Next Document <> Main Page

PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: DOCUMENT 1 FROM DOCUMENTS Four Mrs. Louis-Phillippe SIMARD, Manager, Post DetermI.tion Review

FROM Lev GUNIN (FILE Number 2948-6524/ 95/76/23/18
ID: 3082-7125/7174/7220/7231/7317/ )

DOCUMENT NUMBER 2

2.1. I was in grade 9, when voluntarism and vulnerability of my class teacher, PERFILOVA Maria Michajlovna, converted me from a good school pupil and a promising young musician into a person without future, persecuted by KGB. She was a communist party member and an outraged careerist. She took one of my school essays - and took it to KGB. She also made an open public court over me at the school, not waiting for KGB command. Officially KGB rejected her accusations. They found nothing, which could be considered as anti-Sovetism, in my composition. But in ex-USSR an obstruction, which Perfilova made me at school, and the very fact that she was in KGB building to report on me was enough to devastate my whole life and to cause what it caused. It is also possible that rejecting Perfilova (what made her insane) they secretly put my name on their black list already by then.

2.2. I was prevented from becoming a student of a Music College or university, and later, when I entered music studies by a miracle and graduated, I was prevented from a good musical carrier. In 1979 I was brutally beaten because of an order from KGB. During many years my social and professional status, my health, my privacy, my security, even my freedom and my life were every minute under a threat. Nobody knows what I came through -, and did not become an alcoholic, or sadist, and never violated any crimI.l rule.

2.3. Because I felt more secure among other persecuted people, I started to cooperate with a number of human rights groups and movements and with some other groups and organizations. Most of them were non-conformist art and poetry \ prose groups. I formed my own poetry circle where I was a leader. I also organized a movement in opposition to ideologically motivated demolition or levelation of Bobruysk's 18-19 century architecture, mostly Jewish. I organized mass photographing of the center of Bobruysk. The local authorities have unofficially forbidden that. "Militia" several times arrested my supporters, and me, our photo films were confiscated. Only in the end of 1980-s I contacted Mr. V. Senderov, Mr. V. Batcshev, Mrs. Elena Bonner and other world-famous dissidents and human rights activists, and also correspondents of the west media in Moscow. Only by then I already had permanent contacts with some representatives of foreign parliaments and embassies, but never with any intelligence. I also maintained close cooperation with two different forces: Frankfurt-based NTS and National Front of Belarus.

2.4. As a person who was deeply involved in the cultural self-determI.tion process of the Soviet Jews I also was the first activist in Belarus, who combined several goals together. They were: studies of Yiddish and Hebrew languages and the Jewish history, revitalization of Bobruysk's Jewish cultural and historical heritage, restoration of Jewish religious community, foundation of a Jewish club, newspaper, theatre, and schools. Nobody - except me - believed by then that it might be possible. My poetry in Yiddish was published in "Sovetisch Heimland" (Moscow) and "Der Arbeiter Stimme" (Warsaw). I also became a co-editor of one underground Jewish magazine, based in Minsk. I also became known in cultural circles in Moscow and Leningrad (St.-Petersburg). I have maintained contacts with the most famous personalities like composer D. Shostakovich, poet A. Voznesensky, singers like V. Tolkunova, or L. Leshchenko, and others. In Minsk (where I studied and worked 2 times a week) I maintained almost close relationship with the whole cultural elite: composers (D.Smolski, L. Obeliovich, G. Vagner, U. Semeniako, and others), historians (Tarasov, Zenon Pozdniak (later leader of the National Front), V. Posse, my relative, A. Gritzkievich, O. Dadiomova), pop-rock musicians, and so on.

2.5. During short periods of time (in 1986-87) it looked like persecutions against me were suspended or lightened. But in the same period of time I started to be persecuted by another political force - by Israeli missionary stuff in Minsk and Bobruysk. By that time my brother Vitaly - a talented painter and brilliant businessman - organized one of the first free ("capitalist") enterprises in Belarus. I was an administrator of one of its section, which arranged invitation of famous artists for tours in Minsk and Bobruysk. So, my brother, Mr. Pinchas Plotkin, an Yiddish poet, I, Mr. Marat Kurtzer, and Igor Gorelik - we formed a first circle, which achieved good results in restoring Jewish life in Bobruysk. A course of Yiddish, a library, a club, and other activities became a reality and refreshed the local Jewish life. This was what Israelis did not want to allow. They wanted to elimI.te the whole Jewish social and cultural life in ex-USSR. They suggested that if life in USSR would become non-attractive for the Jews, they could more easily leave for Israel. They also did everything to terrify Jewish population by rumors about pogroms, and by other exaggerations. Missioners like J. EDEL, Arie ROTENBERG, or Dorit HE came to USSR to arrange total control over the local Jewish life and to put down any competitive power. I new dozens of other missioners who came to Minsk and Bobruysk to devastate local Jewish life and to jeopardize mass migration to Israel. They often expressed their hatred towards Soviet Jews.

2.6. Israelis started to build their own activist infrastructure, alternative to ours. They attracted young aggressive careerists, convincing them that they are totally protected, could commit any crimes - and go unpunished. Those boys and girls in their 20-s like Boris Kagan, Dmitry Levin, Vova Kazinetz, Z. Fridburg and others were nothing without Israeli leadership. Their local leader became Ilia Rodov, my brother's school colleague. Rodov became a known local figure only because my brother's, and my help. My brother Vitaly helped him in everything during their studies at the Art College, he presented Rodov to prominent and influential people, and even helped him by giving him money or work at his enterprise. Rodov was a well-known collaborationist: he cooperated with the communist authorities. He also was considered in intellectual circles as KGB informer and "comsomol" activist. He often accused and "denounced" Jewish "nationalists." But very soon he rapidly changed his views, expressing interest to Yiddish culture (when the group of Yiddishists was the most powerful in Bobruysk). When the influence of Israelis increased, he rapidly changed his opinion again "denouncing" Yiddish and calling to "forget Yiddish and study Hebrew." He was supported not only by Israelis, but by the local communist authorities as well.

2.7. Even by then I already suspected close cooperation between Israelis -and local communist authorities. When Bobruysk was a military zone, and a special authorization was needed for foreigners to visit that city, Israelis went to Bobruysk easily. They also had free meetings with people, which was impossible for any other foreigners, for example, for Finish Baptist missioners. They openly called people to emigrate to Israel using lie, deception, threats and profanation. They did everything to discredit my group, and me. Rodov's group has the full freedom to operate and to work with people. We were stopped by the authorities, disrupted and persecuted. Supported by the communists Rodov announced himself as a chairman, avoiding open and free elections and his followers formed local "Jewish council." People - like me - who restored the Jewish life and created the Jewish club, were expelled from that life and from that club.

2.8. As soon as they seized the power, "Rodovers" started to suppress all activities and cultural events in the Jewish society. They ruined everything that we created: very soon, including Yiddish course and all other courses and activities. They concentrated only on pro-Israeli propaganda and propaganda of immigration to Israel, Hebrew course and religious propaganda. When religious in Israel became the most influential force in institutions, which maintained work among potential immigrants in USSR, Rodov supporters converted themselves into ultra-orthodox. (Before that they were fighting atheists). They also used to confiscate the huge wave of help, gifts, money, which was streaming from the west Jewish communities to Soviet Jews. They have stolen about one thousand valuable gift sets from Baptist community of Finland to the local Jewish community. That gift was handed over through Iakov Gutman, an independent from Israelis leader of Minsk's Jews, to me. The sets were given for free delivery. I wanted to deliver them directly from my home to the people in exchange of their signatures in confirmation that they got them free. But Rodov's group forced me (and Iakov Gutman) to hand them over to the club, using dirty manipulations. Rodov and his group sold the sets as their private property. They openly violated the crimI.l code not only by then. They also robbed our Jewish library 2 times, they threaten people by death, they corrupted local officials, and they demanded money from people for information about Israel and for Israeli visas. They also demanded money for the "club needs", threatening people that - if they would refuse, they would be punished in Israel. Israelis also paid them for their services. In ex-USSR, where an imported TV with video could be almost as valuable as an apartment, they got expensive valuable things from Israelis as gifts. I suspect that they were paid by money, too. A special telephone number was given to Rodov, which enabled him to call Israeli embassy in Moscow and to Israel for free (according to his own words, and I believe that it was true).

2.9. Rodov and co "punished" me in different ways. They spread discreditible rumors against me, they posed intrigues against me at my work, they threaten me, they did so, that I was not invited any more to play in restaurants, on wedding parties, in dancing clubs, and so on, they tried to confront my wife with me. I am absolutely sure that Rodov's actions against me were correlated with the persecutions, which I faced from the local authorities. In Minsk I used to visit Mr. Garik Chajtovich, - my friend and a kind person. He was a Jewish activist and Hebrew teacher. Practically all the Israeli missioners have visited hiM.. I met few high-ranked Israeli representatives through Garik or in his place several times and spoke to theM.. I tried to convince them that they should stop supporting odious persons like Rodov and to stop suppressing the development of Jewish cultural life in USSR. They usually answered that their priority is to convince people to leave for Israel, and they do not care about anything else. But one time I got an unusual answer. The man who gave it to me was a very important person. I could admit how Garik respect and treat hiM.. Even Israelis who were with this man obeyed hiM.. He told me that I have to stop talking about such things. He also told me that he has a pity to me because, according to him, I would pay a high price for my "nihilism" and freethinking, my family, my relatives would suffer, and my life will become miserable...

2.10. Because with time people were convinced that Rodov is a crook, and were too angry on him, I, brothers Strupinsky, Marat Kurtzer and others took the power in our own hands, discharging Rodov and his company. Only then I understood very soon that the problem was not in Rodov. Without him Israelis have found other ways to achieve their goals. And very soon my position became as weak as before. Israelis also took revenge in Minsk, displacing Iakov Gutman, the main figure in opposition to their policy in Belarus. Now nothing might stop them from forcible (in the deeper sense) transportation of hundred of thousands Jews from Belarus to Israel.

2.11. From 1988 my brother's health became more and more bad. He has a blood cancer, but I was sure that his disease was caused because he was exposed to radiation. During many month doctors Kustanovich (she died recently in USA from cancer), Cherny and Petrusha did not report Vitaly's bad blood tests. They also accused him in simulating to "avoid military service" and threaten to kill hiM.. Since he became sick I fought to get his true diagnose and to win an appropriate treatment for hiM.. In the end of 1987 we understood that for saving my brother's life we have to move to one of the West countries. I tried to get an immigration visa to US, but America was "closed" very soon because of a treaty, which Israel demanded: about leaving the only one way for Soviet Jews - only to Israel. I also tried to get a visa in the German embassy, but it was too late. Then we had to request a visa only from Israel. We did all necessary steps to obtain it, but we did not get any visas. Hundreds of people whom I helped to get visas (I told them that I do not recommend them to go to Israel, but they kept asking me with passion, and I helped them) got them, but not my brother and me. Even Genady Shulman, one from the Rodov's group, who was kind to us and arranged visas for thousands of people, could not obtain visas for my brother, and me. I went to Moscow, to Israeli embassy, where they knew me very good as one of the activists and where I always had an access to, and spoke to Ambassador Mr. Levin, but without any result.

In 1988 Israel have submitted special visas-invitations for Jewish activists for a free trip to Israel. In spite of my detestation of Rodov I phoned him in an attempt to save my brother's life (because he composed a list of names for these invitations). "What did your brother did for the Jewish movement, for Zionism? - he asked. Avoiding tensions I did not tell him that my brother did for Rodov more then he deserved and that my brother put his business under a risk organizing Jewish events when the local authorities did not approve theM.. I only asked him about compassion. "There are more valuable things then human life, - he responded. Later I had a chance to see what these things are. Nobody from Rodov's group went to Israel with that free invitation, only Rodov's father went to Israel because he did small speculation trade under the table, and used that occasion as a shield...

In August, 1989 my brother, and me, we went to Poland, where a blood test, which was made to him, had shown strange processes in his organisM.. In September I started a new Jewish magazine "Vos Herzach?" and participated in a current issue of "CONTACT." My brother Vitaly gave his caf? (he was the owner) again for the Jewish club meeting. In September also came a telephone threat that my brother Vitaly would die. In January 1990 another person called and told the same.

2.12. When in 1989 first letters began to arrive from those who already settled in Israel, their relatives discovered that Russian speaking people are persecuted in Israel, that Israelis hate us and treat us as second-class people, many of the Jews in Bobruysk cancelled their tickets and visas. It seemed to be a total disaster for Israeli plan to capture half a million or more Soviet Jews. But they have found a solution very soon. Somebody began to spread rumors about possible pogroms. Every day brought a "reliable" information that Jews are in danger. Jewish cemeteries were vandalized everywhere. By that time I was a member of a group that investigated this wave of vandalisM.. Most active members in that group were Baltic Jews. A small Baptist team and NTS representatives also participated. We discovered that vandalism started in west regions of USSR and moved chronologically from the Northwest to Southeast. Pogroms in Muslim region were not known. It was absolutely clear that a team of "vandals" traveled by train from town to town, from city to city, starting from Riga. They had a steady pace, so, Soviet authorities (if they would want to stop hooligans) could figure out very easy where should be their next stop and next pogrom - and catch theM.. But the authorities did not want to stop theM.. Israelis also used different methods to calm down information about vandalisM.. I personally (as well as others) took the description of our conclusions about vandalism to Israeli embassy, but they became furious and refused to send this information to Israeli press. I have submitted the description about vandalism against Jewish cemeteries (without our conclusion) to Washington Post and Chicago Tribune correspondents in Moscow, as well as to Israeli newspapers (enclosing photos of vandalized graves), but no newspaper outside USSR published this information. I was sure that Israelis used their influence to prevent newspapers from that publication. I was even more convinced about Israeli involvement when such a pogrom happened in my native town. Graves that related to non pro-Israeli activists' were mainly targeted, when pro-Israeli families' graves were not touched. My father's grave was vandalized, the monument was broken.

2.13. I informed US president's special representative, Mr. Nikolai Petro, that Israelis are using illegal methods to force people to leave USSR for Israel. I also contacted several US diplomats including Mrs. Daria Arturovna Fein. I met Daria Arturovna at hotel "Ukraine" in Moscow. She took a look at the photos and asked if they are not a fake. I told her that I could give her an origI.l film from which the photos were made. And I gave the film to her. She held the film several minutes in her hands. I saw that she is trembling. After some hesitation she gave the film and the photos back to me, refusing to admit them and giving no explanations. I told to prominent personalities in Frankfurt, in Warsaw and in Paris about these acts of vandalism, but they could not organize even a single publication.

2.14. In January-February 1990 I came to Paris hoping to obtain a visa for my brother. I was warmly welcomed by all Jewish organizations in Paris and Lion, which I visited, and also by Russian immigrants' organizations, including NTS. They gave me money, shelters, they bought me train tickets to Lion several times. My French friends also helped me a lot. I could not tell Jews that I do not want go to Israel. They supported Israel's plan to get from half to one million people from USSR. To justify my request for help in obtaining the French visa for my brother I told them that during almost 2 years we could not get an Israeli visa. After that some leaders of the Jewish organizations in Paris, including M-me Helman from COJASOR, proposed me their mediation in my request for an Israeli visa. They told me that Jewish communities in France have collected so much money for Israel, that Israelis must listen to theM.. M-me Helman and others arranged a meeting for me with Israelis in Israeli embassy. A visa for me and for my brother had to be given for me there. I knew that local AVIR in Bobruysk could not accept a visa, which came not by mail, and could not give us a permission to leave USSR. But I had no solution. When I came to Israeli embassy, which situated down the Le Sacr? Coeur de Monmartre, they did not let me in. I called the doorbell, and also phoned them several times with no result.

2.15. My brother Vitaly tragically died in May 1990. Half a year after his death I discovered just occasionally that the Jewish community in Lion have collected money for his treatment and have submitted a medical treatment visa for hiM.. This visa was confiscated by the Soviet authorities.... After his death I did not need an Israeli visa any more - because I never wanted to immigrate, and from 1987 I understood very well that my place is not in Israel. Before my brother's death we sold some of our property and did other steps expecting a visa from Israel, but now we suspended all such steps.

2.16. One day - when Rodov already left for Israel - one former "Rodovetz" called my doorbell when my wife was at work. I opened the door, and then he told me that he missed my door with somebody else's. In that very moment another person have approached. He asked, "is Gunin lives here?". I recognized hiM.. Living near KGB building I often saw him entering it. I also saw him at the Jewish club where he was with Mr. Sheremetiev, local UKGB chairman. Ilia Rodov has invited him by then to the club to read a lecture. Later I saw this man (who came to visit me) with Rodov in Bobruysk as minimum two times. He started to speak to me without entering my apartment. He told me that I have to quit USSR for Israel within two months. He said that this decision about me is non-reversible and can not be appealed. I was so terrified that I could not speak. But I only asked him what about Israeli visa. "Visa budet"" ("visa will come"), he told in response. And he also told me that I should go directly to Israel, without tricks. 2 days after visas started to arrive. All visas - a whole package, - which were suspended before, came in 2 envelopes (see Supplements, Documents # 20, a,b,c,d,e, etc. - total number is 11).. Where these visas were and who kept them, I do not know, but it convinced me that the situation is very serious, and I must go. When after two months we did not leave USSR yet, such terrible, even monstrous events occurred that I understood: I must go.

2.17. It did not mean that I agreed to go to Israel. I secretly asked my friends in Poland to meet me at the Central Railway Station in Warsaw. I had to try to visit foreign embassies in Warsaw, and, if it could give nothing, then we had to go to Germany (my friends had to buy us tickets to Frankfurt). When our train came to Warsaw, and my Polish friends already approached to the wagon, a group of unknown people surrounded and captured us. One of them, probably chairman, spoke Polish with a Hebrew accent. It was a big man in his middle ages. Mostly he spoke to me, and also an aggressive woman. They were ready to take us with them immediately by physical force, but only the presence of my Polish friends made them hesitating. I am sure that they started negotiations with us only to win the time: they probably used it to find out through Mossad sources who are my friends and what they able to do. They probably also wanted to find out what consequences Israelis would have in case of an eventual scandal, what tactics to use against us, and what their supervisors recommended. They disagree immediately to let us go with my friends. Meanwhile my friends called 2 Polish policemen. I told the policemen that I do not want go to Israel, I asked for their help. The policemen told me that if I was agree to obtain Israeli visa - then I probably must go to Israel. Then I shown them a temporary visa for staying in Poland 3 days, and told them that only after 3 days I might be expelled from Poland, and not by Israelis... The policemen then went to hear what Israelis could say theM.. I did not hear what they discussed - because they moved farther from me (my family stayed with the Israelis as hostages while I spoke to policemen), but when they finished talking, the policemen left. We were taken to a hotel, completely surrounded and guarded by Israelis, from where we could not escape, and then - to the airport.

So, my family, and me, we were taken to Israel by force, against our will, this was a captivity! Israel is not our country. Our native country is Belarus, and we still consider ourselves as citizens of Belarus. We are not Israeli citizens because that citizenship was thrust on us.

NOTE: I could support this statement by my declarations, which I made, when I lived in ex-USSR and in Israel. You could see obviously that these declarations were written many years ago or even make a criminological test to define their age. They are: 1) My declaration to the procuratories of the both districts of city Bobruysk (Lenin and Pervomay), and to the General procuratory of Bobruysk, in which I tried to protest my ultimative deportation to Israel. (1990) 2) My declaration about Israel's illegal activity in Belarus (1988-89). 3) My declaration to the Israeli authorities (1991-1994). Please, take it into considaration ! ! !

NEXT DOCUMENT: Document Number 3

PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: Document number 2

For Mr. Louis-Phillippe SIMARD, Manager, Post DetermI.tion Review
FROM Lev GUNIN
(FILE Number 2948-6524/ 95/76/23/18
ID: 3082-7125/7174/7220/7231/7317/)

DOCUMENT NUMBER 3
TRANSLATOR'S SABOTAGE

3.1.The very first time went to Mr. Le Brune's office when we were in a hotel for refugees (YMCA) yet.

3.2.We also came to Mrs. Broder's apartment to "complete the PIF" and to "compose the story" in November 1994.

3.3.I told Mrs. Broder that I have already composed my refugee claiM.. And gave her the text of my claim in Russian and in
English. I refused to cooperate with her in "composing the story." She was extremely persistent and ultimate, but also flexible
and cunning in achieving her goals. When she understood that she could not break my will not to participate in "composing
the story," she told us to come later. Between that and the next appointment my wife was worked upon by Lucy (our relative,
whose negative attitude towards me in ex-USSR and in Israel scared me a lot in the past) and by Mrs. Broder. They told her
that all direct or indirect criticism of the state of Israel must be excluded from my statement. They also told that I should not
mention Israeli army, censorship in Israel, human rights violations, police brutality, and provocation against me made by
police; my tensions with Mossad and Shabak, or persecutions against me ordered by Israeli authorities. The psychological
pressure on my wife and on me was so strong that it could push us towards a suicide. We also met Mr. Le Brune in that
period of time, and he also suggested that our claim have to be based on everyday occurrences and social conflicts, but not
on political persecutions. When we met Mrs. Eleonora Broder next time I started to fight each sentence, but it was very
complicated since my wife had arguments with me taking Eleonora's side. But I want to make it clear: MY WIFE AND ME -
WE NEVER AUTHORIZED MRS. BRODER TO CHANGE OR MODIFY OUR REFUGEE CLAIM.. We only agreed
to allow some shortening.

3.4.Very soon Mrs. Broder called us and told us to sign her translation. I asked her to read us the context in Russian, but she
refused motivating her refusal by the lack of time. She also told us that only 5 more days are left (to complete the PIF and
submit the claim; and that the total number of days is 14), and if it would not be submitted, then a deportation order is going
to be issued for us. (In reality 20 days or even more are given, but we did not know about that). Then I told her that I could
type my story with her shortenings just in 1 hour in English myself - and give her or another translator to sign it (because I
wanted to control its context, and I was not good enough in French by then). She told me that in Quebec only French-written
claims are accepted. Because of her threats and because my wife was near a hysterics I was forced to sign it.

