Страницы: -
1 -
2 -
3 -
4 -
5 -
6 -
7 -
8 -
9 -
10 -
11 -
12 -
13 -
14 -
15 -
16 -
17 -
18 -
19 -
20 -
21 -
22 -
23 -
24 -
25 -
26 -
27 -
28 -
29 -
30 -
31 -
32 -
33 -
34 -
35 -
36 -
37 -
38 -
39 -
40 -
41 -
42 -
43 -
44 -
45 -
46 -
47 -
48 -
49 -
50 -
51 -
52 -
53 -
54 -
55 -
56 -
57 -
58 -
59 -
60 -
61 -
62 -
63 -
64 -
65 -
66 -
67 -
68 -
69 -
70 -
71 -
72 -
73 -
74 -
75 -
76 -
77 -
78 -
79 -
80 -
81 -
82 -
83 -
84 -
85 -
86 -
87 -
88 -
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-coordinated 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 imagination could suggest that a family like ours
could take a hard decision to fly a country where we
(nominally, 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-coordinated 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 coordinated 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 original of my wife's birth certificate
translation (that we made in Israel before coming to Canada) is kept
now. (We gave the original of my wife's birth
certificate and the original 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 criminal 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
criminal 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,
discrimination, 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 ballerina, 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 terminated! 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 FINAL 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 eliminate 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 criminal code! ! ! Especially, for children! I ask you to
think about it while composing you final decision. Please...
Sincerely yours,
Lev Gunin
Next Document
PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: DOC