Canadian MPs Debate Challenging Israeli Government’s Policies At Israel-Jewish Affairs Summit
May 24, 2023
Debate arises over judicial reform and expanded building in Judea and Samaria
Menu
Popular Articles
Read More »
Donors Encouraged To Support UNRWA Peace Initiative For Lasting Gaza Peace
May 24, 2023
Adopting a comprehensive approach, UNRWA donors can play a crucial role in promoting peace and stability in the Gaza Strip.
The Nakba Display And The Canadian Museum For Human Rights
May 24, 2023
Balancing credibility and historical accuracy at the CMHR
Joe Biden’s Empty Words About Antisemitism
May 24, 2023
President’s pledge undermined by DEI orders and refusal to mention IHRA definition
Jewish Gun Ownership: A Paradigm Shift in American Jewish Thought
May 24, 2023
The rise of Jewish gun ownership challenges traditional beliefs and confronts rising antisemitism.
The Trudeau Government’s Fake Fight Against Antisemitism – Part 46
May 24, 2023
Lessons must be learned from the failures of Germany, France, Sweden and The UK
Engaging Non-Jews In Combating Antisemitism On Campus
May 24, 2023
Tackling antisemitism begins with the Jews, but it doesn’t end with them
Examining U.S. Middle East Policy: Addressing Critical Concerns
May 24, 2023
Addressing Key Concerns: Re-evaluating US Middle East Policy for Lasting Peace
Unveiling The Real Threat To Al-Aqsa Mosque
May 24, 2023
Addressing Internal Challenges and Confronting Extremism
Watch: Contrasting Eulogies: Israeli Victims Of Terror Vs. The Family Of The Terrorists
May 24, 2023
Exploring the Contrasting Narratives: Mourning Israeli Victims and the Family of the Terrorists
The case of Laith Marouf and CMAC
- 24 April 2023
- 9:08 pm
Click an icon above to share, email, or save this article
- 24 April 2023
- 9:08 pm
On November 22, 2022, Canadian “political activist” Laith Marouf told Mayadeen TV (Lebanon), “They say that I am antisemitic, and this is why they terminated the contract in my association. In court, they will have to show what antisemitism is. Obviously, they will lose the case, because there is a huge difference between Zionism and Judaism, and they will not be able to conflate the two in court.” (Screencap: MEMRI)
Click an icon above to share, email, or save this article
Samples of antisemitism in federally financed government programs (5)
The testimony of the Associate Deputy Minister Ms. Mala Khanna and Charles Slowey, Assistant Deputy Minister for the community and identity sector
(The following excerpts of the evidence is solely that of Ms. Khanna as Mr. Slowey’s brief evidence did not produce any information material to the object of the proceedings.)
The Chair: I would inform the witnesses that they have five minutes. It isn’t five minutes each; it’s five minutes for your group, so you may decide who speaks when and how. I will give you a heads-up when you have about a minute or 30 seconds to go. I will say it out loud, because I know that sometimes you’re reading and can’t see me if I hold up a card.
1. The Witness: “Canadian Heritage officials negotiate thousands of grants and contributions with individuals and organizations every year. Last year, the department administered $1.7 billion in grants and contributions, representing 80% of its total budget. In delivering these programs, the department follows established review procedures, which include the assessment of the public profile of the organization, the applicant’s track record and financial issues.”
“In this case, the project on paper met the criteria of the anti-racism action program. There was an internet search done of CMAC as an organization, but it was not done of the individuals who would be performing the work, because nothing came up after the search of CMAC.”
“Because nothing problematic turned up, they did not go further. That is what has now been adjusted. In the review we have done since, we are now going through and looking at the board of directors, the executive director, and individuals associated with the projects that are listed in the application. That work now is being done as a result of the learning we have had through this experience.”
N.B. Despite the internet search, the department remained ignorant that CMAC was owned and operated solely by Marouf and his wife until after the scandal reached the attention of Ms. Khanna on July 26.
2. Witness: “On July 26, the Minister‘s office informed me by phone that there was an issue that would need to be looked into concerning anti-Semitism in one of our projects.
“On August 2, I received information from the minister’s office via email about the case, including one of the offensive tweets.”
“Between August 2 and August 19, the department determined how the individual was connected to the project, reviewed the contractual obligations, sought legal advice and ultimately suspended the project on August 19. The Minister then terminated the agreement with CMAC, and the department is pursuing the recovery of funds that were paid to CMAC.”
3. Witness: “At the October 7, 2022 meeting, Minister Hussen acknowledged that “the time it took to suspend and terminate the agreement once we were informed of the hateful comments could have been shorter. I agree with him. We have learned from this experience and have taken steps to strengthen this process and shorten the timelines.”
“The Minister also stated that he had asked the Department [of Heritage] to conduct a full review of the existing process. As a result of this process, funding applications now explicitly state that projects that espouse hatred or discrimination are not eligible.”
N.B. Surely, in the case at hand, it was not the project that espoused hatred or discrimination.
Get thej.ca a Pro Israel Voice by Email. Never miss a top story that effects you, your family & your community
4. The witness: “In addition, applicants are now asked to certify, in writing, that they will not undermine the Anti-Racism Strategy and will respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Human Rights Act. The minister now has the option to immediately terminate a contract. We are conducting an online public information search on the organization and the individuals identified to work on the project. Program officers have received training on the new criteria and on anti-racism and anti-Semitism.”
“Using the new audit process, we reviewed each of the active and funded agreements, approximately 350 in total and approximately 200 additional applications, which fall under Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy. Funds are now flowing back to the communities, where they belong, so that groups can continue to undertake this important work.”
