GENEVA, SWITZERLAND, February 24th, 1992 - "Representatives of The War Amputations of Canada in Geneva have challenged the United Nations Sub-Commission of Human Rights decision of August 1991 to defer a long-standing claim against the Japanese Government for compensation on behalf of Canadian PoWs who were subjected to slave labour and inhumane conditions in violations of the Geneva Conventions and in contravention of international human rights law."

This statement was made by Cliff Chadderton, The War Amps Chief Executive Officer, in reference to the decision handed down by the Sub-Commission at its meetings in August, 1991 following submissions from The War Amps and other international organizations which dealt with the compensation claims against Japan emanating from World War II.

Chadderton made the statement in explaining the details of the Commission of Human Rights of the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. The War Amps representatives presenting the submissions in Geneva are Professor John Humphrey of Canada's McGill University, who was the former United Nations Director of Human Rights and now a consultant to The War Amps, and Brian N. Forbes, Legal Counsel to The War Amps organization. In addition, the delegation will be asking the Canadian Government to take a position on the claim against Japan.

In this regard, Chadderton said that the Canadian Government, as a sitting member of the Commission, could, at the open-forum discussion in Geneva, support the claim on behalf of the Hong Kong Veterans of Canada. "In the absence of any such support, it would have to be concluded that the Canadian Government was siding with Japan in refusing to make any supportive statements in regard to the Canadian claim," Chadderton stated.

"We wrote to Prime Minister Mulroney on October 18th, 1991, pointing out that when he was in Tokyo last May he did say that Canadian war veterans should "look to their own government" if they felt that additional compensation was warranted," Chadderton said. He added, "we took this as a commitment from Mr. Mulroney to the effect that if Japan did not pay the compensation, the Canadian Government would be quite prepared to give consideration to the matter."

Chadderton said that The War Amps and the Allied Prisoner of War and Civilian Internee organizations were understandably disappointed at the Sub-Commission's August deferral in that The War Amps Task Force had spent several years in preparing the claim. "We thought we had crossed every legal hurdle, particularly in light of the fact that a report made to the Sub-Commission by Mr. Theo van Boven, an eminent international legal expert from the Netherlands, had agreed with the major points which had previously been seen as obstacles," he said.

These major points clarified the position that:

1. There is no moratorium or limitation period or war crimes and crimes against humanity;
2. The government of an offending nation (in this case Japan) must accept the responsibility for the misdeeds of a former government;
3. The defence offered by Japan that the 1952 Peace Treaty extinguished any further rights of Canadian PoWs to seek compensation has been found to be erroneous under international law; and
4. The evidence at the trials of the Far East Crimes Tribunals is considered ample to prove the occurrence of gross violations of human rights and the transgressions of the Geneva Conventions.

As to the question of compensation, Brian Forbes, who as Legal Counsel has been involved with the United Nations claim since 1987, stated that "we have filed extensive material with the Commission as to the record of the German Government and the amount of reparation Germany has paid to individual victims of the Nazi Regime of World War II. It is of significance that by the year 2000 it is estimated that Germany will have paid in excess of DM 102 billion ($78 billion Canadian) in recognition of its responsibility to victims of the National Socialist Regime."

The decision to defer any action on The War Amps request for compensation was handed down at a confidential session of the Sub-Commission on Human Rights last August. Observers of the human rights community in Geneva have told The War Amps that this was a most unusual procedure and the release of such public statement was unprecedented.

"We feel quite strongly that the Sub-Commission on Human Rights in fact abdicated its responsibility last August when it refused to deal with the question of the compensation claims," Chadderton stated. "It was, however, common knowledge," he added, "that Japan raised very strong objections behind closed doors at the meetings of the Sub-Commission."

Professor John Humphrey, a co-author of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, stated in his context that "it is vital to the credibility and integrity of the United Nations human rights system that the procedural mechanisms be seen to be above all other political and economic considerations and the Sub-Commission and the Commission are perceived to operate in an environment which focuses exclusively on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms."

The role of the Sub-Commission and the Commission on Human Rights itself under this procedure is generally seen as that of adjudicating on the merits of a claim. In the event the claimants are able to demonstrate that gross violations of human rights have occurred, and in this particular case that serious contraventions of the Geneva Conventions have taken place, the Commission on Human Rights has the power to hold the defending state party guilty of such gross violations.

Forbes stated that "our formal submission has requested the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to make a specific finding to the effect that the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Japanese during World War II reveal a consistent pattern of gross violations of human rights. It is our considered opinion that such a finding by the Commission would have a significant influence on this process so as to compel the Japanese to satisfy their legal, moral and humanitarian obligations in relation to these outstanding compensatory claims."

The claim in which Canada has played a leading role on behalf of Allied Prisoners of War and Civilian Internees from the United States, the United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand and Canada is for $22,000 U.S. per survivor or widow.