Toronto: Just a few weeks ago, on Oct. 23-26 in Istanbul, we completed the final session of the Gaza People's Tribunal. It was a very successful event due to the high quality of experts and witnesses' testimonies, as well as the enthusiastic response of the live audience at the Tribunal. After this very good experience in Istanbul, and an uneventful return to the US, we never thought the Canadian government would deny us entry to Canada to attend another Peoples' Tribunal two weeks later in Ottawa.
According to Anadolu Agency, upon arriving in Canada, we informed the Canadian Border Services Agency that we were formally invited to participate in the Palestinian Tribunal on Canadian Responsibility in Ottawa over the course of Nov. 14-15. The Canadian immigration authorities explained that the questioning aimed to determine if we posed a threat to Canadian national security. This explanation was confusing, as it seemed disproportionate to deem two professors with controversial views on the Israel/Palestine conflict as threats to national security. We believe that applying international law, rather than ignoring it, would make the world less dangerous and unjust, especially concerning the ongoing issues in Gaza.
We initially felt amused and surprised by the framing of the situation, as the charge of threatening Canada's national security seemed overly grandiose compared to our capabilities. We identify as independent scholars advocating for justice for the Palestinian people, who have long been victimized by apartheid and genocidal assaults on Gaza. Our intention in Ottawa was to support the Palestinian Tribunal on Canadian Responsibility, which aimed to highlight and reject Canadian complicity with Israel through arms exports, diplomatic support, and a failure to prevent and punish genocide as per the Genocide Convention.
Our hope was for Canada to move beyond conditional support of Palestinian statehood and reject Israeli impunity. We aimed to convey this message at the Tribunal, questioning how such advocacy could be considered a threat to Canadian national security. Instead, it should align Canadian security with international law, promoting regional and global stability.
The experience at Toronto Airport was exhausting, with our detention involving more than routine protocol. After missing our connecting flight to Ottawa, we faced a series of peculiar and abstract questions, such as accusations of antisemitism and connections to Hamas. Despite providing straightforward answers, no follow-up questions developed evidence of us being security threats. Eventually, we were allowed entry without further explanation.
This puzzling experience raised questions about the seriousness of the security concern, as our luggage and devices were not inspected, and questions were vague. The incident seemed to be a broader strategy of harassment against those critical of Israel's actions concerning Palestinian rights.
Following our airport interrogation, we learned that the tribunal's initial venue at the University of Ottawa was canceled by administrative officials. Canadian Senator Yuan Pau Woo, critical of Canada's Palestinian policy, offered the Senate building as an alternative venue. Our detention underscored the impact of global civil society movements advocating for Palestinian rights, stopping genocide, and demanding accountability, despite intimidation efforts.
The tribunal proceeded as planned, focusing on Canada's responsibilities rather than determining genocide and crimes against humanity. Our experience highlighted the influence of civil society in challenging national policies violating international law. Despite ongoing tensions, the determination of Palestinian self-determination continues through steadfast perseverance and global solidarity initiatives.