3.5.In December 1994 and January 1995 I gave a copy of Mrs. Broder's translation of my refugee claim to several people;
they knew French very well. Using their help I discovered that the context of our refugee claim was seriously distorted and
sometimes even converted by Mrs. Broder. Some details were given in such interpretation (translation) that they contradicted
with other details. We also discovered that the text of her French translation was different from her back translation into
Russian made after my request and written by her own hand. (I wanted to verify her translation). When Lucy's purposes of
what she did to us might been explained by various reasons, the purpose of Mrs. Broder might be only one: to sabotage the
translation. I repeat that she distorted the translation not because of incompetence or unconsciousness mistakes but on
purpose. And I have good evidence: she excluded one paragraph from my story without even discussing it with us. It was a
description of humiliation over other Russian-speaking workers and me by employers-Israelis in August 1991. Instead of
typing this paragraph she made a statement in my name not just generalizing the situation, but placing an abstract declaration
about slavery in Israel. When I asked her later why she did it, she answered that immigration commissioners would never
believe that something like this exist in Israel. "They would call it "slavery" - and tell you that slavery doesn't exist in Israel.
Why then she inserted that pure statement about slavery in Israel in my name? If even a description of real events, which
could be treated as a denunciation of slavery is "bad", a pure statement about slavery (without any explanation) is "more
worse" then?! I could only explain that by favor, which Mrs. Broder did to the commissioners (immigration oficer in
particular) - because they later used this exactly paragraph (in Mrs. Broder's translation of my refugee claim) as a key
indication of "exaggerations" and based their rejection of our refugee claim mostly on it. Mrs. Broder also told me that she
inserted this paragraph because I mentioned slavery in one of our conversations. I said that it does not mean that I permitted
to insert it.

3.6. I said that I do not remember if I really said that. In response Eleonora said that she secretly recorded all our
conversations and now could prove that I told it. She never agreed to correct her translation. She even threaten me by telling
that she is going to present above mentioned tapes to the immigration tribunal - and she claimed that I spoke enough on these
tapes to make a conclusion that I am dangerous to Israel and "was persecuted correctly".

3.7. The translation of our claim was also made in a sarcastic and humiliating manner as if the translator not just repeated the
Russian text in French, but wrote a humorist story about what was described. 3.8. Lucy constantly threatened us during my
dispute with Eleonora, and I think that her threats came as a reaction on my pretensions to Eleonora. She was threatening us
from February till May 1995. She told that she did a lot for us - but we are not thankful - and we are going to pay for it. She
often told us with bravado that she knows everything about us. She said that some people follow us, that my phone is
bugged, and that my mails are searched. And she demonstrated her knowledge about really discreet information, which
should be known only to my lawyer. I asked my lawyer and demanded from Mrs. Broder not to make publicly known
information, which should be discreet, but Lucy demonstrated her access to everything, what took place in my lawyer's office
-from the dates of our appointments with him to the dates of our immigration hearings, and so on. She used to come to the
immigration tribunal each time when our hearings took place - and even appeared in the room where the hearing took place:
each time without our permission.

3.9. One time she told me with the same bravado (it was in February 1995) that a very partial committee is going to be
assigned to my file. She told me that an especially aggressive immigration officer would be called from Toronto "to calm" me
down. She was right.

3.10. Later it came out that Mrs. Broder sabotaged not only our immigration claim, but also translations of the articles, of
documents, in other words - everything, what she has to translate. Her distortion of the my wife's birth certificate data
enabled immigration officer to excuse her report made to the Israeli embassy about us.

3.11. Not only Lucy was related to Israel, but also Mrs. E. Broder. Soon after we met she married a businessman from
Israel, who maintained all business contacts in Israel - according to his words. She was born in Odessa, but lived several
years in Cuba: it is also an information to reflect.

3.12. It is too painful for me to believe that my lawyer did not remove two above-mentioned paragraphs that Mrs. Broder
inserted without our permission because he acted on purpose. I still want to trust him, and I prefer to think that he was tired,
and this was what caused his mistake. When he was finishing to fix "mistakes", distortions and non-authorized "adjustments",
which Mrs. Broder have did in her "translation", it was late at night, and both him, and me, especially, my mother, were tired,
and I did not check the translation properly. I also trusted him, and this is why I signed the new version without a proper
check. I also prefer to think that he did not let me verify translations of all the documents in my file before the hearings (I
asked him many times to give me documents of my file for a control) because he was constantly busy, and could not prepare
them to me. If he would give me that chance, I could discover before the hearings that Mrs. Broder falsified the translation
not only of our claim, but of all other documents as well (like my wife's certificate). I know that the immigration committee,
which gave no positive decision to "Russians" from Israel at all, would answer "no" even if there were no distortions in
translations at all.

3.13. Some sort of misunderstanding - I believe - happened between my lawyer and me, in result of which the most
important remarks about IRB's negative decision in our case were not submitted with the appeal. This is why I am asking you
to take this submission in consideration when decision in my appeal will be considered.

I submitt examples of Mrs. Broder's sabotage in Supplements, Documents # 92,93, 94, 95, 96, 97.

NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4]]]

PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT 3 of DOCUMENTS]]]

GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4     APRIL-MAY 1997
DOCUMENT 1 (2-nd version)
(Was submitted to Amnesty International via E-MAIL)

MY COPY OF APPEAL TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Why I appeal? 1) Because my complains, which I once submitted to Amnesty International from Israel, played if not the
main, a very important role during all the 3 immigration hearings in our case. 2) Because if not directly, then indirectly (from a
particular point of view) IRB members insinuated that I must be punished for my contacts with Amnesty International. 3)
Because what happened during my immigration hearing here in Montreal (Quebec, Canada) is so incredible and horrible that
will encourage human right violations everywhere on a wider scale. 4) Because in the former USSR as well as in Israel I was
a human rights activist and was considered a human rights activist by the people and press. 5) Because during the hearing the
immigration officer falsified Amnesty International's (and other human rights organizations') documents and lied about theM.. 6)
Because if a family comes to a country (which accepts refugees in general) but faces abuses, ungrounded accusations, threats,
hatred and injustice within an immigration court room - that means a mayhem for the human rights, placing the very basis of
human rights in jeopardy. 7) Because I'm absolutely certain (and I have presented undeniable evidences to the immigration
board) that I'm going to be killed and the members of my family are going to be killed if we will be turned back to Israel since
I could suggest that something like a death penalty was considered there against me for my views.

Why I Appeal Before I Have The Immigration Board's FI.l Decision In My Case? 1) Because I have to dispute the very
procedure of the hearing in our case, which abused us and placed our lives under the definite danger. 2) Because I know of
some examples when a fI.l negative decision was sent to refugee claimants together with a deportation order without the
rights to appeal. 3) Because after what happened during our immigration hearing I feel insecure even here. 4) Because it
looks like they violated some legal and moral norms while hearing our case not for giving us later a positive decision. 5)
Because now, when the information about us was submitted by the immigration officer to Israel there can be a wave of wider
pressure from Israel to turn us back. I was actually expelled from the former USSR, where I was persecuted for my artistic,
philosophical, ideological and political views, where I was beaten, prevented from social and professional success, watched
and threatened. I was deported to Israel. When we moved away from the USSR we tried to escape to a third country but
were captured by Israelis and were taken to Israel by force.

We were systematically assaulted, beaten, disgraced, threatened, discrimI.ted against (persecuted) in Israel. We were
denied a permission to leave the country, and could not go away for 3 1/2 years. We collected thousands of evidences in
discrimI.tion and persecutions. Israeli state radio made a provocation, aiming to elimI.te me, Israeli newspapers called to
destroy all my works - but for this immigration board it's still not "enough"...

*Why I Think My Human Rights Were Violated By the Court?

Inside The Courtroom: 1)Some of the main documentary proofs (statements, affidavits, letters, receipts, articles, etc.) have
been disappeared or were ignored as if they were (disappeared).See pages A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5. 1-a)Only my college
diploma was mentioned during immigration hearings, and the commissioners acted as if my university diploma does not exist.
In reality I mentioned it during the hearings and the copy of this diploma also was in my file. 2)Other extremely important
documents were mentioned but were ignored (if not - they might be an obstacle to what the judges incrimI.ted me). Pages
B-1,B-2,B-3,B-4.B-5. 3) Other documents were mentioned as incomplete proof of particular events, when in reality they
were given to support other events. In the same time documents which relate to these events were ignored. Pages C-1, C-2.
4) In the same way my words were ignored, too. For example, I was asked an insinuating question. My answer closed that
question by a clear and unbeatable contra-argument. So, what then? Then the same insinuation was repeated - but this time in
an affirmative form: As if I said nothing. The same question could be given 2, 3, 5 times non-stop. If I gave the same answer
again and again they shouted on me, used threats, aggression, incredible accusations to force me to change my answer. It's
clear that such a method violates moral and legal norms - and any hesitation by a refugee claimant under such an illegal
psychological pressure can not be taken into consideration. D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4. 5) Too often they questioned me giving me
no rights to response. They shouted me down replacing my eventual answer by their own - and later based their conclusions
not on my answer but on their own statement posing it as my - not their - words. E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4. 6) It was repeated
again and again that they doubt about our rights to appeal (for a refugee status) because our actions (when we were in Israel)
weren't a good solution. As examples of "good solutions" were mentioned: A demolition of our family, a crimI.l offense -
and so on! F-1, F-2. 7) Several times the board members expressed their disapproval by the norms of democracy or by my
approval of the democracy laws. G-1, G-2, G-3. It is absolutely clear that our case was treated not according to Canadians
laws but according to the rules and norms of Israel since - in the judges' eyes - we belong not to Canadian but to Israeli
jurisdiction. G-4, G-5, G-6. This position - neither being ordered to the board or being the product of the board itself - made
the courtroom a part of Israel's territory. G-7, G-8. 8)The procedure of our immigration hearing wasn't an investigation in our
case but a pure pro-Israel's propaganda. Its goal wasn't to detect whether or not our claim for refugee status is justified but to
defend the image of Israel as a "good" country in an imprudent and abusing forM.. The depersonalization of our claim was
done in an extreme form ignoring our personal history. So the only criteria chosen to support the board's point of view was
the very fact that we came from Israel. But the only admissible attitude to refugees has to base the decision on what
happened to them personally, not on which country they flied. H-1, H-2, H-3. 9)The members of the board expressed their
detestation of the human rights defense and verbally denied (directly or indirectly) a number of recognized human rights.I-1,
I-2, etc. 10)They also (indirectly, but clear) expressed a point that if I'll be punished in Israel for my views - it's justified
because I'm "guilty" J-1, J-2, etc. 11)Sending faxes to Israeli embassy and demanding some definite information about us, the
immigration officer violated another moral and judicial principle: Not to announce asylum seekers claim to the government of
a country refugee claimants escaped from .K-1, K-2, etc. 12)Reading Amnesty International's and other reports the
immigration officer distorted and sometimes falsified their meaning.L-1, L-2,ect. 13) Documents submitted by the Israeli
government, by it's dependents or by it's embassy were considered as absolutely reliable and were voluntarily represented by
the tribunal as non-debatable. In the same time documents that were represented by my lawyer (or my documents) -
newspapers, statements, declarations, and so on - weren't treated as equal to Israeli propaganda papers. More then that: At
least our documents were completely ignored: As if they never existed. In the same time the documentation presented by
Israeli government can't be treated as an arbitrary source: Because Israel is involved. Meanwhile a number of my documents
may be considered as more objective and independent. M-1,M-2, etc. 14) The immigration officer used 1) an open lie 2)
threats 3) desinformation; 4) expressed an unexplained malicious anger towards us; 5) claimed one thing to defend her
position during our hearing and claimed the contrary during the hearing in Metelnitsky family case (our cases are related, and I
was called as a witness to their hearing); 6) she lied about what I said, about what she previously said , about what was said
about the situation in Israel and so on; 7) her behavior towards us and Metelnitsky family was so incredibly aggressive as if
she had a personal reason to punish us, or to extermI.te us. N-1,N-2,etc. 15)A "yes" or "no" answer was demanded in
situations when it was clear that such an answer is absolutely impossible. Demanding "yes" or "no" answer only they justified
their decision not to let me speak.O-1,O-2, etc.

Outside The Courtroom: 1)When we came to Montreal I put everything that happened to us in Israel in writing and gave that
piece of paper to my first lawyer's translator, Mrs. Eleonora Broder. She sabotaged the translation distorting the sense of my
story, inserting her own inventions and sentences which sounded like provocation. I demanded a translation back to Russian
from her, and she did it. She wrote it by her own hand. That manuscript is quite different from her French version. So, she did
it to smoothen the distortions and to prevent me from complaining. I have also other proofs of her sabotage.2-A, 2-A1,
2-A2, etc. 2) Mrs.Eleonora Broder sabotaged the translations of newspaper's articles as well. From one hand she
exaggerated a number of descriptions of persecutions against Russian-speaking people "to do me a favor" (I think her goal
was to discredit these articles). But on the other hand she excluded the most important paragraphs in her translation and gave
the opposite meaning to the most important facts and conclusions.2-B, etc. 3) Mrs.Eleonora Broder also sabotaged the
translation of some official papers and other documents which I prepared to support my claiM.. She told us that she has
translated some of them and that she would find a translator from Hebrew - but it was a lie. If not our complains to the lawyer
and an alert note we gave to him: Then no documents were translated. 2-C,ect. 4)Mrs.Eleonora Broder and her assistant
organized a psychological warfare on my wife causing her deep depression, and also provoked us to attempt suicide.2-D,ect.
5) Mrs. Broder inserted some particular phrases into my refugee claim, which I didn't want to see there. Later, in the
courtroom, these phrases were used against me. These phrases were taken from articles, which I wrote before we escaped
from Israel. Among them were the articles, which I hadn't presented to Mrs.Broder or to my lawyer when she was doing the
translation of my refugee claiM.. The members of the immigration board have exploited these phrases again and again: What
leads to a suggestion that it might not happened occasionally.2-E, etc. 6) There is a visible connection between the
immigration officer - and information, which might possess only Mr.Mark Kotlarsky, who lives in Israel. This gentlemen acted
once as an informer and a provocateur for Israeli authorities. He wrote an article about me in 1994, in Israel. This article was
written in a humiliated and sarcastic manner. Mr.Kotlarsky used the information, which I shared with him (as with a close
friend of mine) against me. This article is outright slander, mystification, false insinuations and lie... Before I discovered that
Mark Kotlarsky might act as a government's agent I told him some things which I never told to any other person. During our
immigration hearing and during the hearing of family Metelnitzky these things were used by the immigration officer (against
me). I have no other explanation but that she's might be in a contact with Mr.Kotlarsky. 2-F, etc. 7) a) A campaign of lie and
slender against me inside Israel coincide with a number of actions against me in Montreal, which source might be the
consulate of Israel. If such things are happened - then Israel could eventually influence the immigration board decision in my
immigration case, too. b) Then, I know from reliable sources that the immigration officer, the member of the immigration
board in my case, is a Jew. I have nothing against her nationality. But, from the other hand, if the immigration officer is a Jew
and the patriot of Israel (the last is too clear), what an arbitrary role in our case she should play? She has no moral and - may
be - legal rights to judge in refugees' from Israel cases. 2-J, etc. 8)When we came to Montreal we gave my wife's birth
certificate and it's legal translation to our lawyer. Dispute the submission of that legal translation Mrs.Broder did her own
translation. Now we discovered that she sabotaged ("refused") to translate my wife's parents' nationality. There is a clear
connection between that sabotage and the immigration officer's tactics in that issue.

CONCLUSIONS: our 3 immigration hearings have nothing in common with any legal procedure. They rather remind of an
inquisition court or a secret political tribunal. This tribunal was arranged to punish me for my ideological views - not to decide
whether or not our (my family's and mine) claim for a refugee status is justified. It was used for the political purposes: To
"show" how just any information about human rights violations in Israel, which not concerns Arabs, can be calmed down -
and to express a huge pro-Israel propaganda. They made clear that they treat our escape from Israel as a mutiny and will
never admit the very fact that we are in Canada, in Quebec, not in Israel. Their words, their behavior - everything - was
meant to show us that we could only deserve to be treated according to the Canadian rules after getting a status in Canada.
Before that we don't deserve to be treated by Canadian rules. That's why we were treated according to the rules and norms
of Israel!!! It hard to find a more offensive ritual of humiliations over the juridical norms then that... It was absolutely clear for
the judges - as well as for ourselves - that we were severely persecuted in Israel, that all members of my family were severely
abused and that the definite casualties were inflicted to our health, including the children. It was also absolutely clear to the
judges that the deportation back to Israel is a death penalty for all members of our family. The tricky thing is that the
immigration board expressed almost no doubt about persecutions we survived in Israel or even recognized the harshness of
these persecutions.(2-J-4). But the point is that they claim ... we are guilty in the persecutions ourselves - and therefore they
don't worry about our souls and our lives... So, this is not even a tribunal, but a brutal act of a vengeance.

SUPPLEMENTS:

1.A LIST OF TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH OR FRENCH ARTICLES. 2.DOCUMENTS. 3.TAPES FROM THE
IMMIGRATION HEARINGS. 4.OTHER MATHERIAL PROOFS. 5.OTHER DOCUMENTS. SINCERELY YOURS,
Lev GUNIN

< e-mail address: leog@total.net

GROUP OF DOCUMENTS #4
DOCUMENT number 2
To The Federal Court of Canada
from Alla Gunin.

FEDERAL COURT Supreme Court Building Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0H9

Alla Gunin 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 201 Montreal, Quebec, CANADA H2X 2B5
Tel.(514)944-1294

Dear Sirs! This appeal is formal. It composed not by a lawyer but by the refugee claimants themselves. Despite a temptation
to treat it as a non-official letter we want an official response.

We believe that we are victims of partiality, and our refugee claim has been refused because of extreme generalization and
political approach towards our claiM.. That became possible only because some refugee boards of Canadian Ministry of
Immigration are manipulated by a foreign state. This is the main reason why our refugee claim was denied.

Our case is extraordI.ry. My husband was a relatively well - known dissident in the former USSR and was severely
persecuted by communist authorities. He was a dissident also in Israel. He was persecuted for his views in Israel as well. The
state radio and newspapers called to take the law in own hands and to punish hiM.. We were beaten, assaulted, and
disgraced. All members of our family faced constant mockery.

Our case is extraordI.ry also because we presented so many documentary proofs of persecutions as probably nobody else.
The documents we presented are absolutely reliable: official, legal, medical, juridical, and others. Even in the tribunal negative
decision we can read that the tribunal agree that under certain circumstances persecutions, which we described, "difficulties"
(they called persecutions like that)"could take place". We also presented unbeatable evidences that a threat to our lives and
to our mental and physical health exist in Israel. Our claim is special also because we did absolutely everything for finding
protection in Israel. We turned to police, to the Ministry of Police,to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, to the Minister of
Culture, to all human rights organizations, including Amnesty International's headquarters in Tel-Aviv, to famous parliament
members, to newspapers and to any other possible sources. We have Amnesty International confirmation in our case, which
arrived here in response to tribunal's inquiry.

The reason of tribunal's negative decision and our eventual deportation from Canada was expressed by the immigration
officer, Mrs. Judith Malka. During our 3-rd immigration hearing (it can be listed as 2-nd by Immigration) she hinted at her
desire to send my husband to Israel because he must be punished there for his views. We believe that not the commissioners
but she was the only person who made a decision in our case and that she also composed the text of the decision. She and
the chairman of the tribunal said us that we may be persecuted in Canada as well, our children may be beaten and we may be
also discrimI.ted against. We understood their words as a bad hidden threat. Tribunal's negative decision and Mrs. Malka
and Mr. Boisrond's insinuations during the hearings send us the message: We must be punished! But what for? We are
innocent people, and we did no crimes, ever!

The answer why we have to be punished may be found probably in paragraphs #4 and 5 of the decision's text, which
suggests thhat immigrants from ex-USSR in Israel have no rights to claim a status of refugee in Canada because they are
property of Israeli government. Israel bought them paying for their transportation to Israel, and for other things for theM.. So,
they belong to Israel forever. And the paragraph 6 suggests that the ordI.ry Israelis also paid their part to be our masters!
This very fact that this suggestion is made indirectly and that the information about the mentioned payments made by Israel
and Israelis is incorrect is not really matter. I am absolutely sure that our lives will be in danger in Israel and that my husband
will be killed or imprisoned immediately or soon after our arrival to Israel.

What will be with us without him, what will be with his mother? Please, take pity on us! Save our souls! Save my children!
Sincerely yours, - Alla Gunin

GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4
DOCUMENT 3
TO THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
From Lev GUNIN

Dear Sirs! We came here as thousands of other refugee claimants who flied from their countries to Canada. But our case is
special, may be - even unique. In ex-USSR I was a dissident; I was severely persecuted by communist authorities. I was
relatively well known in my native republic. Under certain circumstances I refused to declare that I never desired to immigrate
to Israel. Now I actually claim that I was deported to Israel from my native Blears because of my political activity. My family
and me tried to escape to Germany but were seized in Warsaw by Israelis. They took us to Israel by force, and we have
certain evidences. In Israel my family and me, we were severely persecuted. I presented the reasons of these persecutions in
my claim, and also during my immigration hearings. I was considered as a dissident in Israel, too. Our case is special also
because we presented more documentary proofs of what happened to us then probably no other refugee claimants.
Persecutions against us in Israel were massive, systematic and dangerous to us. They caused physical and moral loses to us.
Despite clear evidences and undeniable proofs our claim was denied. It happened only because of wide-scaled conspiracy
against Russian-speaking refugees from Israel, and because the immigration committee assigned to our case was manipulated
by a foreign state.

