,

and was told later that normally people don't live

after such an accident.

Since then she had a hypertension, and a atherosclerosis

has began to develop in her.  1. Stresses because of the illness of her mother,  persecutions of her son (me), exposure to   radiation of her other son (my brother), and  his death in 1990, in age of 26.

2. In 1994 we were practically deported from  native Belarus to Poland, but in Warsaw were  kidnapped by Israelis, and taken to Israel  against our will. In Israel my mother had  innumerous stresses, injuries, and her health  situation has rapidly bewcame worse.

3. In Montreal her health suddenly improved,  but our immigration drama, and outrages  persecutions from the Federal Immigration  were slowly destroying her health.

LIST OF EVENTS

(Composed by my mother for Quebec's Omdbusman) 1. 1991. Deportation of my son and his family from our native Belarus. I had no chance but to go with theM..

2. 1991. Warsaw. Here we were kidnapped by Israelis - and taken to Israel by force (instead of going to Germany - as we planned).

3. 1991 - 1994. Persecutions, batteries, discrimI.tion in Israel.

4. 1994. Coming to Canada (Quebec): applying for a refugee status. 3. 1997. Refugee status denied. An intervention of Israeli embassy - and the Jewish organizations took place. 4. 1998. A primary decision of the Federal court in our case was abolished after an intervention of the Jewish organizations and (personally) Mr. Rosenberg. 5. 1998. My humanitarian appeal. 6. 1998. I was married a Canadian citizen. 7. 1999. My humanitarian appeal was cancelled by Immigration without my participation "because of my marriage". 8. 1999. Marriage interview: my marriage was not recognized "because of the medical concerns". However, this decision was later replaced by another - unclear - document, which made impossible to appeal to the Federal court. 9. 2000 - 2001. Immigration's "medical attack" against my son: medical data was falsified, attempts to treat my son from sickness he did not have, tool place. 10. 2000 - 2001. The same "medical attack" against me. I think that the real reasons behind it was my son's criticism of the human rights' violations in Israel [http://www.total.net/~leog/Library/essays.htm] - and my former refugee claim against Israel. The usage of medical matters for political persecutions is the most tremendous outrage in the human rights field. I believe that Immigration's Medical Services and other divisions were systematically damaging my health and my social / mental state on purpose. I suggest that I personally - and the Quebec as a province, where it took place - should be compensated for the damage it caused. 11. Immigration's refusal to produce any decision in my case since the marriage interview in 1999. An open statement by Mr. Chiu, Immigration officer, that there will be no decision. 12. Minister's of Immigration office (where I've appealed) was avoiding to treat me as a wife of a Canadian citizen. They suggested that I should go on Ministerial Permit, which is impossible because of my fI.ncial situation, and in principle. 13. Mr. Cotler's (Federal deputy) secretary opinion that I "should be punish more" for my refugee claim against Israel. 14. Since 1994 I am still in a limbo. Help me!

P.S. In some letters from the Ministry of Immigration was mentioned indirectly that I was fI.lly considered as "medically ineligible". However, I never received an official and direct decision. Labeling me as "medically ineligible" was a crimI.l misconduct, and included falsification and misinterpretation of the medical data, deception and administrative mischief. For more details read Document 4.

STROKE (SUMMARY)

3 - 4 months prior to the stroke. a) Strange skin problems around her neck. Maybe a result of an endocrI.l problem b) Pain in the eyes, eyes are burning. c) Higher then usual blood pressure d) A pimp in her nose; something like a flu e) Pain in the dental area, insomnia and depression

Stressful situations: a) A vallet, stolen in the bus b) Bad fI.ncial situation

Days before the stroke (the same day): a) Immigration's assauly b) Dispute with the husband c) Depression increases

IN THE HOSPITAL

IN EMERGENCY: CT scan - no clear results. Diagnosis "stroke" is under the question. Dropper was installed.

IN POST-STROKE UNIT:

Dropper with an unknown substance. Doctor Cohen cancels the dropper 34 - 40 after the admission.

Medication: Atenolol, Hyazaar, Plavics, Norvask (this one - only in the last days in the hospital), Tylenol.

SYMPTOMS: Facial hemiparesis, that's all. Nurses carefully examined my mother in front of me; she had no symptoms, associated with the stroke. She could beg her neck close to her chest. She could get up her legs while sitting, and move her foots in all direction. No reflex was affected. She could follow an object by her eyes. She could point her nose precisely with her finger. Etc.

Nothing was matching the stroke.

However, she suffers from tremendous pain, which disappeared as soon as she leaves the hospital on March 19.

BLOOD PRESSURE The overage - 170 x 80 (90). 7 or 9 times in 2 weeks her blood pressure was 140 or 130 to 70 - 90. Hovewer, doctor Cohen deliberately distorts the messurements ("law" heart rate), and decreses Atenolol.

TESTS AND PROCEDURES

March 7 - echocardiogram

March 14 - MRI

March 15 and 19 - dentist's consultation

On March. 28, we had already 3 medical opinions that it was not a stroke - or at least - not just a stroke. And still no document from the Jewish General Hospital. 2 private medical doctors - and L'Hopital St.-Mary requested a document from the Jewish General Hospital, but the Jewish hospital was always refusing any information about my mother. This is the most outraged and tremendous violation of the rights of a patient, and this style of actions is not faraway from fascist and stalinist practices. -------- SUPPLEMENT: --------- INTERNET - FORUM IN GUNINS' CASE --------- here: ARCHIVE --------- Copyright   Lev Gunin & Co

Montreal 1998


Оглавление

ПО

о

.

____________________________________________________________

© Гунин Лев. Complete Immigration Drama (And Medical Tools For Persecution Of Dissidents)

Origin: http://samlib.ru/g/gunin_l_m/bio12eshtml.shtml

Создан: 11/08/2003, изменен: 01/07/2006, 576k

Эссе: Публицистика

Series: (Biographies)