“We are also undertaking a broader review of all Canadian Heritage programs and the results of this review will help us refine and improve our process.”
5. Q& A Asked whether this was an open and competitive process.
Ms. Khanna replied: “It was an open process”.
Quere: Since it was not a competitive process, how were the candidates ranked?
Liberal MP Anthony Housefather asked: “On April 14, 2022, a press release was issued. I can understand what you said, that you only looked at CMAC for the grants, but a press release was issued that quoted both Laith Marouf and Ahmed Hussen. At that point, did anyone bother to google Laith Marouf?” Associate Deputy Minister Mala Khanna replied,”In this case, we were relying on the initial vetting, so there was no additional vetting done—“. (Image: openparliament.ca)
6. The initial call for proposals was on September 3, 2019, and I believe it closed in January 2020.
7. A. “There were two rounds of evaluations when the program was set up. There were 1,100 submissions. Of those 1,100 submissions, 85 resulted in funding.”
8 Q. Do you remember the criteria that led to the Community Media Advocacy Centre not being selected after the first round of assessments?
A: “I was not part of that initial review, but my understanding is that there was nothing wrong with the project proposal. It was merely that there were, as you said, 1,100 applications, and only 85 could be accepted. There was nothing deficient, but it wasn’t at the top.”
9. Q. How are applicants screened? Are a few picked at random, or does each applicant go through a review, which I hope is now a little more comprehensive? Are all applicants systematically reviewed?
A: “Yes… Each application is reviewed.”
“It’s on the public record that I alerted the minister on July 18. I sent him three emails on that day with the information that would easily have been able to tell you who Laith Marouf was,” said Liberal MP Anthony Housefather. He was told the Heritage Minister’s chief of staff called on July 26 but did not send Laith Marouf’s offensive tweets until August 2 — and the department did nothing pro-active to investigate Housefather’s complaint. He was also told no one in the department was disciplined for their handling of the Laith Marouf file. (Image: openparliament.ca)
10. Statement of Ms. Khanna about the speed with which the scandal was handled handled:
“I think it will always depend on the complexity of the facts. I will say that we could have moved faster on this case. It was clear. We could have moved faster. I wish we had moved faster. I think in a situation such as this one the measures we put in place—again, I hope very much and I’m confident—will make a difference. If we were in such a situation again, I believe we would be able to move more quickly, in a matter of day.”
11. Q. Mr. Marouf tweeted that he was “begged” by the department and that money was thrown at him with regard to this grant. Is there any truth to that claim?
A: “No, Madam Chair, there is no truth to that claim. The organization was contacted to see if they would be interested in having their project looked at again, because after the initial call was done it was not successful, and then we were looking at projects again. In that case, the outreach was made purely to see if they were still interested in having their application reviewed.”
“There are very well-established procedures that were in place before the financials were looked at and the organization was looked at. Was it a first-time organization? A risk-based, comprehensive review of the applications is done.”
Quere: How can a risk based review be done without checking the background of the principal players of the organisation?
(To be continued…)
Doğan D. Akman is an independent researcher and commentator. He holds a B.Sc. in sociology, an M.A. in sociology/criminology and an LL.B in law. He held academic appointments in sociology, criminology and social policy; served as a Judge of the Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, and occupied the positions of Crown Counsel in criminal prosecutions and in civil litigation at the Federal Department of Justice. His academic work is published in peer-reviewed professional journals, while his opinion pieces and other writings are to be found in various publications and in blogs.
Click an icon above to share, email, or save this article
Click an icon above to share, email, or save this article
Read More
Thank you for choosing TheJ.Ca as your source for Canadian Jewish News.
We do news differently!
Our positioning as a Zionist News Media platform sets us apart from the rest. While other Canadian Jewish media are advocating increasingly biased progressive political and social agendas, TheJ.Ca is providing more and more readers with a welcome alternative and an ideological home.
We revealed the incursion of anti-Israel progressive elements such as IfNotNow into our communities. We have exposed the distorted hateful agenda of the “progressive” left political radicals who brought Linda Sarsour to our cities, and we were first to report on many disturbing incidents of Nazi-based hate towards Jews across Canada.
But we can’t do it alone. We need your HELP!
Our ability to thrive and grow in 2020 and beyond depends on the generosity of committed readers and supporters like you.
Monthly support is a great way to help us sustain our operations. We greatly appreciate any contributions you can make to support Jewish Journalism.
We thank you for your ongoing support.
Happy reading!
Thank you for choosing TheJ.Ca as your source for Canadian Jewish News.
We do news differently!
Our positioning as a Zionist News Media platform sets us apart from the rest. While other Canadian Jewish media are advocating increasingly biased progressive political and social agendas, TheJ.Ca is providing more and more readers with a welcome alternative and an ideological home.
We revealed the incursion of anti-Israel progressive elements such as IfNotNow into our communities. We have exposed the distorted hateful agenda of the “progressive” left political radicals who brought Linda Sarsour to our cities, and we were first to report on many disturbing incidents of Nazi-based hate towards Jews across Canada.
But we can’t do it alone. We need your HELP!
Our ability to thrive and grow in 2020 and beyond depends on the generosity of committed readers and supporters like you.
Monthly support is a great way to help us sustain our operations. We greatly appreciate any contributions you can make to support Jewish Journalism.
We thank you for your ongoing support.
Happy reading!
Sponsored Content
cOMING SOON…….
Breaking News
Recent
Features
News
Current Events
Opinions
Politics
Religion
Culture
Memoriam and Obituaries
PodcastS
Subscribe Now
Receive the latest in community & international Jewish news direct to your inbox