We have several well-grounded reasons: enough to accuse members of the committee in partiality. Almost all basic juridical
norms and elements were violated during our 3 immigration hearings (see Document # 1). The basic moral and political norms
of Canadian society were replaced acting in Israel. Mrs. Judith Malka, the immigration officer, spoke to us and acted as
Israelis normally do. She openly expressed her hatred to us personally - and to Russian speaking people in general. Her
manner and her ironical attitude were assaulting. Besides, she openly assaulted us directly several times (see Document #1).
Her aggression and threats can be explained only by her partiality. When she couldn't control her emotions of hatred and
detestation she left the room of the hearings two times. May be her reaction was so visual because she's a Jew and - it looks
like that - an Israeli. Then - why she was sent to such a hearing? We have 7 main points in connection with that: 1. It is
absolutely clear that the two commissioners refused to participate in our hearings (in other words, kept them out of the way of
the hearing). Mrs. Malka was given an option to speak non-stop during almost all the time excluding rare exceptions. She
accused us, shouted on us, declared pure political pro-Israeli propaganda and accused me in acting against Israel without any
interruption from the judges. Of course, they can claim that they participated by hearing and analyzing. But then their passivity
caused a situation when they had to analyze only what Mrs. Malka gave them to analyze. When Mr. Boisrond spoke he
never opened his own topic and used his role for illegal methods of pressure to distort my responses to Mrs. Malka's
previous questions. 2. The commissioners refused to sign the decision. There are no their signatures on that document. That's
another proof that Mrs. Malka composed that document herself. 3. The committee decision is based on her statements,
insinuations, accusations and declarations only. If something correspond to what Mr. Boisrond said - he just repeated what
Mrs. Malka already said before. The stylistics of the text and the essence of it is deeply differ from Mr. Boisrond's and Mrs.
Madelenine Marien-Roy's, who completely kept her aloof from the hearing (except of few formal words). In the same time
that stylistics fits to Mrs. Malka's manner. These two suggestions allow us to detect her as the only author of the decision,
what is the severe violation of the law. 4. This committee gives no positive decisions in refugees' from Israel cases. When in
1994-95 about 52% of refugees from Israel were recognized as Convention refugees, with this committee it is "0" (or almost
"0"?). 5. She's refusing to give her motivations behind that decision. But to explain such a decision is a juridical norM.. She
replaced any explanations by a pure political rhetoric and pro-Israeli propaganda, which has nothing what to do with our
claiM.. She is also a person who contacted Israeli embassy for explanations (instructions?) in our case. 6. The committee
decision ignores all documents we presented as if there were no documents at all. In the same time to support its statements
the committee used documents, which credibility is "0", and that's obvious not just towards our case but in general sense. But
most of the document used in the decision have no relationship to our case and were given just because something had to be
given. 7. By denying our claim the Immigration committed one of the most inhuman and cruel actions in its history. I am may
be just one of few people in the world who suffered so much for expressing their opinions. I am still living only because of a
miracle, which saved me in ex-USSR, and from angry "patriots"-Israelis. We had so many documentary proof of our refugee
claim as nobody else. We had testimonies, certificates, and articles, which I wrote for various newspapers. We had Amnesty
International confirmation in my case... My children, wives, mother's suffering was just rejected by commissioners. They
acted against us as if we were solders of an enemy army, not innocent people. My family and my lives are in a real danger
now. 8. The decision is partially based on distortions Mrs. Eleonora Broder did when she translated our claim and our
documents.

I can support these points by analyzing the text of the decision and by other supporting material. First of all let's analyze the
decision - paragraph after paragraph.

Let us point that this document replaces some well-known facts and even data by false facts, events and data. The
information from our PIF, our claim, hearings and even passports this document describes with distortions. For example, on
page #1 (par.6) the children ages are indicated as 5 and 6 when in reality they were much younger by then. Only under a
slight view that information is not very important. In reality the children ages were changed for changing an impression.
Because what is less destructive and traumatic for older children for younger children may be totally different. In the same
paragraph we can read that the children were denied the participation in the Sukkot celebration, when in reality in our claim
and during the hearings it was a description of a dark room, in which our children were placed. It makes a difference! A
dispute about that dark room erupted between us - and Mrs. Broder, who refused to translate the text of my testimony which
I typed and gave her but desired to intervene actively. Later - when we demanded to change the places distorted by her in
her translation - she threatened to testify against us before the committee and mentioned that dispute like as we did or said
something wrong. It is clear for me that Mrs. Broder probably was Mrs. Malka's informer. Anyway, that detail shows once
again that Mrs. Malka alone composed this document. How can this document be considered as a legal order when even
during a pure description it refuses to tell the truth?

We can find next false statement on page 2, in paragraph # 4 ("the demander also claim that he was persecuted because he
denounced about the fascism"). In reality I never said like that this happened because of that, and this happened because of
that... The person who composed that document tries to hide here that the fascism was mentioned in connection with my
article entitled "Why Israel Is Against the Victory Day?", which was published in Israel in 1994. In his comment to my article
the editor call to take the law into people's own hands and to make short work of me. As you can see that's also makes a
difference!

Then, the paragraphs #4 and #5 on page 3 deny rights to enter any country as a refugee to any person if he escaped from
Israel. It means that these paragraphs deny not just my personal right to escape from Israel (in other words, I must live in
Israel forever!), but disputes that right in principle. Formally speaking about me that paragraph's meaning is actually
depersonalized. It claims that all immigrants from the former USSR in Israel were bought by Israeli government as any other
property, and now belong to Israel forever. So, can a property escape? There is no other reasonable explanation of these
paragraphs' sense. ("Demanders declared that they flied from Israel to claim a refugee status in Canada after a series of
incidents, which victims they were. But the tribunal denies them the credibility [...] because [...] this family immigrated to
Israel [...] according to the Law of Return" and because Israel paid for their "free transportation, free medical insurance, and
also gave them a certain amount of money, citizenship and other benefits"). Anyway, these two paragraphs have nothing what
to do with our claim! Mrs. Malka also mentions the Law of Return here. That Law of Return is a declaration, which was
made when Israel was founded in 1948. Israelis can call it "the main rule of the country" or whatever they want but it is what
it actually is: Just a proclamation. Since Israel has no constitution the Law of Return and some other laws like it are still there
to calm down people who demand the creation of Constitution. But as in former USSR between constitution and real life
there were thousands of executive laws, which could just abolish what the constitution said. There are customs, official
religious code and thousands of other laws between the Law of Return and the real life in Israel. And Mrs. Malka knows it!
The paragraph #5 on page 3 just shows how far away from the real life is the Law of Return, which was created almost 50
years ago and named here as an "evidence". Mrs. Malka gives an extract from that law, which says that the medical insurance
in Israel is free, but that isn't correct! I can show the receipts for the money that we paid for the medical insurance since our
first day in Israel, because it isn't free any more! The language course is not completely free any more! And not the whole
way to Israel is free!(I can show you the tickets). These are not just mistakes. The whole attitude is wrong (or false, or the
first and the second in the same time). So, how can be reliable a document that contains so many mistakes and falsifications?
Let us point also that these two paragraphs are absolutely illegal from the juridical point of view. Our material situation wasn't
mentioned nor in our claim, nor during our hearings. We described persecutions against us, not our fI.ncial situation. May be
Mrs. Malka had to compose a report for American Jewish organizations to show where their money is going. Then this
decision is not about our status, and has no juridical power!

The next paragraph looks nice, but somehow avoid quitting. Why? I think, I know, why. I know the document and place in
that document the last paragraph on page 3 refers to... Let me show you what it about. It declares that 80% of Israel
population is mobilized to welcome new immigrants from the former USSR. Isn't it sound strange? It's hard to believe that
such a ridiculous sentence can be a part of any juridical document! Let's admit also that this particular fragment is the beloved
fragment of Mr. La Salle, a commissioner who was recently accused of partiality towards refugee claimants from Israel. He
used this paragraph in probably all negative decisions he composed. (He made practically no positive decisions in refugees
from Israel cases). For example, Mr. La Salle used that "evidence" in his responds to Zilber and Buyanovsky's claims. (Page
6 in a response to G. Buyanovsky and p.3 in a response to family Z. claim) Let's to abstract from its complete nonsense and
suppose it reflects something from Israel's life and reality, and reflects the mentality of Israelis (Mrs. Malka's intention to
choose this particular extract, and not another one, reflects her national identity as Israeli). If Israel is a country like other
countries, like Canada, so how it comes that "80% of Israeli population" can be "mobilized" to "welcome new immigrants"?
How people can be "mobilized" (or, probably, ordered) to "sponsor immigrants" and to help them by "giving money, closes
and furniture" (p.3, 5-th line of Mr.La Sall's response to family Z. claim). May be something is wrong in a country where
population can be "mobilized"? May be, our troubles have been erupted exactly because people in such a country have to be
"mobilized" to welcome new immigrants?And then - how those figures, 80% of Israeli population, can be understood? Were
they been called (to a draft board, to Mossad?) to get an order to "welcome new immigrants" - and were counted one by
one? And what about the other 20%? We don't know anything about that "mobilization". But we know that the Israeli
population (and the Hebrew media employees in particular) was mobilized to abuse, assault, disgrace and to discrimI.te new
immigrants from the former USSR. If the Canadian Ministry of Immigration was not on one side it could employ 2-3
translators and send them in a library to translate Hebrew newspapers for last 6 years. Thousands of racists, xenophobic
articles, which encourage aggressive actions against Russian-speaking people and teach to treat them with malicious anger,
could be found. That is the real "mobilization". By the way, if we began to speak about Mr. La Salle, his personality may be
the best illustration of who stands behind the total injustice towards us. He is a permanent director of the Informative
Committee Canada-Israel, an organization that may be considered as a shadow structure of Israeli government. Allegations
that Mr. Salle systematically treats the Russian-speaking refugees from Israel with partiality were expressed several times. In
1996 Federal Court indirectly recognized that. Despite of that Mrs. Lucienne Robillard - Canadian Minister of Immigration -
gave Mr. La Salle a new commissioner's mandate (for the next term). 52% of refugee claimants from Israel obtained their
refugee status in 1994-95.On hearings with Mr. La Salle it is 0(%). In 1997 Mr. Jacques La Salle was accused in partiality
towards refugees from Israel, and his involvement in their cases was termI.ted* (see comments). However, his mandate
wasn't termI.ted in general. How can it happen in a country, which is not a province of Israel, but an independent state?

In the first large paragraph on page#4 of the decision the tribunal express recognition that the persecutions we faced in Israel
might happen to us. But it claims indirectly that we provoked them ourselves by refusing to give up our believes and views.
And it claims directly that the persecutions were caused by some individuals, not by country's rules, traditions or policy. And
it claims also that there no persecutions against Russian-speaking people at all. As we can see that paragraph is deeply
contradictory in itself. In first 5 lines it recognizes the existence of persecutions (calling them "difficulties" but that is not
important because it clear explaining what it means). In next 5 (!?) lines it says the contrary. We already know (see the
reasons expressed above) that there is a bad hidden lie in the referrals concerning fascism in this document. So, this lie is
exploited in that paragraph, too.

The next paragraph is based on a sentence in my refugee claim (in my PIF), which did the translator, Mrs. Broder herself,
insert. Instead of just translating my story about what happened to me during my work on a stadium in Petach-Tikva (August,
1991), she transformed this event into a symbolic conclusion-declaration. In the same time this conclusion is correct in
general. Because what happened to me then may be called a slavery. This event was discussed during the two hearings. I was
tested if I tell the truth, and it is clear from the test that I told the truth. Besides, I presented an affidavit from Mr. Ginsburg
who describes the same event. I also presented an article written by Rivka Rabinovich and entitled "Haim #1 and Haim #2",
which professionally describes some forms of slavery in Israel. I also explained during my hearings that I do not want to make
any declaration and that Mrs. Broder just distorted my words. Instead of taking into consideration all these facts the tribunal
is persisting in its absolutely I.dmissible and illegal suggestions. Instead of investigating whether or not we were persecuted it
accuses us in spreading slander about Israel. It claims like if we would not came to Canada to seek a political asylum but to
spread the slander about Israel. If we claimed that my wife and me - were beaten during our work: that's because we want
show Israel as a state of slavery, claims the tribunal. If we describe what happened to our children: that's because we want to
draw a picture of Israel as a horrible state... And so on. Reading that document you completely forget that it is a decision in
refugees' claiM.. It looks like the tribunal misinterpreted its functions and sees itself not as immigration but as a political
tribunal. But the main point of this paragraph is that we claim we got no help from the state of Israel and will not be defended
by it if will be deported back there because we want to show Israel as a mayheM.. This is the only tribunal's excuse for
ignoring all our evidences, all documentary and other material proofs of police and other state offices' refusal to defend us.
This is the only excuse for ignorance of all the reliable and very serious evidences like Amnesty International's confirmation in
our case! This is the only excuse for ignorance of intensity and incredible scale of our attempts to find protection in Israel!

The next paragraph continues the allegation that we claim we were denied police protection, multiple organizations' , Knesset
members' help (and even our layer couldn't do anything) and were forced to turn to Amnesty International only because ("en
effet"!) we want to show that Israel is a state of injustice.

The declaration, which the tribunal made in the next paragraph (that Israel is a democratic state, a state like other countries,
and so on) has nothing what to do with our claiM..

Let us express our father concern about credibility of the documentation the tribunal used as a documentary proof "against
us". We know that the same document, which mentions the 80% "mobilized" Israelis mentions also a "Department of
Integration", which doesn't exist in Israel. It's clear that the real name of Israeli Ministry of Absorption ("misrad ha-klita in
Hebrew) was replaced by non-existing "Ministry of Integration" because it sounds strange for Canadian (or American,
European) ears. But the "Ministry of Absorption" is the real name of the organization, which "takes care" of new immigrants.
And this document changes it to the "Department of Integration"...In reality the Zionist ideology is against integration. Look
over Ben-Gurion's, Orlosorov's, Bella Katsnelson's, Golda Meir's works and statements! Then you will be convinced that the
name "Ministry of Absorption" expresses their desires completely well. It means that the document, which was used as an
"indisputable source of information" replaces actually the truth by the lie, not only a real name by a false name. Then - how
can such a document be considered as a credible one?

We also express our deep concern of utilization of Mr. Natan Sharansky's affidavit. As far as we know this affidavit was
given through a telephone interview what is juridical unacceptable. Especially when the commissioners don't accept copies of
articles (even from the most famous newspapers), which refugee claimants present, they demand origI.ls! Then - it was well
known before Mr. Sharansky became a Minister in Israeli government that his "Zionist Forum" is not an independent
organization (as well as its chairmen) but an organization infiltrated by the government. By the time of our second hearing Mr.
Sharansky has already became a minister. And Mr. Malka knew it. So he presented the view of Israeli government as an
"independent" view that time as well as in all other occasions. She clearly exposes the source of all the manipulations with the
refugees from Israel in Canada: Israeli government! That paragraph also exploits the topic , which was closed by my answer
during our first immigration hearing. Mrs. Malka asked me how can I explain the statistic from Israel that no Russian-speaking
people were regestered complaining against the police. I shown then all the receipts of my appeals I have submitted to police,
to the Ministry of police, to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and to police headquarters in Tel-Aviv. And I said that this is the
explanation because my mails were unanswered and my complains were never registered. I also presented an article, which
gives absolutely precise, reliable and competent information that nothing can be really done against police in Israel. And the
story about a policeman who get a fine because of his refusal to help an Arab as an "evidence" looks like a clowned.

It was clear for the tribunal that it's impossible to avoid comments about the total ignorance of the whole documentation,
which we presented. It was clear that something must be said. This is why the next paragraph was composed to say just
anything about that and was designed to say nothing in particular. The tribunal claims that all our documents were rejected
because its members took into consideration only "absolutely reliable" documents. And it looks like there were no such
documents among these we presented... In reality documents like the letter from the Minister of Culture Mr. Amnon
Rubinschtein, which shows that persecutions against me weren't just a chain of coincidences, Amnesty International's
confirmation, Lev Ginsburg's affidavit, receipts of my letters to police and other organizations, other official papers can not be
considered as "reliable" or "not reliable". Another thing is that their existence may be recognized or not recognized. The
tribunal chosen the second way: to ignore theM.. It's your choice now to decide if that happened as the result of the tribunal's
partiality. But we ask you to read over the paragraph #4 on page 3 of the decision where the tribunal rejects in advance even
the possibility of existence of such a category of refugees as "refugees from Israel". How could you expect then another
attitude to any documents from a tribunal, which refuse to recognize refugees from Israel in principle? On the other hand that
tribunal's ability to distinguish between "reliable" and "non-reliable" documents is reflected in documents they chosen
themselves to support their point of view: one of them is incompetent when it speaks about Israel , another one has "0"
credibility because it was presented during the hearing as an independent source, and in reality is the voice of Israeli
government (Mr. Charansky's affidavit), and the 3-rd can proof nothing because it is a part of the declaration of the state of
Israel (the Law of Return), and nothing more.

The suggestion that my wife refused to collaborate with the tribunal is a pure lie what can be heard on the tapes from the
hearings.

And the ignorance of the medical documents is the thing from the same category.

Please, believe us that our lives were in a real danger in Israel and that this danger just increased since we came to Canada.
We were threatened from Israel even here, and we presented the proof. Please, save our souls!

Lev Gunin

NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 5 - CONCLUSIVE DECISION]]]
 
 
 

PEVIOUS DOCUMENT: [[[GROUP of DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4]]]

DOCUMENT NUMBER 5
From Lev Gunin
File number 3082-7125

                 }                         CONCLUSIVE DECISION
                                                       (Paragraph 69.1 (9) of Immigration Law)
This is the translation in brief

P.1. Paragraph 1. Lev Gunin, M.. and I., and Alla Gunin, and Elisabeth Epstein are not recognized as refugees.
Paragraphs 4-7. This is demanders' declaration in brief: They came to Israel in April 1991. When they arrived in
Petach-Tikva theirs neighbors, orthodox Jews, were persistent [and aggressive] in their attempts to convert them [from
atheism from one side, and passive Christianity from another side] to JudaisM..

Children, then 5 and 6 years old [*1] - (see commentaries), were abused during a religious celebration at a kinder-garden
[*2]. The governor has found the situation ordI.ry. Dispute the transfer to another kinder-garden children faced abuses.
They were bitten, bite by another children [*3]. The kinder-garden administration refused to protect theM..

Demander was mocked by the employers [*4] and bitten by his colleagues because he is not a true Jew.

P.2. His wife has difficulties in finding a job [*5] , and when she was at least hired she was insulted, bitten and - under certain
circumstances - became a victim of a sexual harassment[*6].

There were multiple insults and abuses from theirs neighbors, who were furious because demanders in their eyes are not true
Jews.

They turned to police in innumerous occasions with no results. One time police itself abused and ill-treated the demander
under certain circumstances. His lawyer told him that nothing could be done against police.

They contacted innumerous organizations including Amnesty International. They wrote to members of parliament and
contacted a number of lawyers with no result [*7]. The demander also said that he was persecuted because of denouncing
fascism [7-a].

Demander's mother also became a victim of multiple aggressions. She was attacked by a group of youngsters when she went
to pick up the children from school [*8]. Policemen at the police station refused to pay an attention to that incident.

In Nov. 1993 she was attacked by her neighbor; she stroke her by a basket with oranges and cried to her "goy!". It tool
place at a market.

In January 1994 in company with her children she went to pick them up from school, when she was attacked by a group of
youngsters, who thrown stones at her and injured her [*9].

One evening in 1994 [*10] youngsters, friends of their neighbor, have thrown a little box at her door [*11]. She composed a
letter to police in that case but police never responded [*12].

P.3. Paragraphs 1-2. In context of that the demander together with his family including his mother came to ask a refugee
status in Canada [*13].

Paragraph 3. After seeing that declaration, studying their lawyer's arguments and other material we came to a conclusion that
demanders are not refugees. We came to that conclusion because of the next reasons:

Paragraphs 4-6. Demanders claim that they flied Israel for seeking an asylum and because of a number of incidents, which
victims they became. But the tribunal is disagree with that because [...] they all came to Israel according to Israeli authorities
permission and acceptation, and also because they took an advantage from benefits of a free transportation to Israel, Israeli
citizenship, a certain amount of money for settlement, a free language course, and other benefits. They also might use other
help because we have the documentation indicated that the population in Israel gives material help to newcomers.

P.4. Paragraphs 2-5. It is possible that during their life in Israel they faced some difficulties because some individual
ultra-religious feel that their rights are violated because of the presence of 2 secular adults who refuse to practice their
religion. But there are no evidences that Russians are persecuted because of their religion, nationality, or because they are
mixed couples or because they express anti fascist views as pretend the demander.

In result we were convinced that the demanders are [dangerous for their state] exaggerators who painted a picture of their
state as a state of slavery, injustice, where Russians are bitten if they do not work quickly enough, where Russian children are
victims of mockery committing by theirs classmates and teachers, and where Russian women are victims of sexual
harassment. And that all is going on without any possibility to obtain a protection from the state.

As a result of that the demanders turned to police in several occasions without success, to innumerous organizations, human
rights groups and to Amnesty International, composed letters to members of parliament and contacted more then one lawyer
without getting any protection from the state.

It is incongruous to that documentation about Israel, which we have chosen. This documentation present Israel as a
democratic society, maintaining a justified juridical system in favor of the citizen. Police never have any discrimI.tory
behavior towards Russian or Arabs.

P..5. Paragraphs 1-5. Multiple human right organizations are also presented in Israel, both local and international.

Documentation, which we present, we consider as completely reliable, when the demanders' documentation we consider as
unbelievable.

The tribunal ignored demanders' medical and other certificates and documents because we have found that their documents
show nothing in particular.

