The World Uyghur Congress (WUC) has released its weekly brief, highlighting a series of international engagements aimed at exposing what it describes as China’s ongoing repression of Uyghurs, intensifying global attention on China’s policies in East Turkistan [known as Xinjiang in China].
…
Concerns over China’s expanding repression beyond its borders were raised in Canada. World Uyghur Congress [WUC] Vice President Zumretay Arkin testified before a parliamentary human rights subcommittee, warning that China’s transnational repression continues to target Uyghurs abroad. She argued that existing safeguards remain too narrow, often excluding everyday harassment and coercion faced by diaspora communities, and urged stronger legal frameworks and protections.
Arkin also participated in an advocacy week in Ottawa, engaging with Canadian lawmakers and civil society groups. Discussions focused heavily on allegations of forced labour involving Uyghurs and the need for stricter enforcement of legislation such as Bill C-251. Meetings included senior political figures across party lines, highlighting growing international scrutiny of China’s policies.
…
Is there anyone here who has the legal knowledge to explain how Bill C-251 would in any way challenge the oppression of Uyghurs specifically? I’m not qualified to understand how this law would function in practice based on precedent, but it seems like an intentional formalization of racist trade practices.
Canada’s economy is, in reality, dependent on coerced and child labour, and it isn’t like liberals are actually concerned about that. So, when I see something would purportedly provide the state with the explicit power to prohibit importation from specific areas or countries, I can only imagine its enforcement would be to the detriment of more challenging global-south nations and not like, the US or China.
Canada’s Bill C-251 aims to prohibit the importation of products made with forced labour from any country, but is particularly targeting goods linked to human rights abuses in regions like Xinjiang, where Uyghur forced labour has been widely documented. The bill seeks to amend the import regime to ban such imports to combat modern slavery.
It requires transparency, meaning businesses must ensure their supply chains are free from forced labour, with enforcement mechanisms to investigate and seize prohibited goods at the border. The bill reflects growing legislative pressure - aligning with international efforts such as in the EU and other jurisdictions in democratic areas - to hold corporations accountable for human rights violations in their supply chains.
Right, I get what it is saying it will do, what I’m asking is how this could even be enforced in a system that is so dependent on coerced and child labour. The Liberals want a closer tie with the Chinese state, so I can’t see how this could be passed and enforced effectively within even that context, let alone the fact that coerced labour exists in the US, has for decades, and is not even recognized as such by Canadians (exactly because it is racialized and formalized in a way that occludes the coercive nature of that carceral system). Those are big trading partners with Canada, so it isn’t surprising if it isn’t enforced there, but then if it is enforced, that would mean the countries it is enforced on would be subjected to this ban and increased scrutiny because of their position of power relative to Canada and other imperial forces, not because they are exceptional in their fostering of coerced and child labour.
Since S-211 already defined child and forced labour and mandated reporting by entities (and did so in a way that even applies to labour conditions in Canada and the US), why is this additional measure necessary and how is it effective in ways that S-211 is defficient? The specific thing about C-251 appears to be the introduction of the power to hold goods suspected to be from supply chains that make use of coerced and child labour and to preemptively identify certain goods and areas as suspect and restrict or ban importation on that merit. Coffee, chocolate, and oil all come from economies that make use of coerced and child labour, let alone the supply chains for precious metals required for computer manufacturing. Canada itself and corporations based within its borders play a large part in the maintainence of brutal working conditions that include coerced and child labour, which means that this law would set precedents for similar restrictions on Canadian goods in other countries if it is indeed meant to curb these practices globally.
So like, again, I’m curious how this is meant to work in a way that isn’t just the formalization of racist trade practices without it becoming a coercive tool to use on smaller, global south economies that the Canadian state wishes to exercise more power over.
In other words it can’t possibly work to sifnificantly decrease slave labour. At best it would function as a PR or idpol shield for Canada and Canadian corporations that they follow this law and therefore are clean, all the while it’s not enforced because it’s unenforceable. It’ll be allow some lib idpol aficionado to say “Canada has robust anti-slavery in supply chains law. Look over there instead.” and feel very good abt it. All the while our economy be still dependent on TFWs, American and Chinese slave labour. Also African and many other places’ slave labour. And if we try to actually enforce it by blocking some major import from a large economy like US or China, we’d get slapped with counterslap on our exports to them, because our enforcement not only hurts the firm bosses that uses slave labour but everyone else involved. Therefore the gov’t that represents it will take action to protect its interest.
And so given that we’re materially dependent on slave labour, the material conditions dictate this ain’t gonna pass and that’s my bet.
Or it’ll pass because everyone knows it can’t actually be meaningfully enforced. We got all kinds of laws we can’t meaningfully enforce!
Or that. And then every time Scotty says something abt Canada’s relation with slave labour in China we’d point to having a law on the books against it. 🫠
