In 1995, the Federal Government introduced its new Denaturalization and Deportation Policy against individuals suspected of war crimes and crimes against humanity during WWII.

The Government stated that such revocation of citizenship proceedings would be initiated against Canadians who acquired their citizenship almost half a century ago, notwithstanding the fact that the Deschenes Commission reported in 1986 that:

"Applications for immigration and connected documents have been destroyed in large numbers over the years, consistently with retention and removal policies in force within Canadian government departments and agencies, more particularly Immigration, External Affairs, RCMP and CSIS, so that evidence for possible revocation of citizenship or deportation has become largely unavailable."

However, the Government declared that:

"The key criterion in all these proceedings is the existence of some evidence of individual criminality. If that cannot be proven, no proceedings will be considered."

In the final decision of The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration v. Odynsky, 2001 FCT 138, rendered on March 2, 2001, the Federal Court of Canada, presented with a matter of revocation of citizenship acquired almost half a century ago (1955 to be more precise), concluded that:

"It is worth note that there was no evidence before the Court of any particular activity of Mr. Odynsky that could be characterized as brutal or criminal, or as directly threatening to any individual."

and that:

"(1) on the evidence before me I find that Mr. Odynsky did not voluntarily join the SS auxiliary forces, or voluntarily serve with them at Trawniki or Poniatawa, or later with the Battalion Streibal;

(2) there was no evidence of any incident in which he was involved that could be considered as directed wrongfully at any other individual, whether a forced labourer-prisoner, or any other person;

(3) no evidence was presented of any wrongdoing by Mr. Odynsky since he came to Canada, now more than 50 years ago;"

Moreover, the Federal Court of Canada stated that there was no evidence of war crimes or crimes against humanity committed during WWII in the earlier cases of:

• Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vitols, [1998] F.C.J. No. 1373;
  
  
• Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Duek. [1998] F.C.J. No. 1829;
  
  
• The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Katriuk, Docket: T-2409-96;
  
  
• The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Podins, Docket: T-1093-97: and
  
  
• The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Oberlander, Docket: T-866-95.
  
  

In light at these cases, the Ukrainian Canadian Congress (UCC) contends that the Canadian Government is not abiding by its undertaking to initiate proceedings against Canadians for events that occurred a half century ago only if there is "evidence of individual criminality".

The UCC continues to assert that in cases where "evidence of individual criminality" is uncovered, the Government of Canada should prosecute such individuals before Canadian courts of criminal jurisdiction in accordance with Canadian criminal law and Canadian standards of evidence in criminal proceedings.

According to the UCC. the Canadian Government should not resort to denaturalization and deportation proceedings to deal with the issue of Canadians suspected of war crimes during the Second World War since:

(a)	such proceedings are inadequate to determine a person's guilt or innocence as a war criminal;
(b)	such proceedings suppose, therefore, that another country will address this issue in Canada’s place; and
(c)	applications for immigration and connected documents have been destroyed in large numbers over the years by government employees.

- 30 -

March 15, 2001