COMMENTS 1. Children age is given incorrectly. Probably, because our children were younger, and that could give us
more sympathy. 2. It is false. Our children were abused during the celebration as well as in cause of that celebration (they
were not allowed to a "suka" and were kept in a dark room - because they are "Russians"). It is clear from our declaration. 3.
It is false. They presented the event as if our children were abused not by the teacher but by the children during the
celebration, when in reality it is the teacher who abused theM.. 4. They combine two different event into one what is juridicaly
incorrect. 5. Without a notice that my wife could not find a job because she was considered as Russian that sentence is
incorrect. 6. It is false. She was not sexually abused. But she was beaten because she refused to obey the sexual pretensions
of an Israeli. It is also false because it happened not at her first working place but when she became a cleaner. 7. It is false.
Complains to Amnesty International gave a result. In result of them Israeli government let us leave the country. 7-a. It is a
direct distortion. First, the discussion about fascism arose during our immigration hearings but does not reflected in our
declaration. On the other hand, I never claimed that I was persecuted in Israel solemnly because of denouncing fascisM.. The
discussion about fascism was related to my article and to a commentary to it made by the editors of that newspaper. They
wrote that I have to be punished for my views, that my works have to be destroyed and expressed their aggression towards
my poor person. 8. It is false. Two different events, which happened in different years, are confused together here. They
combined the event consciously in a kind of nonsense: to make all our declaration non-reliable. 9. It is false. It is the second
from the above-mentioned events, it mixed with the previous in a strange way. It is absolutely contradictory with what may be
found in the declaration. 10. We gave a precise month. 11. It is false. A huge box, which was released to hit our front door
(to the entrance to our apartment, and not to my mother's door - as the tribunal wrote) from the above flour, has damaged
our door. It was breached through. The tribunal presents the events as if there were no damages. They claim that in a
non-justified wave of panic my mother turned to police, and - naturally - was refused. They try to present us as exaggerators.
12. My mother did not compose her letter to police herself. Other people assisted her. 13. It is false, because that paragraph
may be interpreted as if we flied Israel because somebody threw a little box in our door direction. In reality from one hand
the event with the box was falsified itself, from another hand, it is clear from the real text of declaration and from immigration
hearings that we left Israel in result of systematic persecutions and because we were afraid under serious circumstances.

Translation from French and comments were made by Lev Gunin

NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 6]]]

PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 5]]]

DOCUMENT NUMBER 6
FROM Lev GUNIN
FILE Number 2948-6524/ 95/76/23/18
ID: 3082-7125/7174/7220/7231/7317/
LIST OF SUPPLEMENTS or LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SUPPLEMENTS
 This is the list of Documents, which I have submitted to Immigration
  Canada in support to my refugee claiM.. There were, I think, more then 50   of other Documents, which are not
listed here. I believe that the total   number of documents, which supported my claim, was about 180-200, and
none   of them was rejected by the Immigration Board as non-reliable...

  TO VIEW THE ORDER OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON INTERNET FROM THE LIST BELOW,
  CLICK HERE: [[[DOCUMENT NUMBER 7]]]

1. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 5-a. 5 pages. Letter to Jerusalem Post. 19 June 1991. Refers to Introduction, page 2,
paragraph 4.

2. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 6-a. 3 pages. Fax from Israeli consulate to Mrs. Judith Malka. Refers to Document 1.
Paragraph 1.2., point A).

3. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 7-a. 3 pages. Fax from Maitre Michel Dor? to Maitre Yves Boirond. Refers to Document
1. Paragraph 1.2., point A).

4. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 8. 3 pages. List of Organizations, Institutions, Persons and Governmental Boards, Where
We turned for Protection in Israel during 1991-1994. Refers to Document 1, page 3, point C).

5. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 9. 2 pages. Mrs. MarI. Heifetz's autograph. Refers to Document 1, page 3, point C).

6. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 10. 2 pages. Postal receipts. Refers to Document 1, page 3, point C).

7. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 11. 2 pages. Fax receipt. (Fax was submitted to Amnesty International in London). Refers
to Document 1, page 3, point C).

8. A room was prepared for a document, which I did not attached.

9. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 13. 2 pages. Medical document from Asharon (or Ha-Sharon) hospital. Refers to
Document 1, page 5, line 5.

10. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 14. 2 pages. From medical center "Golda". Refers to Document 1, page 5, line 5.

11.SUPPLEMENTS, Document 15. Medical certificate. Refers to Document 1, page 5, line 5.

12. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 16. Evaluation psychologique. Refers to Document 1, page 5, line 5.

13. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 17. Medical certificate. Refers to Document 1, page 5, line 5.

14. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 18. Medical certificate from Reddy Memorial Hospital. Refers to Document 1, page 5, line
5.

15. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 19 (number of documents: A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I, J,K, L,M,N,O,P). All of them refer to
Document 1, page 3, point D):

16. Document 19-A.1 page. U.S. Jews hold fire in rift with Netanyahu.

17. Document 19-B.1 page. Arabs seek resumption of U.N. session on Israel.

18. Document 19-C.1 page. Israeli immigrants finding work.

19. Document 19-D.1 page. Ethiopian Jews Riot Over Dumped Blood.

20. Document 19-E. 1 page. A group of children marched along St.-Alexander...

21. Document 19-F. 1 page. A mourner pauses... page 2

22. Document 19-G. 7 pages. We do not need your love, but just stop beating us!

23. Document 19-H. 7 pages. Interview with Jonathan Gefen.

24. Document 19-I. 1 page. The Bungling Bank Robbers of Israel.

25. Document 19-J. 2 pages. Fleeing the Promised Land.

26. Document 19-K. 1 page. Name On the Tombstone.

27. Document 19-L. 3 pages. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. An urgent call to stop the recent Israeli bill, which could
forbade all religions beside JudaisM..

28. Document 19-M.. 3 pages. MAOZ, Messianic Jews' Almanac. ONE YEAR IN PRISON FOR POSSESSING A
NEW TESTAMENT.

29. Document 19-N. 1 page. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. AN URGENT CALL FOR PRAYER AND
SOLIDARITY: "This bill before the Knesset would render illegal the possession, production, reproduction, importation and
distribution of literature or information, which may serve to persuade another to change his religious views or affiliations".

30. Document 19-O. 2 pages. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. A CALL FOR PRAYER AND PROTEST.

31. Document 19-P. 1 page. MAOZ, Messianic Jews Almanac. YOU CAN BE ACTIVE IN THE STRUGGLE FOR
FREEDOM IN ISRAEL.

32. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 20: from A to K: Israeli visas. (Total number - 11 documents). Refer to Document
number 2 (in Documents, not in Supplements), paragraph 1.16.

33. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 21.

34. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 22.

35. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 23. < Group of documents, which could be attached later

36. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 24.

37. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 25.

38. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 26.

39. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 27-a. 3 pages. (From "Courier" newspaper). Lev GUNIN. A Jewish Apartheid? Refers to
Document number 1, page 5, beginning of the part "ME".

40. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 27-b. 1 page. Letter for radio "RECA". Refers to Document number 1, page 5, beginning
of the part "ME".

41. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 28. 4 pages. From newspaper "Vremia". Lev GUNIN. Why Israel Is Against The Victory
Day? Refers to Document number 1, page 5, see part "ME".

42. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 29-a. 1 page (in Russian; translation was done, but disappeared from my file...). From
newspaper "Vremia". Interview with Lev GUNIN. (Life of Lev Gunin, Permanent Dissident). Refers to Document number 1,
page 5, (part "ME"), see the last line of the page 5. Also refers to Document number 1, page 7, lines 3-4.

43. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 29-b. 2 pages. Complains to "Vremia" newspaper, regarding the interview. Refers to
Document number 1, page 5, (part "ME"), see the last line of the page 5.

44. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 30. Examples of threats submitted by Israelis. Refers to Document number 1, page 6
(upper part of the page). page 3

45. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 31. 2 pages. Explication. In French. I wrote it and submitted to my lawyer Maitre Le
Brune (asking him to add it to my file) in a protest against another provocation by Mrs. Malka. Refers to Documents, Group
of Documents Number 4.

46. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 32. 4 pages.
45 Years With Pain In The Heart. Refer to Document number 1 from Documents (not Supplements), page 4, paragraph 1.3.,
CILDREN.

47. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 33. 6 pages. The Silence of the Lambs. Refer to Document number 1 from Documents,
page 4, paragraph 1.3., CILDREN.

48. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 34. 2 pages. Your Blood has to be Avenged. Refer to Document number 1 from
Documents, page 4, paragraph 1.3., CILDREN.

49. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 35. (Refers to Document number 1, page 7 (on the top).

50. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 36. 2 pages. Affidavit form Asharon (Ha-Sharon) Urgency. Refers to Document number
1, page 7 (on the top).

51. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 37. 2 pages. Medical document from doctor Pinkas. Refers to Document number 1, page
7 (on the top).

52. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 38. Was reserved.

53. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 39. 2 pages. Medical document from an urgency. Refers to Document number 1, page 7
(on the top).

54. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 40. 2 pages. An appointment issue with a neurologist. Refers to Document number 1, page
7 (on the top).

55. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 41. 1 page. Declaration to the police in Petach-Tikva. Refers to page number 8, upper
paragraph.

56. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 42.
 

57. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 43 (a and b): a : Barak, Avraham, tel. (03) 528-0878. b : 5 pages. Letter from Israel.
Description of threats in my address. Refers to Document number 1, page 8.

58. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 44. 3 pages. Human Rights Watch Documents: Law Effectively Legalizing Torture in
Israel, Police and Army Police Brutality in Israel. Refers to Document number 1, page 8.

59. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 45. 7 pages. A Raven Will Never Peck Up Raven's Eye. An article about police brutality
and unpunishement of policemen. Refers to Document number 1, page 8,
 

60. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 46.

61. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 47.

62. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-a. 2 pages. Results of Special Musical Attestation Committee in Tel-Aviv, which
defined the level of professional skills and abilities. Refers to Document 1, page 10, point 4.

63. SUPPLEMENTS, Documents 48-b. 3 pages:

64. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-b: 1-st page. Diploma in superior studies in Music. Refers to Document 1, page 10,
point 4.

65. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-b: 2-nd page. Attestation D'Etudes Superior. Refers to Document 1, page 10, point 4.

66. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-b: 3-rd page. Attestation D'Etudes Postsecondair Professionnel. Refers to Document
1, page 10, point 4. page4

67. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-c. 3 pages. Refusal from "Talpiot" course. ( A course, which could give me
professional employment authorization, was refused to me). Refers to Document 1, page 10, point 4.

68. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 48-d. 2 pages. Letter from the Minister of Culture and Education of Israel Mr. A.
Rubinstein in response to my lawyer Maitre S. Levin declaration. Refers to Document 1, page 10, point 4.

69. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 49. 1 page. Letter from Maitre S. Levin to director of Petach-Tikva's governmental labor
exchange. Refers to Document 1, page 10, point 5.

70. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 50-a. 2 pages. Civil court's in Petach-Tikva decision. Refers to Document 1, pages 10-11,
point 8.

71. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 50-b. 1 page. Dr. S. Levin's letter to the National Insurance. (Regarding refusal to register
me at the labor exchange). Refers to Document 1, pages 10-11, point 8.

72. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 50-c. 1 page. Dr. Levin's letter to National Insurance. Refers to Document 1, pages
10-11, point 8.

73. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 51. 3 pages. National Insurance Institute's refusal to send the allowances, determined by
the law. Refers to Document 1, pages 9, 10, 11.

74. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 52.

75. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 53-a. 3 pages. Illegal order issued by the Income Tax Board from JerusaleM.. (No fresh
immigrant receives such orders). Refers to Document number 1, page 11.

76. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 53-b. 2 pages. Another order from General Reports Centre, JerusaleM.. Refers to
Document number 1, page 11.

77. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 54. If there are not enough documents like 53 (a} and b}), then other documents of this
kind could been added.

78. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 55. 3 pages, 6 documents. Orders to appear at the draft board at Tel-ha-Shomer.

79. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 56.

80. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 57-a. 1 page. Letter from Mrs. Judith Malka to Mr. Michael Dore. Refers to Document
number 1, page 13.

81. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 57-b. 3 pages. Letter from Mr. Dore to Commissioner Mr. Yves Boisrond. Refers to
Document number 1, page 13.

82. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 58. 1 page. True translation of my wife's (Alla Fishman) Birth certificate, made in Israel in
1994. Refers to Document number 1, page 13.

83. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 59. Translation of the same birth certificate, distorted by Mrs. Eleonora Broder. Refers to
Document number 1, page 13.

84. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 60.

85. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 61..
86. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 62.
87. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 63.

Group of Documents Number 4 of Supplements.
All documents in the group refer to Document number 1, Page 15, 1.6. - RESUME.

88. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 64. 1 page. An affidavit from Mr. Iwan Edvards, Conductor and Director of Montreal
Symphony orchestra chorus and St. Lawrence chorus. Page 5

89. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 65. 1 page. A Letter From Mrs. Margaret Rumscheidt, President of St. Lawrence Choir.

90. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 66. 1 page. Festival Mozart Plus.

91. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 67. 1 page. List of Singers, participated in Festival "Mozart Plus".

92. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 68. 1 page. List of Singers, participated in Festival of contemporary music.

93. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 69. 1 page. A contract concerning the audio cassette release.

94. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 70. 1 page. List of Participants in Festival in Hilton Dorval, in April, 1996.

95. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 71. 1 page. List of Participants in Festival in Hilton, Dorval, in April, 1996.

96. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 72. 1 page. An Affidavit in my participation in Cultural (Musical) Festival in Terrebonne.

97. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 73. Newspaper Polonia-Montreal. One of newspapers, which I am editing in Montreal.

98. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 74. Newspaper "Russian Voice". One of newspapers, which I am editing in Montreal.

99. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 75. Newspaper "Romanian Voice". One of newspapers, which I am editing in Montreal.

100. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 76. An Affidavit from Mrs. Zelia Nisman, Toronto. 1997. Next numbers were reserved
for other documents of this kind, which could be added if needed.

101. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 77.

102. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 78.

103. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 79.

104. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 80. END OF GROUP 4 OF SUPPLEMENTS

105. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 81-a. 8 pages. From "Yitogi" newspaper. By Rivka Rabinovitch.HAIM NUMBER ONE
AND HAIM NUMBER TWO. (About slavery tendencies in Israel). Refers to: a) Document number 1 of Documents, page
1-2, Introduction, paragraph 3 of Introduction; also - Document number 1, page 3, paragraph C); b) Document number 1,
top of the page 4, comments *) and **); c)

106. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 81-b. 3 pages. By Irma Zokol. From "Yitogi" newspaper. IF I WAS A TRADE
UNIONS MEMBER. (About the slavery tendencies in Israel).

106-a. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 82. 2 pages. An affidavit from Lev Ginsburg, composed in Israel, in 1994.

Next numbers were reserved for the same kind of documents, which could be added later if needed.

107. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 83.
108. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 84.
109. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 85.
110. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 86.
111. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 87.
112. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 88.
113. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 89.
114. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 90.
115. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 91.

EXAMPLES OF MRS. BRODER DISTORTIONS OF NEWSPAPERS'
ARTICLES (AND OTHER DOCUMENTS)
ALL DOCUMENTS OF THIS GROUP REFER TO DOCUMENT NUMBER 3 (TRANSLATOR'S SABOTAGE).

116. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 92. 1 page. A copy of the origI.l of my wife's birth certificate.

117. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 93. 4 pages. From "New Russian Word" newspaper. Russians, Get Out Back! Article by
Savely Kashnitzki.

118. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 94. 2 pages. From "New Russian Word" February 1995 issue. About Hitler's "My
Kampf"'s edition in Hebrew in Israel.

119. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 95. 2 pages. From newspaper "Nasha Strana". Wake Up, Israel. About the resemblance
of the fascist's slogan in right-wing propaganda in Israel. End of This Group of Documents.

120. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 96. 2 pages. Natan Charanskzs statement, which illustrate his double position: rejection
of "speculations" that Israeli society is sick in his statements for Immigration Canada, and declarations about that when it
helps to obtain money (in his fundrisen compaigns). Refers to Group of Documents number 4.

121. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 97. From newspaper "Novaya Gazeta". To Celebrate! A letter to the editor by a World
War II veteran Vladimir Kogan in protest of admiration of fascism by among young Israelis and refusal of the state of Israel
officially recognize the Victory Day (in relation to the Victory over fascism). Refers to Group of Documents number 4.

122. SUPPLEMENTS, Document 98.

End of List: See the referring documents!

Please, Save Our Souls!

NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENTS NUMBER 7 - BRIEF DESCRIPTION AND SAMPLES]]]
 
 
 

Short DESCRIPTION of GUNINS CASE

PREVIOUES DOCUMENT <> NEXT DOCUMENT

From Family Gunin, Montreal, November, 1998

Dear Friends!

Please, try to treat this letter as an unusual appeal, not just a desperate cry for help and justice.

In October 1998, the Federal Court of Canada issued a second decision in family GUNIN's appeal.  (The 1-st one was
positive). That tragic decision resumed our refugee claim, which took 4 years of our lives.

Let us make a brief description of events, which took place before that sad date.
The head of the family, Lev GUNIN, as all members of the family, was born in Bobruisk, Belarus, ex-USSR. Senseless,
ridiculous coincidences in 1971-72 turned him, a secondary school student, young composer, and advance piano player, into
a person, persecuted by Soviet authorities. They tried to prevent him from entering collegial - university studies; however, his
persistence and a lucky miracle broke that wishes circle, and he received first collegial, and then university degrees in music.
In spite of that, L. GUNIN could not build a successful composer's carrier because of persecutions. In the same time, he
played a specific role in ex-USSR, Belarus, and other countries' cultural life. He's the author of novels, stories, poetry,
contemporary and electronic music, works in history, essays, musicology, music history, philosophy, etc. His articles were
published in a number of newspapers all over the world.

In 1979-1986, Lev became an object of wide humiliations. He was beaten by somebody, who has links with militia (police)
and KGB. The authorities stood up in defense of the attackers. They persecuted L. GUNIN even more for bringing the
attacker to trial. In another incident he and his brother - they were hunted by two well-coordI.ted groups: mobsters, and a
gang of youngsters. "Hunters" were also leaded by militia (police). Later brothers GUNIN were interrogated by police /KGB
men. Lev's brother Vitaly became a victim of secret medical manipulations.

L. Gunin has multiple links with the cultural elite, famous personalities and dissidents in Moscow, St. - Peterburg (Leningrad),
Vilnius, Warsaw, and Belarus. He also has connections with the Western journalists in Moscow, and with representatives of
the governments of the Western countries.

1980-s. Because of persecutions L. GUNIN's decided to participate in the dissident movement. There are the main
directions of his dissident activities:
1. Participation in Human Rights movement and links with the most famous human rights activists.
2. Membership in underground literacy circles.
3. Defense of the Old City of Bobruisk from revelation and demolition.
4. Journalism and editorial functions for underground magazines.
5. Cooperation with forbidden (or unwelcomed) in ex-USSR NTS (People's Labor Union) and the National Front of
Belarus.
6. Participation in the Jewish national movement.
7. Creation of ideologically independent and stylistically controversial music, prose, poetry, philosophy, and historical,
political, and other works.

1985-1989. A conflict erupted between leading by L. GUNIN group - and the powerful institution of Israeli emissaries to
USSR, and controlled by them Jewish political Mafia. (Their goals - devastation of the local Jewish cultural life, confiscation
of huge aid from the Western Jewish communities, and concentration of the propaganda of immigration to Israel - L. Gunin
was fighting). He also confronted three important personalities - Kebich, Alimbachkov, and Lukashenko. All of them became
top political figures later: first one short before, and the two others - after his departure from USSR (The 1-st one became the
Prime Minister of Belarus, 2-nd - major of Bobruisk, and the 3-rd is the present dictator of Belarus).
 .
His attempts to emigrate to USA or Germany - to save his brother's life - failed. All attempts to obtain an Israeli visa for
permanent residency have been failed, too. (By then practically everybody could easily get such a visa). Israelis did not want
to allow him and his brother to immigrate to Israel.

1991. After his brother's death, Lev started to cancel all steps of immigrating to Israel. He did not want to go there by then.
Soon he received an order from KGB to leave his native country for Israel. Soviet authorities sent us (family Gunin) all
previously suspended visas. We could not say "no" to KGB, but planned to escape from Warsaw to Germany. At the
Central railway station in Warsaw, in presence of L.Gunin's Polish friends, Israelis captured us, and took us to Israel by
force. In Israel, Mossad (Shabbak) officers verbally accused Lev in an attempt to sabotage the whole operation of bringing
the Soviet Jews to Israel. Mossad approached him several times.

In Israel we faced next persecutions:
1) Israeli citizenship was thrust on us
2) Alla, Lev's wife, was abused, attacked, beaten, assaulted, and systematically discrimI.ted against
3) Elisabeth, his mother, was abused, attacked, and assaulted
4) Children became victims of systematic humiliations and mockery
5) Lev himself was deprived in his rights. Israeli authorities denied him:
a) valid diploma equivalent
b) professional courses
c) rights to enter other courses or university
d) full and valid employment authorization
e) registration  with the State labor exchange
f) tax exemption as all fresh immigrants were receiving
g) welfare when he was unemployed
h) proper and equal medical service
i) legal, and police defense
j) reduction of municipal taxes
k) authorization of departure, which is required in Israel to leave the country
l) etc.

He was beaten, abused, discrimI.ted against. Israeli state radio called him an enemy. One of the leading Israeli newspapers
suggested that his works (essays, articles, etc.) must be destroyed. Innumerous and systematic draft board's orders to appear
affected his normal life and his (his family) fI.ncial situation.

During his life in Israel L. Gunin published a number of articles & books in Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Moscow, and Germany,
criticizing Israeli government for human rights violations and fascist tendencies in Israel.

