graphs 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 Dorи 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.  Marina  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.  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, Ina, Marta,
     and Lisa Gunin), 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  Ina, 4,  and Marta, 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  terminate 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, finally refused to return us originals 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 termination 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 termination of our Israeli citizenship
from Israeli consulate. This citizenship was given to us against our will
     and must be terminated.
     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 termination 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. Dubй, 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 e