Arms control advocates call for independent investigation into alleged Saudi abuses with Canadian vehicles

Most of the attention has been focused on a $15-billion contract signed in 2014 through which Canada sold an undisclosed number of light armoured vehicles made by General Dynamics Land Systems in London, Ont., to Saudi security forces. But Ottawa has also approved the export of other armoured vehicles, such as the Terradyne Gurkhas, which are manufactured by Newmarket-based Terradyne Armoured Vehicles.

Some of those Gurkhas were deployed by Saudi armed forces during a security operation in July 2017 in the eastern town of Al-Awamiyah, whose predominantly Shia population has harboured long-standing grievances against the Sunni-led government in Riyadh. Video and eyewitness interviews allege the Gurkhas were used to surround the town and, while trying to rout an armed group hiding in the community, ended up firing into populated areas and killing several civilians.

Freeland has already overseen what she described as a “thorough” internal investigation into the allegations. She said in February there was “no conclusive evidence” the Gurkhas were used to commit human rights violations. Her department released the report in May.

Now some of Canada’s most prominent human rights and arms-control groups say the government’s investigation was seriously flawed, and that an independent probe is needed before more weapons are shipped to Saudi Arabia. The letter to Freeland — which was signed by the executive directors of Amnesty International Canada, Oxfam Canada and Project Ploughshares, among others — says the investigation suffered from “major” shortcomings.

“These shortcomings suggest that a thorough review conducted by an independent and impartial expert is now required to adequately address the serious questions and concerns that remain unresolved.”

Among the charges outlined in the letter are that the Canadian government officials who conducted the investigation relied on a source funded by the Saudi royal family, that they sought conclusive proof of the alleged abuses rather than assessing the potential risk Canadian exports could be used in future abuses, and that they suggested Canada’s commercial relationship with Saudi Arabia was a relevant factor.

Saudi Arabia is by far the largest buyer of Canadian weapons and other military goods, after the U.S. Last year alone Canada exported more than $497 million worth of arms and other military equipment to the country. Those sales account for nearly half of all military exports outside the U.S.

“Quite frankly it was a sloppy report,” said Cesar Jaramillo, executive director of Project Ploughshares. “It relies on sources that are clearly biased — that are notable for their lack of independence — and despite the shaky credibility of some of the sources, the conclusion still ignores the risks the report itself identified.”

The letter comes as Freeland’s department is also facing criticism for what has been seen by some as a halfway approach to strengthening Canada’s arms controls. The Liberal government has committed Canada to the Arms Trade Treaty — an international agreement to regulate the global arms trade — while continuing not to disclose weapons exports to the U.S., which account for roughly half of Canada’s military exports.

Global Affairs Canada did not respond to questions for this story.

Jaramillo said the government’s report showed a “clear bias” towards the Saudi explanation of what occurred in Al-Awamiyah while “sanitizing” the violence that was corroborated by human rights organizations. “The Canadian government continues to assume a no-matter-what attitude around arms exports to Saudi Arabia,” he said.

Canadian export controls restrict the sale of weapons or other military goods to countries with a “persistent record of serious violations of the human rights of their citizens, unless it can be demonstrated that there is no reasonable risk that the goods might be used against the civilian population.”

But Jaramillo said one of the biggest problems with the report is that it too narrowly focused on verifying evidence of the alleged incident but did not address the issue of whether Canada should have sold the vehicles to a country with a dismal human rights record in the first place. “If a human rights violation has already been committed, it’s too late.”

Terradyne president Durward Smith said his company follows Canadian export laws “to the letter of the law,” and if the government decided to prohibit sales of military goods to any country, the company would “of course respect that decision.”

Smith said the Gurkhas are not combat vehicles and they were not weaponized when they were exported. The government’s investigation found some of them “may have been modified” with mounted machine guns. “You can mount a weapon to anything,” Smith said, adding that what happens once the vehicle is shipped is “out of the manufacturer’s control.”

Smith refused to disclose the value of his company’s deal with Saudi Arabia. He also wouldn’t say when the deal was made, how many vehicles were shipped and whether the company currently had any contracts with Saudi Arabia.

With files from The Canadian Press