1994-1996. With an indirect Amnesty International's involvement we could come to Canada, and claimed a refugee status.
To support our claim we presented next types of documentary proof:
A. Legal documents
B. Documents, issued by Israeli government
C. Documents, issued by all kinds of Israeli institutions
D. Affidavits
E. Letters
F. Post receipts
G. Medical documents
H. Newspapers
I. Researches made by International committees and human rights organizations
J. Proof that in Israel we turned to innumerous organizations, institutions, police, court, and lawyers for protection
K. Our lawyer's documents
L. Etc.

Practically each statement, described in our refugee claim, was supported by the documentary proof. Only the list of
documents' description consisted of six pages.

1994-1997. In her translations, our lawyer's secretary/translator distorted all documents in our refugee claiM.. One of our two
lawyers submitted several messages to IRB in protest of some outraged events. He claimed that the IRB members took
advantage of the distorted translations, using them as a tool against us. IRB members used offensive, illegal methods against
Lev. They interrogated only hiM.. No questions were given to other family members. IRB commissioners demonstrated their
opinion that Lev GUNIN must be punished for his ideological (political) views. Two members of IRB, immigration judges,
gave the whole initiative to the third member, an immigration officer, a Jew and - probably - Israeli, who only spoke. During
our refugee hearings she manifested an outraged malicious hatred towards us, and maintained close contacts with the Israeli
embassy in writing, in our case. IRB members maintained the atmosphere of hostility and arbitrary attitude towards us.

Denying our refugee claim, the IRB members not just acted unfair. Their negative decision was not just a refusal to recognize
us as refugees, but a declaration-manifest, which rejected the basic human rights in principle. In form of declaration, they
denied in principle rights to have an independent opinion, practice or not to practice religion, be protected by the state. IRB
members claimed that if government paid for immigrants' transportation, immigrants became the property of that government
(a kind of commodity). IRB members also claimed that police' and other institutions' refusal to give protection was justified if
people had an alternative political /ideological opinion (even if that opinion was not expressed to police). They claimed that
we alienated Israelis by keeping controversial opinions, and refusing to change our views. And so on...

The IRB's negative decision became not just a matter of our personal fate, but also a matter of human rights in general.

1998. In her speech in the Federal Court, Mrs. Murphy, the Minister's of Immigration representative, confirmed the IRB
members' negative attitude towards human rights, and also widened personal accusations against Lev Gunin, turning the
question of our refugee status into the question of his "I.dmissible" (by whom?) ideological views. As IRB did before, Mrs.
Murphy refused even to mention Alla Gunin, Elisabeth Epstein (Gunin), and the children.

The Federal Judge, Mr. Dube, just copied Mrs. Murphy's and the IRB statements, refusing to evaluate arguments of the
TWO sides. He claimed that - because in their refusal to recognize us as refugees IRB members used the formula "no minimal
credibility", - such cases are automatically denied by the Federal Court. In reality, his decision was made in contradiction to
another Federal Court judge's decision in our case, and also contradicted the IRB's fI.l (conclusive) decision. In that
decision IRB agreed that some persecutions against us (they called them "difficulties") could take place because we abused
the Israelis by refusing to obey their demands to change our views. Mr. Dube also revealed his partiality by distorting some
important events and attacking our lawyer in personal. A person, whose name was also Dube, was involved into negotiations
between the immigration officer, Mrs. Malka, and the General Consul of Israel, in our case. We could not find that person
among the IRB headquarters' staff, or among other immigration divisions. All faxes were submitted to Israeli consulate from
Mrs. Malka, without mentioning any other name (s). However, the responses from the consulate were submitted to Mr.
Dube. We feel that this mysterious Mr. Dube has something what to do with the Federal Judge Mr. Dube.

IRB and Mrs. Murphy's accusations against us were such, which are the prerogative of the crimI.l court. They accused us
so sharp as if we were killers or terrorists. In reality we are innocent people, never accused in defamation, or fraud. In the
same time, the way they acted might be easily considered as a crimI.l offence.
We are appealing not just because of incredible injustice, but because the removal back to Israel means DEATH for us. If
nobody in the whole world could prevent it, it would mean that if people are deprived and innocent they might be kidnapped
and taken to another country by force. It would mean that demonstrative humiliations over human rights, such as the IRB
members and Mrs. Murphy expressed, are tolerated. There are rumors among UN staff that the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights might be changed soon to fit to the brutal and ultra-religious regimes' requirements. Please, do something for us
before it happened!

The only way to save us is to help us in obtaining the permanent residents status in any civilized country. That could prevent
our eventual removal to Israel.

Please, help!

Family GUNIN:
Alla, Lev, I., and M.. Gun.
Elisabeth EPSTEIN-Gunin

Tel. (514) 499-1294
E-mail: [leog@total.net]

From Lev GUNIN, April, 1999
Dear Friends!

In 1991 I  was deported from my native Belarus to Warsaw because of my political opinion.
Together with my family (wife and 2 children) and my mother I wanted to move from Warsaw
to Germany.
On the Central railway station in Warsaw we were captured by Israelis and were taken to Israel
against our will.
We were widely persecuted in Israel and were refused an exit vise during 3 and a half years.
In 1994 we managed to quit Israel and came to Canada seeking a refugee status.
In an outraged manner, openly accenting their rights for injustice, the members of IRB
committee refused us the status.
Deportation to Israel means death for me and members of my family.
The only solution is to start a legal immigration to Canada.
But we need travel documents to afford it because:
1) our Israeli passports have expired and to extend them is not possible
2) I asked the Israeli embassy to cancel my Israeli citizenship

We made an appeal to the Federal Court, but our appeal was automatically rejected
without any analysis of our file, just because of the formula that the Immigration and
Refugee Board used in their conclusive decision. In the Federal Court, the Immigration
Canada representative, Mrs. Murphy, expressed outraged accusations against me,
as if by claiming a refugee status and by criticizing the IRB decision I have committed
the most violent crime or was a terrorist.

Almost 5 years we (my family, and me) live under a threat of deportation,
under the wild persecutions of the Immigration Canada, institution, which
put the equal sign between my peaceful and legal human rights activism
against the former Soviet and Israeli governments' violation of human rights
- and terrorism!!!

Please, help us!
 

    My best wishes,

     Lev GUNIN
 

       August, 1997
 

     E-Mail: leog@total.net
 

PREVIOUES DOCUMENT <> NEXT DOCUMENT
 
 
 
 

To The Federal Court of Canada from Alla Gunin.

FEDERAL COURT Supreme Court Building Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0H9

Alla Gunin
3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 201 Montreal, Quebec, CANADA H2X 2B5
Tel.(514)944-1294
See the list of the places where the copies of that appeal are submitted below.

Dear Sirs! This appeal is formal. It composed not by a lawyer but by the refugee claimants themselves. Despite a temptation
to treat it as a non-official letter we want an official response. We believe that we are victims of partiality, a wide-scaled
conspiracy against Russian-speaking refugees from Israel and political repression. That became possible only because some
refugee boards of Canadian Ministry of Immigration are manipulated by the foreign state. This is the main reason why our
refugee claim was denied. Our case is extraordI.ry. My husband was a relatively well - known dissident in the former USSR
and was severely persecuted by communist authorities. He was a dissident also in Israel. He was persecuted for his views in
Israel as well. The state radio and newspapers called to take the law in own hands and to "punish" hiM.. We were beaten,
assaulted, and disgraced. All members of our family faced constant mockery. Our case is extraordI.ry also because we
presented so many documentary proofs of persecutions as probably nobody else. The documents we presented are
absolutely reliable and legal. Even in the tribunal negative decision we can read that the tribunal agree that under certain
circumstances persecutions, which we described "could take place". We also presented unbeatable evidences that a threat to
our lives and to our mental and physical health exist in Israel. Our claim is special also because we did absolutely everything
for our defense in Israel. We turned to police, to the Ministry of Police, to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, to the Minister of
Culture, to all human rights organizations, including Amnesty International's headquarters in Tel-Aviv, to famous parliament
members, to newspapers and to any other possible sources. We have Amnesty International confirmation in our case, which
arrived here in response to tribunal's inquiry. The reason of tribunal's negative decision and our eventual deportation from
Canada was expressed by the immigration officer, Mrs. Judith Malka. During our 3-rd immigration hearing (it can be listed as
2-nd by Immigration) she hinted at her desire to send my husband to Israel because he must be punished there for his views.
We believe that not the commissioners but she was the only person who made a decision in our case and that she also
composed the text of the decision. She and the chairman of the tribunal said us that we may be persecuted in Canada as well,
our children may be beaten and we may be also discrimI.ted against. We understood their words as a bad hidden threat.
Tribunal's negative decision and Mrs. Malka and Mr. Boisrond's insinuations during the hearings send us the message: We
must be punished! But what for? We are innocent people, and we did no crimes, ever! The answer why we have to be
punished may be found probably in paragraphs #4 and 5 of the decision's text, which suggests that immigrants from ex-USSR
in Israel have no rights to claim a status of refugee in Canada because they are property of Israeli government. Israel bought
them paying for their transportation to Israel, and for other things for theM.. So, they belong to Israel forever. And the
paragraph 6 suggests that the ordI.ry Israelis also paid their part to be our masters! This very fact that this suggestion is
made indirectly and that the information about the mentioned payments made by Israel and Israelis is incorrect is not really
matter. I am absolutely sure that our lives will be in danger in Israel and that my husband will be killed or imprisoned
immediately or soon after our arrival to Israel. What will be with us without him, what will be with his mother? Please, take
pity on us! Save our souls! Save my children! Sincerely yours, - Alla Gunin

Dear Sirs! We came here as thousands of other refugee claimants who flied from their countries to Canada. But our case is
special, may be - even unique. In ex-USSR I was a dissident; I was severely persecuted by communist authorities. I was
relatively well known in my native republic. Under certain circumstances I refused to declare that I never desired to immigrate
to Israel. Now I actually claim that I was deported to Israel from my native Belarus because of my political activity. My
family and me tried to escape to Germany but were seized in Warsaw by Israelis. They took us to Israel by force, and we
have certain evidences. In Israel my family and me, we were severely persecuted. I presented the reasons of these
persecutions in my claim, and also during my immigration hearings. I was considered as a dissident in Israel, too. Our case is
special also because we presented more documentary proofs of what happened to us then probably any other refugee
claimants. Persecutions against us in Israel were massive, systematic and dangerous to us. They caused physical and moral
loses to us. Despite clear evidences and undeniable proofs our claim was denied. It happened only because of wide-scaled
conspiracy against Russian-speaking refugees from Israel, and because the immigration committee assigned to our case was
manipulated by a foreign state.

We have several well-grounded reasons: enough to accuse members of the committee in partiality. Almost all basic juridical
norms and elements were violated during our 3 immigration hearings (see Document # 1). The basic moral and political norms
of Canadian society were replaced by the norms, which traditionally acting in Israel. Mrs. Judith Malka, the immigration
officer, spoke to us and acted as Israelis normally do. She openly expressed her hatred to us personally - and to Russian
speaking people in general. Her manner and her ironical attitude were assaulting. Besides, she openly assaulted us directly
several times (see Document #1). Her aggression and threats can be explained only by her partiality. When she couldn't
control her emotions of hatred and detestation she left the room of the hearings two times. May be her reaction was so visual
because she's a Jew and - it looks like that - an Israeli. Then - why she was allowed to be a member of the committee
assigned to such a hearing? We have 7 main points in connection with that: 1. It is absolutely clear that the two commissioners
refused to participate in our hearings (in other words, kept them out of the way of the hearing). Mrs. Malka was given an
option to speak non-stop during almost all the time excluding rare exceptions. She accused us, shouted on us, declared pure
political pro-Israeli propaganda and accused me in acting against Israel without any interruption from the judges. Of course,
they can claim that they participated by hearing and analyzing. But then their passivity caused a situation when they had to
analyze only what Mrs. Malka gave them to analyze.When Mr. Boisrond spoke he never opened his own topic and used his
role for illegal methods of pressure to distort my responses to Mrs. Malka's previous questions. 2. The commissioners
refused to sign the decision. There are no their signatures on that document. That's another proof that Mrs. Malka composed
that document herself. 3. The committee decision is based on her statements, insinuations, accusations and declarations only.
If something correspond to what Mr. Boisrond said - he just repeated what Mrs. Malka already said before. The stylistics of
the text and the essence of it is deeply differ from Mr. Boisrond's and Mrs. Madelenine Marien-Roy's, who completely kept
her aloof from the hearing (except of few formal words). In the same time that stylistics fits to Mrs. Malka's manner. These
two suggestions allow us to detect her as the only author of the decision, what is the severe violation of the law. 4. This
committee gives no positive decisions in refugees' from Israel cases at all. When in 1994-95 about 52% of refugees from
Israel were recognized as Convention refugees, with this committee it is "0" (or almost "0"?). 5. She's refusing to give her
motivations behind that decision. But to explain such a decision is a juridical norM.. She replaced any explanations by a pure
political rhetoric and pro-Israeli propaganda, which has nothing what to do with our claiM.. She is also a person who
contacted Israeli embassy for explanations (instructions?) in our case. 6. The committee decision ignores all documents we
presented as if there were no documents at all. In the same time to support its statements the committee used documents,
which credibility is "0", and that's obvious not just towards our case but in a general sense. But most of the documents used
to support the decision have no relationship to our case and were given just because something had to be given. 7. By
denying our claim the members of the board have committed one of the most inhuman and cruel actions in Canadian
Immigration history. I am may be just one of few people in the world who suffered so much for expressing their opinions. I
am still living only because of a miracle, which saved me in ex-USSR, and from angry "patriots"-Israelis. We had so many
documentary proof of our refugee claim as nobody else. We had testimonies, certificates, and articles, which I wrote for
various newspapers. We had Amnesty International confirmation in my case... My children, wives, mother's suffering was
just rejected by commissioners. They acted against us as if we were solders of an enemy army, not innocent people. My
family and my lives are in a real danger now. 8. The decision is partially based on distortions, which Mrs. Eleonora Broder
did when she translated our claim and our documents. 9. The decision's text style is ironically humiliating, what reflects the
committee' partiality towards us.

I can support these points by analyzing the text of the decision and by other supporting material. First of all let's analyze the
decision - paragraph after paragraph.

Let us point that this document replaces some well-known facts and even data by false facts, events and data. That document
describes the information from our PIF, our claim, hearings and even passports with distortions. For example, on page #1
(par.6) the children ages are indicated as 5 and 6 when in reality they were much younger by then. Only under a slight view
that information is not very important. In reality the children ages were changed for changing an impression. Because of what
is less destructive and traumatic for older children may be totally different for younger children. In the same paragraph we can
read that the children were denied the participation in the Sukkot celebration, when in reality in our claim and during the
hearings it was a description of a dark room, in which our children were placed. It makes a difference! A dispute about that
dark room erupted between us - and Mrs. Broder, who refused to translate the text of my testimony which I typed and gave
her but desired to intervene actively. Later - when we demanded to change the places distorted by her in her translation - she
threatened to testify against us before the committee and mentioned this dispute like as we did or said something wrong. It is
clear for me that Mrs. Broder probably was Mrs. Malka's informer. Anyway, that detail shows once again that Mrs. Malka
alone composed this document.

When the committee describes two acts of aggression against my mother it confuses the dates and the events. We declared in
our claim and during the hearings that my mother was attacked two times: in August 1992, and in January 1994. We're giving
clear description for each event, so there is no way to confuse one event with another one unconsciously. But the committee
did it! Read the paragraph # 5, on page # 2. It says: "In August 1992 when she was on her way to pick up the children from
school she was surrounded by a group of teenagers". In reality that happened when my mother took the children to a park. In
paragraph #7 on the same page you can read: "In January 1994 she was accompanied by her little children and went to find a
school..." The real event, which happened to my mother in January 1994 , took place when she was alone and was on her
way to the school to pick up the children. But the author of that text not only confuses the two different events but creates an
atmosphere of a non-sense ("to find a school", "her little children" instead of "her grandchildren"). These distortions can hardly
been considered as "innocent mistakes" because it is absolutely clear that they were made by intention. Their goals were to
form a bad impression of my story and show that everything is permitted for the commissioners. I am sure that by doing these
distortions Mrs. Malka desired to give me a signal that she's the appropriator of the laws and can go unpunished whatever
she's doing. And - if so - any complains will not help me...

How can this document be considered as a legal order when even in a pure description it refuses to tell the truth?

We can find next false statement on page 2, in paragraph # 4 ("the demander also claim that he was persecuted because he
denounced about the fascism"). In reality I never said like that it happened because of this, and it happened because of that...
The person who composed that document tries to hide here that the fascism was mentioned in connection with my article
entitled "Why Israel Is Against the Victory Day?" which was published in Israel in 1994. In his comment to my article the
editor calls to take the law into people's own hands and to make short work of me. As you can see that's also makes a
difference!

Then, the paragraphs #4 and #5 on page 3 deny rights to enter any country as a refugee to any person if he escaped from
Israel. It means that these paragraphs deny not just my personal right to escape from Israel (in other words, I must live in
Israel forever!), but disputes that right in principle. Formally speaking about me that paragraph's meaning is actually
depersonalized. It claims that all immigrants from the former USSR in Israel were bought by Israeli government as any other
property, and now belong to Israel forever. So, can a property escape? There is no other reasonable explanation of these
paragraphs' sense. ("Demanders declared that they flied from Israel to claim a refugee status in Canada after a series of
incidents, which victims they were. But the tribunal denies them the credibility [...] because [...] this family immigrated to
Israel [...] according to the Law of Return" and because Israel paid for their "free transportation, free medical insurance, and
also gave them a certain amount of money, citizenship and other benefits"). Anyway, these two paragraphs have nothing what
to do with our claim! Mrs. Malka also mentions the Law of Return here. That Law of Return is a declaration, which was
made when Israel was founded in 1948. Israelis can call it "the main rule of the country" or whatever they want but it is what
it actually is: Just a proclamation. Since Israel has no constitution the Law of Return and some other laws like it are still there
to calm down people who demand the creation of Constitution. But as in former USSR - there were thousands of executive
laws between constitution and real life, which could just abolish what the constitution said. There are customs, official religious
code and thousands of other laws between the Law of Return and the real life in Israel. And Mrs. Malka knows it! The
paragraph #5 on page 3 just shows how far away is the Law of Return, which was created almost 50 years ago and named
here as an "evidence", from the real life. Mrs. Malka gives an extract from that law, which says that the medical insurance in
Israel is free, but that isn't correct! I can show the receipts for the money that we paid for the medical insurance since our first
day in Israel, because it isn't free any more! The language course is not completely free any more! And not the whole way to
Israel is free! (I can show you the tickets). These are not just mistakes. The whole attitude is wrong (or false, or the first and
the second in the same time). So, how can be reliable a document that contains so many mistakes and falsifications? Let us
point also that these two paragraphs are absolutely illegal from the juridical point of view. Our material situation wasn't
mentioned nor in our claim, nor during our hearings. We described persecutions against us, not our fI.ncial situation. May be
Mrs. Malka had to compose a report for American Jewish organizations to show where their money are going. Then this
decision is not about our status, and has no juridical power!

The next paragraph looks nice, but somehow avoid quitting. Why? I think, I know, why. I know the document and place in
that document the last paragraph on page 3 refers to... Let me show you what it about. It declares that 80% of Israel
population is mobilized to welcome new immigrants from the former USSR. Isn't it sound strange? It's hard to believe that
such a ridiculous sentence can be a part of any juridical document! Let's admit also that this particular fragment is the beloved
fragment of Mr. La Salle, a commissioner who was recently accused of partiality towards refugee claimants from Israel. He
used this paragraph in probably all negative decisions he composed. (He made practically no positive decisions in refugees
from Israel cases). For example, Mr. La Salle used that "evidence" in his responds to Zilber and Buyanovsky's claims. (P.6 in
a response to G. Buyanovsky and p.3 in a response to family Z. claim) Let's to abstract from its complete nonsense and
suppose it reflects something from Israel's life and reality, and reflects the mentality of Israelis (Mrs. Malka's intention to
choose this particular extract, and not another one, reflects her national identity as Israeli). If Israel is a country like other
countries, like Canada, so how it comes that "80% of Israeli population" can be "mobilized" to "welcome new immigrants"?
How people can be "mobilized" (or, probably, ordered) to "sponsor immigrants" and to help them by "giving money, closes
and furniture" (p.3, 5-th line of Mr.La Sall's response to family Z. claim). May be something is wrong in a country where
population can be "mobilized"? May be, our troubles have been erupted exactly because people in such a country have to be
"mobilized" to welcome new immigrants? And then - how those figures, 80% of Israeli population, can be understood? Were
they been called (to a draft board, to Mossad?) to get an order to "welcome new immigrants" - and were counted one by
one? And what about the other 20%? We don't know anything about that "mobilization". But we know that the Israeli
population (and the Hebrew media employees in particular) was mobilized to abuse, assault, disgrace and to discrimI.te new
immigrants from the former USSR. If the Canadian Ministry of Immigration was not on one side it could employ 2-3
translators and send them in a library to translate Hebrew newspapers for last 6 years. Thousands of racists, xenophobic
articles, which encourage aggressive actions against Russian-speaking people and teach to treat them with malicious anger,
could be found. That is the real "mobilization". By the way, if we began to speak about Mr. La Salle, his personality may be
the best illustration of who stands behind the total injustice towards us. He is a permanent director of the Informative
Committee Canada-Israel, an organization that may be considered as a shadow structure of Israeli government. Allegations
that Mr. Salle systematically treats the Russian-speaking refugees from Israel with partiality were expressed several times. In
1996 Federal Court indirectly recognized that. Despite of that Mrs. Lucienne Robillard - Canadian Minister of Immigration -
gave Mr. La Salle a new commissioner's mandate (for the next term). 52% of refugee claimants from Israel obtained their
refugee status in 1994-95.On hearings with Mr. La Salle it is 0(%). In 1997 Mr. Jacques La Salle was accused in partiality
towards refugees from Israel, and his involvement in their cases was termI.ted* (see comments). However, his mandate
wasn't termI.ted in general. How can it happen in a country, which is not a province of Israel, but an independent state?

