OTTAWA, ON, December 11, 1995 - "The Canadian government should take no comfort in the decision of the Human Rights Committee, which ruled that a claim for compensation for slave labour experienced by Canadians who were prisoners of war of the Japanese in World War II was inadmissible under rules of the UN body."

This statement was made today by Cliff Chadderton, Chief Executive Officer of The War Amputations of Canada, following receipt of a judgement from the Human Rights Committee.

"The rejection by the Geneva-based Committee does not mean that the claim is invalid. It means only that, for procedural and technical reasons, the dispute cannot be resolved by the United Nations," Chadderton said.

"The crux of the matter is that the Japanese still committed a serious violation of the Geneva Convention in refusing to compensate the Canadian PoWs. This violation was recognized by the United Nations in a previous decision in 1991, but Japan succeeded in having the claim for compensation shelved, largely because the Canadian Government refused to intervene and support the initiative," according to Chadderton.

The Canadian Minister for External Affairs stated in 1992 that the 1952 Peace Treaty between Canada and Japan extinguished any further claims by the Canadian veterans.

The War Amps, which has pursued the claim for seven years under its United Nations consultation status, accused the Canadian government in its claim to the Human Rights Committee of failing to protect the interests of the Hong Kong Veterans and of violating international laws in relation to its interpretation of the Geneva Convention.

"This failure to look after the rights of a group of Canadian veterans was apparent, both in the act of the Canadian government in signing the 1952 Peace Treaty, and later in failing to support the Claim at the United Nations in Geneva," Chadderton claimed.

"It is noted that the Canadian government is hiding behind a technicality. The Human Rights Committee decision did not say that the claim was faulty. The decision stated, however, that there was no alternative but to conclude that the Peace Treaty of 1952 could not be set aside by the Optional Protocol, in that this UN procedure came into being only in 1976," Chadderton said.

The War Amps had argued on behalf of the Canadian PoWs that this historic sequence of events provided the Committee with ample authority under the UN protocol. In The War Amps submission to the United Nations, it was argued that a "continuing and ongoing violation" of the rights of the Hong Kong Veterans persisted to the present day, as it had to be recognized that these veterans still suffered from serious residual disabilities and incapacities as a result of their wartime experience.

Chadderton emphasized that the Human Rights Committee, in considering its authority to deal with the claim, felt that "domestic remedies" still appeared to exist under Canadian law which could hold the Canadian government accountable for compensation.

Chadderton stated that The War Amps would be pursuing this aspect of the Claim and underlining the Canadian government's continuing responsibility to satisfy this part of the UN decision. He has today written to Prime Minister Chretien, indicating that The War Amps will continue to press the Canadian government to recognize that it has an obligation to compensate those veterans whose rights were violated by the Japanese. The compensation would amount to approximately $22,000 per survivor or widow.