In the first large paragraph on page#4 of the decision the tribunal express recognition that the persecutions we faced in Israel
might happen to us. But it claims indirectly that we provoked them ourselves by refusing to give up our believes and views.
And it claims directly that the persecutions were caused by some individuals, not by country's rules, traditions or policy. And
it claims also that there no persecutions against Russian-speaking people at all. As we can see that paragraph is deeply
contradictory in itself. In first 5 lines it recognizes the existence of persecutions (calling them "difficulties" but that is not
important because it clear explaining what it means). In next 5 (!?) lines it claims the contrary. We already know (see the
reasons expressed above) that there is a bad hidden lie in the referrals concerning fascism in this document. So, this lie is
exploited in that paragraph, too.

The next paragraph is based on a sentence in my refugee claim (in my PIF), which did the translator, Mrs. Broder herself,
insert. Instead of just translating my story about what happened to me during my work on a stadium in Petach-Tikva (August,
1991), she transformed this event into a symbolic conclusion-declaration. In the same time this conclusion is correct in
general. What happened to me then may be called a slavery. But I never did any pure declaration. This event was discussed
during the two hearings. I was tested if I tell the truth, and it is clear from the test that I told the truth. Besides, I presented an
affidavit from Mr. Ginsburg who describes the same event. I also presented an article written by Rivka Rabinovich and
entitled "Haim #1 and Haim #2", which professionally describes some forms of slavery in Israel. I also explained during my
hearings that I do not want to make any declaration and that Mrs. Broder just distorted my words. Instead of taking into
consideration all these facts the tribunal is persisting in its absolutely I.dmissible and illegal suggestions. Instead of
investigating whether or not we were persecuted it accuses us in spreading slander about Israel. It claims like if we would not
came to Canada to seek a political asylum but to spread the slander about Israel. If we claimed that my wife and me - were
beaten during our work: that's because we want show Israel as a state of slavery, claims the tribunal. If we describe what
happened to our children: that's because we want to draw a picture of Israel as a horrible state... And so on. Reading that
document you completely forget that it is a decision in refugees' claiM.. It looks like the tribunal misinterpreted its functions and
sees itself not as immigration but as a political tribunal. But the main point of this paragraph is that we claim we got no help
from the state of Israel and will not be defended by it if will be deported back there because we want to show Israel as a
mayheM.. This is the only tribunal's excuse for ignoring all our evidences, all documentary and other material proofs of police
and other state offices' refusal to defend us. This is the only excuse for ignorance of all the reliable and very serious evidences
like Amnesty International's confirmation in our case! This is the only excuse for ignorance of intensity and incredible scale of
our attempts to find protection in Israel!

The next paragraph continues the allegation that we claim we were denied police and multiple organizations' protection, and
Knesset members' help (and even our layer couldn't do anything) and were forced to turn to Amnesty International only
because ("en effet"!) we want to show that Israel is a state of injustice.

The declaration, which the tribunal made in the next paragraph (that Israel is a democratic state, a state like other countries,
and so on) has nothing what to do with our claiM..

Let us express our father concern about credibility of the documentation the tribunal used as a documentary proof "against
us". We know that the same document, which mentions the 80% "mobilized" Israelis mentions also a "Department of
Integration", which doesn't exist in Israel. It's clear that the real name of Israeli Ministry of Absorption ("misrad ha-klita in
Hebrew) was replaced by non-existing "Ministry of Integration" because it sounds strange for Canadian (or American,
European) ears. But the "Ministry of Absorption" is the real name of the organization, which "takes care" of new immigrants.
And this document changes it to the "Department of Integration"...In reality the Zionist ideology is against integration. Look
over Ben-Gurion's, Orlosorov's, Bella Katsnelson's, Golda Meir's works and statements! Then you will be convinced that the
name "Ministry of Absorption" expresses their desires completely well. It means that the document, which was used as an
"indisputable source of information" replaces actually the truth by the lie, not only a real name by a false name. Then - how
can such a document be considered as a credible one?

We also express our deep concern of utilization of Mr. Natan Sharansky's affidavit. As far as we know this affidavit was
given through a telephone interview what is juridical unacceptable. Especially when the commissioners don't accept copies of
articles (even from the most famous newspapers), which refugee claimants present, they demand origI.ls! Then - it was well
known before Mr. Sharansky became a Minister in Israeli government that his "Zionist Forum" is not an independent
organization (as well as its chairmen) but an organization infiltrated by the government. By the time of our second hearing Mr.
Sharansky has already became a minister. And Mr. Malka knew it. So he presented the view of Israeli government as an
"independent" view that time as well as in all other occasions. She clearly exposes the source of all the manipulations with the
refugees from Israel in Canada: Israeli government! That paragraph also exploits the topic , which was closed by my answer
during our first immigration hearing. Mrs. Malka asked me how can I explain the statistic from Israel that no Russian-speaking
people were regestered complaining against the police. I shown then all the receipts of my appeals I have submitted to police,
to the Ministry of police, to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and to police headquarters in Tel-Aviv. And I said that this is the
explanation because my mails were unanswered and my complains were never registered. I also presented an article, which
gives absolutely precise, reliable and competent information that nothing can be really done against police in Israel. And the
story about a policeman who get a fine because of his refusal to help an Arab as an "evidence" looks like a clowned.

It was clear for the tribunal that it's impossible to avoid comments about the total ignorance of the whole documentation,
which we presented. It was clear that something must be said. This is why the next paragraph was composed to say just
anything about that and was designed to say nothing in particular. The tribunal claims that all our documents were rejected
because its members took into consideration only "absolutely reliable" documents. And it looks like there were no such
documents among these we presented... In reality documents like the letter from the Minister of Culture Mr. Amnon
Rubinschtein, which shows that persecutions against me weren't just a chain of coincidences, Amnesty International's
confirmation, Lev Ginsburg's affidavit, receipts of my letters to police and other organizations, other official papers can not be
considered as "reliable" or "not reliable". Another thing is that their existence may be recognized or not recognized. The
tribunal chosen the second way: to ignore theM.. It's your choice now to decide if that happened as the result of the tribunal's
partiality. But we ask you to read over the paragraph #4 on page 3 of the decision where the tribunal rejects in advance even
the possibility of existence of such a category of refugees as "refugees from Israel". How could you expect then another
attitude to any documents from a tribunal, which refuse to recognize refugees from Israel in principle? On the other hand that
tribunal's ability to distinguish between "reliable" and "non-reliable" documents is reflected in documents they chosen
themselves to support their point of view: one of them is incompetent when it speaks about Israel , another one has "0"
credibility because it was presented during the hearing as an independent source, and in reality is the voice of Israeli
government (Mr. Charansky's affidavit), and the 3-rd can proof nothing because it is a part of the declaration of the state of
Israel (the Law of Return), and nothing more.

The suggestion that my wife refused to collaborate with the tribunal is a pure lie what can be heard on the tapes from the
hearings.

And the ignorance of the medical documents is the thing from the same category.

Please, believe us that our lives were in a real danger in Israel and that this danger just increased since we came to Canada.
We were threatened from Israel even here, and we presented the proof. Please, save our souls!

Lev Gunin
 
 

TO UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE TRIBUNAL
                                                        From Family GUNIN

Central European (Windows 1250) Encoding

1. To UN High Commissioner
2. Adjustments
 

           TO UNITED NATION'S HIGH COMMISSIONER OF REFUGEES IN MONTREAL,
                                        MRS. KIM MANCINI
 

From family GUNIN (Lev, Alla, I., M..,
and Lisa), refugee claimants, who
were denied the status of refugees  (1997),                         ADDITIONAL MATERIALS
and whose casewas approved for the
judicial control in the Federal Court (1998)

Postal address: 3455 Aylmer St., App. 201, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5
Tel. (514) 499-1294                         e-mail: leog@total.net
September, 1998, Montreal

NEW CHANGES IN OUR SITUATION. NEW FACTS, DOCUMENTS, AND EVENTS SINCE THE FIRST
SUBMISSION OF OUR FILE TO UNITED NATION'S HIGH COMMITTEE OF REFUGEES IN MONTREAL
ABOUT 1.5 YEARS AGO
(By then our file was handed over to Mrs. Luis O'Ben, former head of United Nations High Committee of Refugees)

CONTENT OF THIS DOCUMENT
I. New Brief Description of Our Immigration Case
II. About Latest Changes in Our Situation
III. What We Expect From You

I
To remind you about details of our case we give its brief description, made by one of our immigration counselors, Mrs.
Anna-Maria Augenstad:
Shortly before 1991 the authorities ordered Lev Gunin, human rights activist, to leave his native Belarus, and issued an Israeli
visa. In April, 1991, in Warsaw, family Gunin attempted to escape to Germany, but were captured by Israelis and taken to
Israel by force. They came to Tel-Aviv, including I., 4, and M..., 3-years-old by then. In Israel the children faced
systematic humiliations, mockery, and became witnesses of severe persecutions against their parents and grandmother.

Without the government permission Gunins could not leave the country. In 1992 they appealed to the consulate of Belarus in
Tel-Aviv, but were denied the citizenship and access to their native country. They could live Israel only in 1994 with indirect
Amnesty International involvement. They arrived to Canada, claiming a refugee status. The Refugee Board (IRB) did not
rejected Gunins' claim completely, but accused the family in provoking persecutions by refusal to change their believes and
religious orientation. Doing that, the IRB denied Gunins one of the basic human rights: not to be persecuted for their believes
and opinions.

IBR members also contacted Israeli embassy, revealing Gunins' refugee claiM..

IRB members recognized that Gunins started to complain to dozens of organisations and institutions when they were in Israel,
and were denied protection. But the IRB concluded that the police and other Israeli institutions' refusal to give family Gunin
protection was justified because of the views, expressed by family members. The IRB also invented a speculative suggestion
that Gunins turned to all these organizations not for protection but for propaganda against Israel. They also called Gunins
aggressive "exaggerators", dangerous to their country (they did not use the word "dangerous", but this is what they mean).

The Immigration Board (IRB) also indirectly called Gunins "property of Israel" just because the state of Israel paid for Gunins'
transportation from Warsaw to Tel-Aviv. IRB denied the right for all Russian speaking refugees from Israel to claim a status
of refugees in principle: just because they came to Tel-Aviv for Israel's cost and because they were allowed to come to Israel
according to "the law of return".

So, IRB in Montreal rejected the refugee claim of family Gunin in the manner of demonstrative denial of all basic human
rights. By rejecting openly the main principles of the Charter of Rights IRB members probably tested special humiliation over
family Gunin.

Because IRB targeted what is the prerogative of United Nations and rejected one of the most important United Nations'
documents, it was natural to turn to United Nation asking to protect not only Gunins' personal rights, but also UN own
principles from IRB's attack. This is why and how Lev Gunin made the previous submission to UN High Commission of
Refugees in Montreal.
 

II
1. Since then our accommodation in Canada has been improved; we are not on welfare any more. We started to work more
then one year ago.
2. Our children continued their brilliant accommodation in Canada, participating in further cultural events since then, including
concerts, performances, and TV shows.
3. The Federal Court approved our case for the judicial control (the Federal Court's decision is enclosed).
4. The hearing in the Federal Court is scheduled for the 30-th of September.
5. Israeli consulate in Montreal answered the request to termI.te Lev Gunin?s citiwenship first positively; but lqter expressed
inqppropriqte preconditions (see the folder REASONS For Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - further: REASONS).
6. By now (September, 1998) it is clear that the members of IRB, assigned to our refugee file, fI.lly refused to return us
origI.ls of two among several crucial for our case documents, which they confiscated:
a) card for visitors of a Mossad officer, who contacted and interrogated Lev Gunin in Israel;
b) and the certified translation of Alla Gunin's birth certificate, made in 1994, in Tel-Aviv.
7. Uncertain situation and fear of removal from Canada became equal for us to a moral torture and seriously damaged health
of all members of our family. For further details, please, look over the folder REASONS. You can also contact our family
doctor Wanda Brzezinska (tel. ).
8. We won sympathy and compassion of a number of lawyers and immigration counselors, including Maitre Le Brune, Maitre
Bouchemin, Maitre Dore, Maitre Tobolewsky, Maitre Drozdowski, and others, who did or doing just great work for us or
give us advises. If such a marvelous and numerous team of lawyers could do nothing against unfair immigration decisions, it
will mean the end of the legal defense for the refugee claimants.
9. We have collected a big number of signatures under a petition to the Minister of Immigration.
10. Our case caused some international repercussions, including several forums on Internet, specially dedicated to us by web
sites owners and designers in several countries. They attracted hundreds of entries.
11. We won sympathy and support of some institutions including school F.A.C.E., which our children attend.
12. Some famous personalities gave referrals to Lev Gunin or composed separate petitions to the Ministry of Immigration.
13. Our legal staff prepared an application for Humanitarian and Compassionate cases prograM..
14. But in spite of all these achievements we still can be removed to Israel in case of a negative decision in the Federal Court
or later, in result of eventual further refugee hearings. Such a removal would end our lives tragically.
15. We would like to abandon our refugee program and start an independent immigration, but this is impossible because of
the next obstacles:
1) We consider ourselves as stateless persons (see REASONS)
2) Besides, our Israeli passports have been expired or expiring. It is impossible to extend them (see in REASONS, why)
4) One of us has steady exchange of correspondence with the Israeli consulate in terms of termI.tion of his Israeli citizenship

3) Our appeal for Humanitarian & Compassionate cases could be also rejected: because immigration officials often support
previously made by their colleagues decisions in solidarity with them, no matter how unfair they were.
16. All lawyers, which served us or consulted us did not "recommend" us to reveal the fact that we were taken to Israel by
force. Being afraid that we can loose their sympathy and emotional support we had to agree not to include this statement in
our refugee claiM.. We need help in finding a lawyer who will admit our claim as a whole, without cutting the fact that we were
taken to Israel by force if even he thinks that it will diminish our chances. The only thing we want now is truth.
17. This document is followed by the letter of Elisabeth Epstein, and then - by the copy of an adjustment to an application for
Humanitarian and Compassionate cases, which was prepared by one of our counselors in case of  a negative decision in the
Federal Court (it entitled REASONS). All new events, facts, documents, changes, and arguments were presented in this
document, as well is everything we would like to tell you about our situation. REASONS is the new basic document, which
we submit to you in our case.

     More materials can be found on Internet: [http://www.total.net/~leog/appealX.htm]

III
What We Expect From You?

A) We hope that you might prevent or even exclude our removal in case of a negative decision in the Federal Court.
And
B) Help us with an extortion of termI.tion of our Israeli citizenship from Israeli consulate. This citizenship was given to us
against our will and must be termI.ted.
And /Or
C) Help us with obtaining any valid travel documents and the Mexican visa for an interview in Canadian consulate for an
independent immigration.
Or
D) Make your own decision recognizing us as refugees
Or
E) Find a way to obtain for us a granted permanent residency in any country, where we could avoid persecutions, and
subsist, eventually working and supporting ourselves without public aide, from the next: Great Britain, France, Germany,
Poland, Belgium, Canada.
 

Best regards,
Family GUNIN
 
 
 

ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL TO UN REFUGEE TRIBUNAL

From Lev Gunin, former citizen of USSR (now - Belarus),
formal citizen of Israel (asked for termI.tion of his citizenship).

Montreal, Oct. 1998
Tel. (514) 499-1294
E-mail: [leog@total.net]
3455 Aylmer St., App. 210, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5

Around October, 18, a negative decision, signed by the Federal Court's judge Mr. Dub?, came to my lawyer's office. The
date on the decision was October, 8, 1998. They might submit it so late on purpose, to prevent me from starting another
immigration program before an eventual deportation order.

In His conclusions Mister Judge claimed again that the IRB used "no minimal credibility" formula (paragraph [7] ) towards our
refugee claim, what is not completely true. He called the documentary prove, that we and our three lawyers presented, an
accumulation of innumerous documentary prove from the " sources fiables " (week sources), including medical documents,
requests and protests of my Israeli lawyer about the State Labor Exchange refusal to register me (what is something like an
employment authorization in Israel), about the refusal of the Ministry of Culture and Education to allow me a professional
course (what was a routine procedure in Israel), about the refusal of the National Insurance to issue me welfare when I was
unemployed (this was a precondition of the Labor Exchange for registering me), about Tax Agency's refusal to give me the
tax exemption as all fresh newcomers, and so on. I also presented receipts of the registered mails to Israeli Ministry of Police
and Ministry of Eternal Affairs with the copies of the letters, responses from the Ministry of Culture and Education, and
course "Talpiot", medical documents, testimonies, and so on. I presented innumerous orders from Israeli draft board to
appear for tests and interrogations as the proof that the necessity of traveling to the draft board so often distorted my normal
life, affected my employment possibilities, and deteriorated our fI.ncial situation because the draft board situated not in our
city, and the buses tickets were extremely expensive for us, fresh immigrants. I presented Israeli Tax Agency's official
requests, submitted to
me in violation of Israeli laws about fresh immigrants, which ordered us to present a report about busyness we never had, and
deteriorated our fI.ncial situation because we had to hire a lawyer to compose such a report. Plus, the Tax Agency
documents were submitted to us from Jerusalem in violation of Israeli district rules. And also my wife presented medical,
judicial, governmental, and other official documents, which corresponded to events, which happened to her and the children.
And Mister Judge called that all "sources fiables"! Incredible! Then, my lawyers quoted sometimes the same documents,
which the Ministry of Immigration used against our claim, but different paragraphs. If these are the "sources fiables", then it
had to correspond to IRB, too, because they used the same sources!

In paragraph [8] of His conclusion Mister Judge wrote: documentary prove shows that claimants could turn for help to Israeli
authorities - and obtain the help. If police refused to cooperate, there are multiple other organizations. He completely ignored
the fact that we turned for help to Israeli authorities, to all possible governmental institutions, to all possible organizations (see
above), but were refused. Only the list of organizations we turned to consist of two pages. Plus, in support of our claim we
presented official documents as the proof that we really turned to all these institutions. Now it is clear that He simply refused
to compare our arguments with the Ministry's of Immigration, to take our arguments into consideration and present them
objectively, but simply copied the Ministry's point of view and presented it as His own. IN OTHER WORDS, HE
REFUSED TO JUDGE! So, He violated the whole legal procedure itself, turning the Federal Court procedure into clownery,
and producing a decision, which had to be prepared in advance, without any connection with the Federal Court hearing,
documents, presented by us, or judgement of the arguments presented by two sides.

He also claimed that the analysis of IRB's evaluation of our personal claim is not in the jurisdiction of the Federal Court: this is
why he replaced it by a generalized statement about how good the state of Israel treats the Russian-speaking people. Even if
our case would missed with another one, I see here a violation of the legal procedure itself - because we appealed not the
results of the theoretical dispute around human rights in Israel, which - as any other dispute - can not be solved
synonymously, but the practical IRB's decision about our personal refugee claim, which affected our personal lives and
brought us to a suicidal situation!

He also claimed that the analysis of IRB's evaluation of our personal claim is not in the jurisdiction of the Federal Court: this is
why he replaced it by a generalized statement about how good the state of Israel treats the Russian-speaking people. Even if
our case would missed with another one, I see here a violation of the legal procedure itself - because we appealed not the
results of the theoretical dispute around human rights in Israel, which - as any other dispute - can not be solved
synonymously, but the practical IRB's decision about our personal refugee claim, which affected our personal lives and
brought us to a suicidal situation!
 

In the same time Mister Dub? was sincere or rather cynical enough to tell me the truth: he pointed that people like me, who
claim something that the powerful circles do not want to recognize, "see miracles in the middle of reality". I understood very
good what he wanted to say by that. To fight what the powerful politicians made an opinion and hope that an ordI.ry man
like me could win was to expect a miracle! If the state of Israel and powerful Jewish communities decided to stop admission
of the Russian speaking refugee claimants in Canada, they did it, and stopped all "Russian" refugees, including me. More
persistent I was, more evidences I presented that I was persecuted, more unbeatable material proof I found, more strong
they wanted to reject me.
 
 

NEXT DOCUMENT:
 
 
 
 

DOCUMENT NUMBER 10
 

HUMANITARIAN AND COMPASSIONATE CASES

CONTENTS:

1. Part 1: Humanitarian Cases, Main Part
2. Part 2: Exceptional contribution, which Gunins could bring to Canadian cultural heritage
3. List of Photos: Adjustment to PART 2
4. List of Documents: Documents, Chacklist-2
5. ExplaI.tion
 
 
 

PART 1
Lev Gunin - Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - File Number 2948-6524/95/76/23/18   IMM - 1462-97
                                             (In Addition to Form IMM 5283 (02-98) E)

REASONS
ADJUSTMENT TO SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE CASES
Grounds for Exemption - Adjustment to Paragraphs A and B

[ A) Canadian Immigration law requires applicants for permanent residence to obtain an immigrant visa outside Canada,
before coming to Canada. Explain why you believe that your application for permanent residence should be processed from
within Canada as an exception]

[ B) What hardship would you have if appeal from outside Canada?]

MAIN PART
ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF MAIN PART
Main part describes each paragraph from the listed above in details. In Main Part, these paragraphs called Part 1, Part 2,
Part 3, Part 4, etc.

Each description contains the general descriptions, which are a part of this document, and a number of referrals, data, and
links, which correspond to    other documents with further detailing, proof, description, and explanation.

 (There are 2 big chapters of reasons why Applicants can not apply from outside  Canada: First 7 Groups [A] and Second 7
Groups [B]).
 

Documents, which this document refers to, are:
a) PIF of the immigration file (PIF)
b) Audio-cassettes from the refugee hearings (CASSETTES)
c) Documents from Applicants' file, which was founded and maintained by their lawyer (LAWYER'S FILE)
d) Package of documents, composed by Applicants for the post-determI.tion officer and for the Federal Court
(APPLICANTS)
e) All documents, which were composed by the Ministry of Immigration in Applicants' case (MINISTRY)
f) All material proof and supplementary documents, such as medical documents, newspapers, affidavits, legal, official and
other documents, which were added after the 1-st of April, 1998 (SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2)
g) Documents, which illustrate and explain why Applicants could bring an exceptional contribution into Canadian cultural
heritage (EXCEPTIONAL CONTRIBUTION, WHICH GUNINS COULD

- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 2 -
BRING TO CANADIAN HERITAGE).

REMARK: Decisions taken by the Post-DetermI.tion officer and by Federal Court in Applicants' case does not matter for
evaluation of the documents described in paragraphs d), e), and f) because these documents might not being taken into
consideration when the decisions were made (see all decisions in our case). It is also obvious that the same document might
have different values and meaning for different immigration programs, and must be evaluated from the Humanitarian and
Compassionate grounds point of view only.

ATTENTION!
We absolutely demand that before reading this document you read first the copies of our three letters to the High
Commissioner of Refugees. Without reading them you could not understand the most delicate and sensitive issues of our
situation. If you'll study this document first, it might make a wrong impression. So, we claim that it is absolutely necessary to
read above mentioned three document before. These 3 letters are enclosed and attached right after this document.
 
FIRST 7 GROUPS OF REASONS (PARTS)
[ A) Canadian Immigration law requires applicants for permanent residence to obtain an immigrant visa outside Canada,
before coming to Canada. Explain why you believe that your application for permanent residence should be processed from
within Canada as an exception]

1. Applicants consider themselves as people without citizenship (see below)

2. Passport of the principal Applicant has been expired; its extension is not possible through Israeli consulates in Canada (see
below)

3. It is also impossible to extend the expired passport in Israel, because there passports are confiscated from some refugee
claimants (see below)
 
4. In spite of the refugee board's negative decision in Applicants' case the danger to their security, health or even lives still
exist in Israel. The Refugee Board (IRB) did not reject Applicants' claim completely, but accused the family in provoking
persecutions by refusal to change their believes and religious orientation. Doing that, the IRB denied Applicants one of the
basic human rights: not to be persecuted for their believes and opinions (see below). During debates in the Federal Court
Immigration representative, Mrs. Murphy, went even further, replacing the question about credibility of our refugee claim and
IRB's decision by attacks on my personality (see ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL TO UN REFUGEE TRIBUNAL). The
Federal Court Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 3 -
judge, Monsieur Le Juge J. E. Dub?, committed several legal mistakes, missing up our case with an unreal one (we never
received an IRB's decision with "aucune credibilite" remark; if we would appeal the "no minimal credibility" formula, we had
no chances to win, but a positive decision to allow us the judicial control was already issued by the Federal Court's judge,
Monsieur Le Juge Tremblay-Lamer). He also claimed that the analysis of IRB's evaluation of our personal claim is not in the
jurisdiction of the Federal Court: this is why he replaced it by a generalised statement about how good the state of Israel
treats the Russian-speaking people. Even if our case was missed with another one, I see here a violation of the legal
procedure itself - because we appealed not the results of the theoretical dispute around human rights in Israel, which - as any
other dispute - can not be solved synonymously, but the practical IRB's decision about our personal refugee claim, which
affected our personal lives and brought us to a suicidal situation! (see the copy of an appeal to UN High Commissioner for
Refugees because of our drastic situation after the Federal Court's negative decision; also compare the texts of IRB's
Conclusive Decision - see in the folder MINISTRY,  Federal Court's positive decision to allow us the hearing for the Judicial
Control, and Mister Judge Dub?'s decision in our case - see in the folder SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2)

5. The principle Applicant submitted a request to Israeli government to abandon his Israeli citizenship (see explanations
below)

6. If after 4 years in Canada Applicants' children would be sent away - this would be an inhuman action.

7. Members of Applicants' family can bring an exceptional  contribution into Canadian cultural heritage (see below)

DESCRIPTIONS
PART 1 - (a)
Thesis: Applicants consider themselves as people without citizenship.

Applicants claim that they were actually deported from their native country (Belarus) to Israel against their will (see folder
APPLICANTS, document  # 2)

They also claim that in Warsaw Israeli officials prevented them from going to Germany and took them to Israel by force (see:
APPLICANTS, document #2, pages 7,8,9)

- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 4 -
Therefore, in spite of their protests and disagreements Applicants were taken to the state of Israel (see: APPLICANTS,
document # 2, pages 7,8,9)

Applicants believe that Israeli citizenship was thrust on them, and they would like not to use it for the independent immigration
procedure from outside Canada

Any attempts to force Applicants to use the citizenship, which - they believe - was given to them against their will, would
severely violate the basic principles of human rights and freedoms

This is one of the reasons why they must be given a possibility to apply from within the country

Applicants also submitted several messages to Israeli government in Lev GUNIN's name asking the Israeli government to
termI.te his Israeli
 

 citizenship. The copy of these letters and the responses from Israeli side are enclosed (see them among
SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, Requests for Citizenship TermI.tion).

In 1993, Applicants applied to the consulate of Belarus in Tel-Aviv, asking for restoration of their Belorusian citizenship, but
were denied.

This part mainly refers to next documents:

1) APPLICANTS, Document #2
2) APPLICANTS, Supplements
3) Copies of the letters to Israeli government and consulate, and the responses (SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2,
Requests for Citizenship TermI.tion, doc. 9, 10, 11, etc.)

PART 2 - (a)
Thesis: Passport of the principal Applicant has been expired; its extension is not possible through Israeli consulate in Canada

The Israeli passport of one of the Applicants (Lev GUNIN's passport) has been expired already by March 1998 (see the
photocopy of the passport: SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, documents 4, 4-a).

- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 5 -
 If even an obstacle to use Israeli passports, described in the Part 1, would not exist, an extension of Lev Gunin's expired
passport is not possible anyway because of the next reasons:

1) Israeli consulates practice refusals to extend passports of Russian speaking refugee claimants (see SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2, document number 5).
2) Israeli consulates not just reject the requests to extend an Israeli passport, but also practicing humiliation over Russian
speaking visitors (see SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, document number 6).
3) A stamp "claimed a refugee status in Canada" is placed in passports of those, who claimed the refugee status in Canada,
instead of the extension (see SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, document number 7).

                                                  PART 3 - (a)

Thesis: It is also impossible to extend the expired passport in Israel, because passports are confiscated from refugee
claimants (See: SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, document number 8)

Because Lev Gunin's Israeli passport has been expired, Applicants can not go outside Canada for obtaining a Canadian
immigration visa. The only country they could go to is the state of Israel. However, it is widely known that when people who
claimed a refugee status in Canada return to Israel, their passports might be confiscated: if Israeli authorities know that they
claimed a refugee status. Madam Judith Malka, the immigration officer, member of the IRB assigned to Applicants' refugee
file, informed Israeli consulate about Applicants' refugee claim (see: APPLICANTS, document 1, INTRODUCTION, and
also: pages 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18). Therefore, Applicants belong to the category of people, whose passports must
be eventually confiscated in Israel.

All necessary documents are enclosed.

Part 4 - (a)
Thesis: 1) In spite of the refugee board's negative decision in Applicants' case the danger to their security, health or even lives
still exist in Israel. The Refugee Board (IRB) did not reject Applicants' claim completely, but accused the family in provoking
persecutions by refusal to change their believes and religious orientation. Doing that, the IRB denied Applicants one of the
basic human rights:

 Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 6 -
 not to be persecuted for their believes and opinions. 2)Immigration representative, Mrs. Murphy, only enforced that  attitude
in her speech in the Federal Court. 3)We believe, that giving His negative decision, the Judge of the Federal Court did severe
mistakes violating the legal procedure itself.

1) See the analyses of the negative decision in folder "APPLICANTS", Document #5, Conclusive Decision; and in Group of
Documents # 4
2) See ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL TO UN REFUGEE TRIBUNAL (folder SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2)
3) See this document, FIRST 7 GROUPS OF REASONS (PARTS), paragraph 4

Part 5 - (a)
Thesis: One of the Applicants (Mr. Lev Gunin) has submitted a request to Israeli government to abandon his Israeli citizenship

He was submitting the same request several times, first time in 1994, when he was in Israel. Since 1994, in Canada, he used
to submit such a -
 

request once a year, since 1996. The latest request was submitted on September 10, 1998, by his consultant, Anna-Maria
Augestad.

The copies of the requests and other relating documents are enclosed (see Copies of the letter to Israeli government
(consulate) and the responses in folder Supplementary Documents-2, Requests for Citizenship TermI.tion).
 

Part 6 - (a)
Thesis: If after 4 years in Canada Applicants' children would be sent away - this would be an inhuman action.

The children accommodated in Canada very well, when in Israel they suffered from neuroses and hiperkinesys (see this
document, SECOND 6 GROUPS OF REASONS, Part one). If they will be sent away from here, where they feel secure,
convenient and equal, back to the nightmare they lived under when they were in Israel, - this would be an inhuman action.
See also a letter from Elisabeth Epstein, related to this issue (SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2, doc. 1).
 

Part 7 - (a)
- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 7 -
Thesis: Members of Applicants' family could bring an exceptional contribution into Canadian cultural heritage.

Everything, which relates to this part, is described in additional documents (REASONS For Humanitarian and
Compassionate cases, sub-folder CONTRIBUTION):
a) Introduction for: "Exceptional contribution, which Gunins could bring to Canadian cultural heritage".
b) Evaluation of Lev Gunin as a talented musician / musical composer.
c) Evaluation of Lev Gunin as a poet and writer.
d) Evaluation of Lev Gunin as a human right activist, historian, and a thinker.
e) Evaluation of I. and M... Gunin.
f) Evaluation of Gunins as a family.

SECOND 7 GROUPS OF REASONS (PARTS)
[ B) What hardship would you have if appeal from outside Canada?]
 

1. An irreversible damage could be cause to Applicants' health if they will be forced to apply from outside Canada (see
below)
2. Applicants' lives could be under a threat (see below)
3. Mistakes, committed by the members of the refugee board (IRB), Mrs. Murphy, put Applicants' health and lives under an
additional threat (see below)
4. Applicants might face ill treatment and extreme sanctions if they will be forced to appeal from outside Canada (see below)
5. Both Israeli authorities and IRB consider one of the Applicants as an enemy of Israel with a tendency to justify any
punishment (see below)
6. Direct threats to Applicants used to come from Israel even here, to Montreal (see below)
7. Because of all above-mentioned reasons exceptional hardship for Applicants to apply from outside Canada (from Israel)
seems obvious (see below). A special permission (pass) is required to leave Israel. Lev GUNIN was always refused that
"departure authorization" during 3,5 years, when he lived in Israel. He links Israeli authorities' decision to give him at least that
authorization with his appeal to Amnesty International in 1994. Authorities in Israel will never give it to Gunins again (Israeli
authorities refusal to give Gunins permission to leave the state of Israel during 3 years was discussed during their refugee
hearing; refers to CASSETTES). So, he never could do the independent immigration procedure from outside Canada
because Israeli authorities will never let him leave Israel again! The certified translation of that pass - permission - (2-pages
document) was presented to the IRB in Montreal and can be found in folder SUPPLEMENTS-2.

Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 8 -
  Part 1 - (b)
Thesis:  An irreversible damage could be caused to Applicants health if they will be forced to apply from outside Canada

There are 5 main reasons for that:
1) Because one of Applicants' passports has been expired, and can not be extended (see: SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2, documents 5,6,7,8,9,10,11, etc.) Applicants could go outside Canada only to Israel. In the same time
Applicants have so much fear of what they believe could threat their freedom, lives, right not to be persecuted, if they would
be forced back to Israel, that it alone could damage their health by a psychological shock (see: APPLICANTS, Document
1).
Three and a half years in Israel already damaged Applicants' health so much that now another push towards the same country
may lead to irreversible damage to their health. This issue was described or reflected in next documents: APPLICANTS,
Document #1, pages 5,6,7,8,17,18; NOTE OF MOTION OF EXTENSION OF TIME; SUPPLEMENTS; see the list of
medical documents. To evaluate this point it is necessary to read over all documents in this submission. To examine this point,
please, read over the above mentioned documents. [Please, also look over all medical documents in SUPPLEMENTARY
DOCUMENTS-2, sub-folder MEDICAL].

2) What Applicants consider as IBR members' humiliating behavior and partiality provoked Applicants to feel themselves
completely unprotected, insecure, bad-treated and insulted (see: APPLICANTS, Document #1, pages # 3-8, 14-18;
Document #4, parts 1,2, and 3; Document #5; also see: LAWYER'S FILE, Document # ). This caused an additional
damage to their health.

Part 2 - (b)
Thesis:  Applicants' lives could be under a threat

Applicants' lives might be under a threat if they will be forced to appeal from outside Canada.
Predictable inhuman treatment and extreme sanctions against them in Israel (because this is the only country they can go:
please, read over the First seven reasons, this document, page #2) can put even their lives under a threat.
They already faced inhuman treatment and extreme sanctions in Israel (see: APPLICANTS, Document #1, pages # 10-14,
16-19), and there are same significant indications (see the same documents) that the both inhuman treatment and extreme
 

- Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases - page 9 -
sanctions will be used against them again as soon as they will enter the state of Israel.

Such a sensitive towards some specific items state as Israel might retaliate against Lev Gunin even for his request to termI.te
his Israeli citizenship.

Both adults - both husband and wife - already suffering from: she - chronically fatigue and depression, he - from hyper
tension and other blood vessel disorders, as well as neurological disorders in result of what - they believe - happened to them
in Israel. Their heath disorders were jeopardized because of extremely painful and dramatically tenth immigration collisions.
Now the state of their health is not a direct threat to their lives. But if removed to Israel, Applicants could face any father
damage to their health, and then it could become irreversible.

Besides, Applicants' lives might be under a threat in Israel: sooner or later. The latest documents enclosed by Applicants in
this submission present some further explanations.

Part 3 - (b)
Thesis:  Actions, committed by the members of the refugee board (IRB), put Applicants' health and lives under an additional
threat. In her speech in the Federal Court Immigration representative, Mrs. Murphy, repeated IRB's mistakes, and even
enforced them

Non-compatible with the status of IRB actions, which were committed by the IRB members, assigned to Applicants' file,
directly increased an eventual danger for Applicants if they would be forced to go back to Israel:
1. IRB members contacted Israeli embassy and denounced (disclosed) Applicants' refugee claim (see next documents:
APPLICANTS, Group of Documents #4, document #3 (p.p.1,2,3); APPLICANTS, document #1 (page 1, paragraph 3,
points 2,3,5,8, 11);  APPLICANTS, document #1, INTRODUCTION, and pages 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18;
SUPPLEMENTS, documents #6, 7). IRB members had no reasonable grounds to do that (APPLICANTS, document #1,
page 13, paragraph "D"). The disclosure of Applicants' refugee claim to Israeli officials from one side shows the total
ambivalence of the IRB members towards refugee claimants' security, and from another side caused an additional severe
threat to their freedoms and lives if they will be moved to Israel.
2. IRB members presented Applicants as exaggerators, who committed themselves to spread slander against "their" state
(see next documents:

- Humanitarian  & Compassionate Cases - p.10 -
APPLICANTS, Group of Documents # 4, Document #3 (p.3, paragraph 4; p.4, 3 last paragraphs; p.5); APPLICANTS,
Document #5, p.2, paragraph P.4).
3. IRB members pretended that the Applicants appealed to dozens of institutions and organizations in Israel (with complains)
not for protection but to spread slander against "their" country (see: APPLICANTS, document #5, p.2, paragraph P.4). IRB
members recognised that Applicants started to complain to dozens of organizations and institutions when they lived in Israel,
and were denied protection. But the IRB concluded that the police and other Israeli institutions' refusal to give family Gunin
protection was justified because of the views, expressed by family members (folder APPLICANTS, document 5, page 3).
The IRB also invented a speculative suggestion that Gunins turned to all these organisations not for protection but for
propaganda against Israel (APPLICANTS, document 5, page 3). They also called Gunins aggressive
"exaggerators", dangerous to their country (they did not use the word "dangerous", but this is what they mean). The
Immigration Board (IRB) also indirectly called Gunins "property of Israel" just because the state of Israel paid for Gunins'
transportation from Warsaw to Tel-Aviv. IRB denied the right for all Russian speaking refugees from Israel to claim a status
of refugees in principle: just because they came to Tel-Aviv for Israel's cost and because they were allowed to come to Israel
according to "the law of return" (see APPLICANTS, document 5, page 2, paragraph P.3).
4. IRB members expressed almost direct insinuations that Applicants came to Canada to defame against "their" country, just
camouflaging it by the refugee claim (see APPLICANTS, document 5, page 2, paragraph P.3).
5. Therefore the general ideologically-motivated line in IRB statements and in their questions during interrogations put the
equal sign between peaceful protests against human rights violations, Applicants' attempts to defend themselves, their human
dignity in Israel, - and revolutionary activity, defamation and/or mutiny.
6. Everything, starting from IRB members' replicas during the hearing, to their negative decision's text, is a direct
encouragement for Israelis to continue persecutions of Applicants. Or a direct order...

Part 4 - (b)
Thesis:  Applicants might face ill treatment and extreme sanctions if they will be forced to appeal from outside Canada

It is clear from the above placed information that Applicants can go outside Canada only to Israel. But in Israel Applicants
would face ill treatment and extreme sanctions.

- Humanitarian  & Compassionate Cases - p.11 -
This part correspond to all above mentioned reasons.

To learn more, please, read over next documents: folder APPLICANTS, document#1, page 16, INHUMAN
TREATMENT; folder APPLICANTS, document#1, page 10; APPLICANTS, GROUP OF DOCUMENTS #4,
document#1.

Part 5 - (b)
Thesis:  Both Israeli authorities and IRB considered one of the Applicants (L. Gunin) as an enemy of Israel with a tendency to
justify any punishment.

This consideration goes in contradiction with the clear evidence that the only thing he wants is to be away from the state of
Israel, and the only method he's using to achieve it is the peaceful, legal approach.

The Refugee Board's treatment of Mr. Gunin is evidently not independent. During their evaluation of GUNINS' claim they
were in close contacts with Israeli embassy. They clearly demonstrated a tendency to represent the attitude from the Israeli
point of view before the objective evaluation of the dangers for the refugee claimants in case of their removal. Instead of
defining whether or not the removal of the refugee claimants from Canada is dangerous for them, they made attempts to
define their "guilt". Instead, the Refugee Board turned itself into a kind of a crimI.l (or, rather, a political) court, accusing
Applicants in exaggerations, propaganda against Israel, and other "crimes". The very tone of the negative conclusive decision
is not a neutral, but accusational. The same tone was used by all Israeli official documents, which concern Applicants.

Part 6 - (b)
Thesis: Direct threats to Applicants used to come from Israel even here, to Montreal

Israeli state radio and newspapers used to make direct provocation against Lev Gunin trying to cause violence against him,
playing on sensitive issues. Applicants also used to get mails from Israel, which reflected some actual threats to theM.. There
also were malicious telephone threats, e-mails, and other forms of threats. Applicants believe that an official status in Canada
given to them could put an immediate end to such threats. In the same time these threats proved that if removed to Israel
Applicants would face malicious anger of Israeli authorities as well as of ordI.ry Israelis [see APPLICANTS,
SUPPLEMENTS, documents #30 ("A" and "B")].

- Humanitarian  & Compassionate Cases - p.12 -
Part 7 - (b)
Thesis: Because of all above mentioned reasons the extreme hardship for Applicants to apply from outside Canada (from
Israel) seems obvious.

Applicants can never apply from Israel (the only country they can go) for Canadian permanent residency because of: 1)
predictable persecutions; 2) impossibility of accommodation in Israel; 3) eventual confiscation of Applicants' passports; 4) a
special permission, which is required in Israel to leave the country; Israeli authorities will never give it to Lev Gunin again (the
permission issue was already discussed during the refugee hearings).

Resume: Family Gunin suffered a lot. They went through dramatic, drastic, and tragic events. It is absolutely clear that they
can not apply for permanent residency in Canada from outside Canada. A refusal to give them a possibility to apply from
within Canada will bring their lives to a tragic end. If humanity and compassion is not for them - for whom then?

IMPORTANT NOTICE: PLEASE, TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT SOME OF THE DOCUMENTS,
MENTIONED HERE AND IN OTHER DECLARATIONS, WITH REFERRAL TRACES, MIGHT BE SUBMITTED
1-2 WEEKS AFTER
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

PART 2
Lev Gunin - Humanitarian  & Compassionate Cases
IMM     Second Additional Document [refers to the form 5283 (02-98) E]
 

Exceptional contribution, which Gunins could bring to Canadian cultural heritage

REFERS TO
REASONS
ADJUSTMENT TO SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE CASES
Grounds for Exemption - Adjustment to Paragraphs A and B
 

Three members of Applicants' family can bring an exceptional contribution into Canadian cultural heritage.

1. Mr. L. Gunin is a productive musical composer, journalist, historian, poet, writer, and amateur photographer. He is also an
advance computer designer and HTML programmer.

Mr. Lev GUNIN is an editor of two non-commercial Montreal-based newspapers: in Polish and in Russian languages. He is
an owner and editor of 11 web sited on Internet; 7 of them are E-Zines. His newspapers and E-Zines became wide known
among International Internet community. People submitted him tenth of mails and thousands of E-mails. They expressed their
interest and approval. His creative works in Russian (poetry and prose) became known on faculties of Russian Literature in a
number of universities, for example, in Gomel University (Belarus) or Moscow State University (Russia). A number of famous
personalities like a famous Russian writer Vladimir Batchev or poet Andrei Voznesensky spoke with warmth about L.Gunin's
poetry. Mr. Josef Brodsky, Noble Prize-winner, has marked his poetry as unusual and sophisticated. Mr. Gunin's essays
were published in huge number in Belarus, Russia, Israel, Germany, France, Poland, and Canada. Interviews with him were
published by the leading Russian newspaper "Vesti" in Israel (1994) and by the Radio "Russian Aliance" in Montreal, Canada
(1998). World-famous writer and scenario creator, author of the famous American movie "Hostages", Mr. Grigory Svirski,
citizen of Canada, gave the highest approval to L. Gunin's creative and social activity. Gunin's prose and poetry were added
to the most complete and famous electronic Russian libraries (Alex Farber & Maxim Moshkov's library, for example).

Mr. Gunin is an author of numerous contemporary compositions for piano, orchestra, choral, instrumental duets, trios, etc.,
and also electronic music and songs in jazz, pop and rock styles. In Montreal he took part in a number of music festivals,
concerts, and other types of musical activity. During his Montreal's life period he released several musical albums with other
musicians and poets - both immigrants and Canadian citizens. He created several songs with relatively well-known Montreal
poet Miguel Lamiel. His music was placed on Internet. He participated in so many musical events that they hardly could be
listed. Mr. Gunin is a member of Montreal-based Saint-Lawrence choral (the leading in Quebec) and Union Des Artist.

Mr. Gunin is a known human rights activist, recognised by many informal human rights groups all over the world. He
maintains contacts with the leading human rights organisations.

Mr. Gunin's works about the history of Belarus were approved by all leading professional historians in Belarus, including A.
Gritzkievich, A. Tarasov, O.Dadiomova, V. Posse, etc. His work "BOBRUYSK" is a unique monograph of that kind among
the books about Belorusian cities.

He is also an author of works in music history, musicology, theory of music, counterpoint, art, and culture. He is an author of
a number of philosophical essays and works in political science.

As an amateur photographer he has a fresh, colourful and origI.l style.

Mr Gunin is an advanced amateur computer technician, designer and HTML programmer.

He is also an amateur architect.

All about mentioned information is supported by documents, referrals, photos, diplomas, certificates, etc. This supplementary
information evaluates each sphere of Mr. Gunin's activity separately, and could be divided on next parts:
1) Music plus works in musicology
2) Poetry
3) Prose
4) Journalism
5) Works in history
6) Computer skills + HTML programming
This 6 groups of documents will be submitted 1-2 days later or could be presented on your request.

One can ask: Why - if he is so talented - we never heard about him?
This is because in the former USSR Lev was seriously persecuted (read over folder Applicants, document 2), his creative
works were not compatible with the communist ideology - and therefore could not be officially presented for publications or
awards. All doors were closed before him, and his carrier was broken in advance.

Could he make his carrier in Israel - country, where he never wished to go and where he was taken by force; country, which
he criticised long before he was taken there? (See: Applicants, Documents 1, 2, etc.). Of course, not!

In Israel he was also widely persecuted. He was not permitted to work in his profession; even an employment authorisation
was refused him: formally an Israeli citizen! Newspapers in Israel called him "an enemy"; Israeli State radio called him "an
enemy"! (See other documents). He could not advance in his attempts to be treated like other people (see attached
documents)...

Now, in Canada... In spite of the pressure of his tragic immigration situation, uncertain status, time and money-consuming
fight for not to be removed from Canada, time-consuming self-training to polish his French and English, French course, low
social status related to his immigration situation, hardness of accommodation period, and myriad of other obstacles, Canada
became the first country in his life, where he is little by little - but advancing. For almost 4 years in Montreal (taking in
consideration his unstable immigration situation) his achievements are just great! You can learn more about them in
supplementary information (see the bottom of the previous page).

There is another part of Mr. Gunin's activity, which is hidden and not so evidently impressive among his achievements, but - in
the same time - is very important and means a breakthrough for hiM.. This activity could play a role of his achievements or
substitute them in some cases, or explain why more impressive results can be predicted because of next reasons:

a) He was and is still restoring some of his manuscripts, confiscated by the former Soviet or by the Israeli authorities.
b) Before showing his musical or literacy works to potential publishers, managers or sponsors he had to make them readable,
retype, print and fold them, make musical records in professional recording studios, what he did during 3 years. This process
is almost finished by now.
c) It took time also to meet important people and find other musicians with whom he could record his music.
d) To do that all and to avoid ignorance in creative people' environment, to keep himself technically updated, he had to buy
(or get as an offer) expensive equipment, which he could not get just instantly. By now the most important part of such
equipment has been purchased or obtained.
e) Typing, retyping, scanning, printing hundreds of pages, making professional recordings, translating if necessary, and
creating musical arrangements was a long, money- and time-consuming process, but it was absolutely necessary for
preparation of a potential future success.
f) Editing and preparing his works for presentations, Lev Gunin did a huge, monumental job in relatively unfavourable
situation.

In spite of his hard attempts and his present achievements he can not complete and persuade his goals without any stable
status in Canada.

By these 6 above-placed paragraphs ("a" - "f") we wanted to show that he is not just a talented person but also a hard
worker; and he did maximum of the possible in his situation to gain success, and deserves to be given a chance to make
society benefiting from his talents.

It would be absolutely unfair if such a person will be removed from Canada as if he was an ordI.ry person without any
creativity and without monumental creative goals...

The former Soviet Union was a classical totalitarian power. This power took away Lev Gunin's future, prevented the society
from benefiting from his talents, and made his life tragic and unbearable. An evil force sent him to another country: where he
did not want to go and where the verdict against him, taken once by the Soviet authorities, was confirmed. It is not in the best
interests of Canada to maintain the consequences of what one of the most brutal regimes in History did to this man. It would
be a tragic mistake if Canada will manifest support to a former brutal regime's decision and will regenerate in time the
destructive effect to Lev Gunin's life, which was origI.lly generated by the former totalitarian regime.
 
Will Lev Gunin become a famous musical composer or a poet, will he concentrate on literature or on history, will his creativity
been targeting just his closely friendship environment; will he get a professional job in music or will work as a volunteer on the
amateur scale (as a member of a choral or an instrumental group), the society will benefit from his creativity anyway.

We were not committed here to discuss social mechanisms, which put up one talented person to the top of success, and
another one, may be, more talented, don't. We are not here to analyse why J. S. Bach, V. A. Mozart, F. Schubert, Van
Gogh, and other genius, died in poverty and obscurity. But we know that the society benefited from their talents even without
recognising their creative superiority. In the same way it might benefit from Lev Gunin's creativity if he would be left alone, out
of the threat of deportation.

We strongly believe that the rejection of his refugee claim came as the result of extreme generalisation, partiality and was
generated by the influence of the state of Israel. It is in the interests of justice to let him stay in Canada.

2. Alla Gunin is a creative and hard-working person, reliable and honest.

During all  years of persecution, instability, sometimes fI.ncial difficulties, and threat of deportation - during the last 4 years,
she always was with her family, with her husband and children. In spite of her deep depression, caused of the immigrations
situation, she gave all her love, her creativity, and her support to her husband and children. I don't  know any other example,
when in similar situation, which could be compared for that poor family with the war-time, another woman did so much for
her love ones! Gunins children's excellent performance in that tragic, drastic situation could be explained not only by their
father's participation in their education, but by their mother's creativity and love.

3. I. Gunin is a perspective talented musician, music and storywriter.

From her very young age I. Gunin was a gifted and promising musician, good in both instrumental and theoretical spheres.
She is an advanced for her age piano player (certificates and other documents are enclosed), a flute player, a member of
F.A.C.E. Junior Tremble choir, conducted by well-known Erica Phar, and another choir, conducted by Mr. Yvon Edwards.
I. is also a young musical composer, and a good theoretician.

When she was just 4 years old, I. started to create tales and stories. Now she is an advanced storywriter. She has written
tenth of them in French and in English.

All necessary documents are enclosed.
(Some of them might be submitted in an additional envelops).

4. M... Gunin is a talented ballerI., recognised by all ballet teachers as an exceptionally talented young ballerI., may be
just one of 2-3 in Canada. She was chosen by the National Ballet of Canada among many other children as the one of the
most talented.

M... is a gifted ballerI.. She is dancing from 4 years old. She has good skills and abilities, good physical form, esthetical
and rhythmical feeling - and she is very nice in movements and in everything she is doing. The director of the National Ballet
educational department M-me Bishop recognised M... as an extremely talented person.

All M...'s ballet teachers predict her a great future. She already participated in several big performances in several theatres,
including Jean-Mance theatre, Clark Theatre, and she must participate in the big "Nutcracker" (ballet) Christmas
performance.
 
M... is also a storywriter, a musician and an amateur young musical composer.

All necessary documents are enclosed.
(Some of them might be submitted in an additional envelops).
 

Gunins are a peaceful, harmonically-established, honest family. The both adults are working. What will gain Canada by
deporting such nice people? As far as I see it is impossible for them to apply for immigration from outside Canada, and it
must be obvious for everybody. They suffered so much... much more then any other family on Earth. Maybe, it is enough to
torment them? Try to imagine yourself, your children, your love ones on their places! If Humanity and Compassion is not for
them, for whom then?!

Sincerely,
Anna-Maria Augestat,
Canadian Citizen
Tel. (450) 923-2967

( ! ) Brochures, prospects, photos, diplomas, memos, referral letters, albums, and material evidences of GUNINS'
participation in Montreal's cultural life are so numerous, that most of them might be presented during the time of an interview
 
 

LIST OF PHOTOS
(BOBRUISK, 1974 - 1991)

1. Lev GUNIN with rock-group "Karasi".
This rock-group performed in various places. They played their own compositions, including L. Gunin's. They worked
sometimes for Moscow and Kostroma philarmonies, but mostly performed in Myshkovichi, an entertainment center near
Bobruisk (1982 - 1987). They had the most advanced by that time musical instruments (keyboards, guitars, drums) and
equipment. A disc was released.

2. Lev GUNIN in Myshkovichi (see the previous paragraph).

3. Lev GUNIN with rock-group "Duration"
(he's sitting in front of that group's singer, 1988).
.
4. Lev GUNIN in Lenin plant club, with the club's rock-group. 1977.
.
5. Lev GUNIN with his group "Waterfall"
He performed with that group in 1976 - 1987, parallel with other groups. It was his main group. They played popular songs
as well as Gunin's compositions.
.
6. The group of students of the Music College in Brest (Belarus), theoretical faculty, with their teacher, IrI. Morikh. Among
them - Lev GUNIN. 1974.
.
7. Rock-group "Iles" from Hungary, once very popular in Eastern Europe.
Lev Gunin happened to substitute their keybordist.
.
8. With that group Lev GUNIN played on marriages, parties, birthday parties, restaurants, etc.
.
9. L. GUNIN is the teacher, composer, artistic director for 3 rock-groups of young musicians. One of these groups.
.
10.  Touring over Belorusian villages with an amateur rock-group.
.
11.  The same tour as "10".

12.  Members of "Raduga" rock-group, who played for the Management of  the restaurants of Bobruisk-city. L.Gunin among
theM.. 1991.

13.  The same as "8".

14, 15. L. GUNIN is the teacher, composer, artistic director for 3 rock-groups of young musicians. Two of these groups.

16. Playing with the group "Raduga" (see paragraph 12).
 
 
 
 
 

DOCUMENTS' CHECKLIST - 2

MAIN ENVELOPE (ENVELOPE NUMBER 1)
1. Request For Exemption From Immigrant Visa Requirement (application form IMM 5001)
2. 3 copies of above mentioned form
3. Additional Sheet Of Paper With Jobs Listed (refers to IMM 5001 form, p.3, section "G")
4. 3 copies of above mentioned sheet
5. Explanations (refers to Additional Sheet Of Paper With Jobs Listed: see point 3)
6. Supplementary Information (IMM 5283) form
7. 3 copies of above mentioned form (see point 6)
8. A copy of the Federal Court's decision ("Ordonnance")
9. Authorization by applicant (his spouse) for release of police certificates/clearances
10. Identity documents, issued for the members of family GUNIN by Immigration Canada and Quebec's Immigration: 11
documents
11. Copies of the last salary checks for Lev and Alla Gunin as evidences of their employment
12. Official Immigration Canada DOCUMENTS CHECKLIST
13. REASONS (Adjustments to Supplementary Information (refers to IMM5283 form). 12 pages.
14. Exceptional Contribution GUNINS Can Bring to Canadian Cultural Heritage
15. Copies of 3 letters to UN High Commissioner of Refugees Mrs. Kim Mancini (14 pages)
16. Motion of extension of time (5 pages): refers to REASONS: see point 10
17. My fI.l word
18. Folder "PASSPORTS, BIRTHDAY CERTIFICATES, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS": 10 DOCUMENTS

SUPPLEMENTARY ENVELOPE (ENVELOPE NUMBER 2)
1. Control copy of IMM 5001 and 5283 application forms (to show what applicant they belong to)
2. Folder "APPLICANTS": 7 main documents, 11 total, which must show that the applicants can not go outside Canada,
that they were exposed by IRB to an additional danger, and faced deep psychological traumas because of the way they were
treated by IRB, and their health or even lives might be completely destroyed
3. Folder "SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS-2"
a) folder "Administrative Pressure" (67 documents, which show that before coming to Canada applicants were under
excessive administrative pressure: they were refused full employment authorization and welfare in the same time; tax
exemption, diplomas equivalent and professional courses, which were obvious for all new comers, registration with the state
labor exchange; the departure authorization - permit to leave the country - was given only after 3,5 years, and so on. This
pressure will never give them any possibility to apply for immigrant visa from outside Canada)
b) sub-folder "Medical" (24 documents, 31 pages show that even the threat of the removal from Canada itself already slowly
damaging their health, and the eventual real removal will finish their lives tragically)
4. Folder "REFERENCES"
sub-folders:
a) Lev GUNIN (46 + 22 documents)
b) I. GUNIN (16 documents)
c) M... GUNIN (9 documents)
All documents refer to "Exceptional contribution GUNINS can bring..."
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

EXPLAI.TION

DEAR HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS DIVISION OFFICER!

I had two affidavits from refugee claimants families who (one of them) was removed from Canada, and another one left after
they were refused. Both of them were linked with the movement for Russian speaking people rights in Israel. In the first family
the International ("foreign" as Russian speaking people call it) passport was confiscated from their single son (27 years old)
when they came to extend their expired passports. The confiscation was related to their refugee claim in Canada. Passports
were confiscated from the members of another family right in the airport.

Because the member of IRB, assigned to our file, Mrs. Malka, contacted Israeli embassy and denounced our refugee claim, I
don't feel secure to any information, submitted to Immigration Canada. This is why I have no rights to put security of people,
who submitted me their affidavits, in danger. And this is why I decided fI.lly not to reveal them to you. I live it for your
consciousness to believe or not to believe me. I am an idealist, probably, a naive man. I still believe in goodness and in
consciousness, and hope that in spite of a potential pressure from the state of Israel, or, rather, from the public opinion in your
working environment or/and from your supervisors, you could act according to your consciousness.

You can also go to next web sites for find out more about administrative terror in Israel against Russian speaking people:

[ http://www.codoh.com/newsdesk/ ]

[http://pinpoint.netcreations.com/search?account=codoh&query=Israeli+persecute+Russian+ Immigrants&submit.x=25&submit.y=10]

Sincerely,
Lev Gunin
 
 
 
 

DOCUMENT NUMBER/NUMERO  11

Previous Document  <>  Next Document  <>  Main Page

En Francais
In French Language

POUR LE COMMMITTEE DES DROITS DES ENFANTS DES QUEBEC
To QUEBEC's Children Rights Committee
 
 

Cher madame, monsieur!
Nous devions s`adresser au public parce que d`autres mesures a prot?ger les droits des deux enfants ne pourraient pas
fonctionner. S'il est si, un pr?c?dent de violations tres s?rieuses des droits d'enfants pourrait survenir.
Ca concerne  I. & M... Gunin:

Brievement: avant 1991 les autorit?s ont command? Lev Gunin, activiste des droits de l'homme, a partir de son natale
Belarus, et ?mettaient un visa Isra?lien. En avril, 1991, dans Varsovie, la famille Gunin essayait de s`?chapper en Allemagne,
mais ?taient captur?s par les Isra?liens et pris en Ira?l par force. Ils venaient en Tel-Aviv, incluant I., 5, et M..., 3 ans -
vieilles par alors. En Ira?l les enfants affrontent des syst?matiques humiliations, moquerie, et deviennet des t?moins des
pers?cutions s?v?res contre leurs parents et grand-m?re.

Sans la permission du gouvernement les Gunins ne pourraient pas partir du pays Ira?l. En 1992, ils s`adressaient au consulat
de Belarus au Tel-Aviv, mais ?taient ni?s de la citoyennet? et  de l'acc?s ? leur pays natif. Ils ont pu quitter Ira?l seulement en
1994 avec l`indirecte participation d'Amnistie Internationale. Ils sont arriv?s au Canada, revendiquant un statut de r?fugi?. Le
Conseil De r?fugi? (IRB) ne rejettait pas le r?clam? des Gunins compl?tement, mais accusait la famille en provoquant des
pers?cutions par le refus ? changer leur croix et orientation religieuses. Faisant que, le IRB a ni? les Gunins un des droits de
l'homme fondamentaux: ne pas ?tre pers?cut? pour leurs croyances et opinions. Les droits de l'enfant aussi ?taient viol?s.

Maintenant leur cas gagnait le 1er niveau de l'appel, ? la Cour F?d?rale. Si sur le deuxi?me niveau l'appel sera rejet?, ils
pourraient ?tre d?port?s en Ira?l.

Il est clair qu'une telle d?portation pourrait faire les d'enfants orphelins ( sources Isra?liennes - comme le radio d'?tat -
addresse au public pour l'approbation des mesures s?v?res contre leur p?re) et les exposent ? des pers?cutions d`avantage.
M?me si elles ne se rappellent pas de tous les d?tails elles pensent ? leur vie dans Ira?l avec l`horreur et la terreur. Bient?t
apr?s leur arriv?e ? Montr?al, l'?valuation psychologique trouvait le dommage profond au psychique de l'enfant. Parce que le
psychique de I. & M... ne pourrait pas endurer des m?moires horribles, tout ?tait effac? et remplac?  par leur vie ?
Montr?al. Elles ont oubli? les traditions Isra?liennes et l`H?breux compl?tement. Leur accomodation ? Montr?al est brillante.
Le fran?ais est devenu  leur langue maternelle. Elles  gagnaient beaucoup d'amis,  elles n'ont pas la mentalit? Isra?lienne, mais
Queb?quoise...

Maintenant,  la d?portation de l'endroit qu`elles admirent, apr?s 4 ann?es qu`elles  vivent ici, atteindant  l'?cole F.A.C.E., -
dos ? captivit?, dos au pays qu`elles ?taient prises  par force, n'est pas juste, inhumain, elle est  brutale! Elles n'appartiennent
pas et n'avaient jamais appartenus l?!

P.S. Les parents des enfantes sont des gens sinc?res, talentueux, et paisibles. Ils travaillent.

Elisabeth Gunin, grand-m?re d'enfant

Ce que nous attendons de vous?
1. Une p?tition aux organisations de la protection des enfants et aux comit?s des droits d'homme, au Ministre D'immigration,
aux m?dias, et une copie pour  nous.
2.  Une aide en extortation de la termI.ison de citoyennet? Isra?lienne de GUNINS du consulat d'Ira?l ? Montr?al  (Lev
GUNIN apelle pour elle depuis  1994).

I. GUNIN:
Elle est une joueuse avanc?e de piano. I. employait pass? les examens ? McGill chaque ann?e avec les meilleures marques.
Elle participait dans des activit?s et ?v?nements culturels/ artistiques des douzaines de fois. Elle est aussi une jeune ?crivaine
de po?sie, histoire/  et  compositeur.

M... GUNIN:
M... est une ballerine talentueuse. Elle ?tait choisie des douzaines de jeunes danseurs pour le Ballet National du Canada.
M... participait dans divers ballet & autres performances.  La sculpture, faite par elle, ?tait expos?e au Musee des Beaux -
Arts.  Elle est aussi une jeune compositrice/ ?crivaine d'histoire.
 

Nous sugg?rons que les avocats doivent ?tre contre le chaos dans les matieres juridiques.  La t?rmI.ison compl?te de justice
devrait t?rminer la prof?ssion d`avocat. C`est pourquoi, nous ?sperons sur votre aide.

En octobre, 1998 une reponse negative est arrivee.
 

               Famille GUNIN
 
 

<Previous Document>

                                       THE ENFORCEMENT OF FAMILY GUNIN's PERSECUTION
                                                          by IMMIGRATION CANADA
                                                                          Part 3
 
 
                                          LIST OF EVENTS
                                          (short description)

                                   October, 1998 - September, 1999

<<Next Document>>
 
 
 
 

DOCUMENT NUMBER 14
 
 
 

Elisabeth Gunin (Epstein) - Humanitarian & Compassionate Cases -
 (In Addition to Form IMM 5283 (02-98) E)
REASONS
ADJUSTMENT TO SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION HUMANITARIAN & COMPASSIONATE CASES
Grounds for Exemption - Adjustment to Paragraphs A and B
A
[ A) Canadian Immigration law requires applicants for permanent residence to obtain an immigrant visa outside Canada,
before coming to Canada. Explain why you believe that your application for permanent residence should be processed from
within Canada as an exception]

1. I had the joint refugee claim with my son, and his family. The negative decision by Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB)
did not mean that there was no danger for me to go back. I am sure that my case was neglected. IRB refused to evaluate my
it at all. They did not interrogate me, gave me no questions, in their speeches and in their conclusive decision in writing I was
not mentioned  as a personality at all. They concentrated exclusively on my son: because they wanted to punish him for his
attitude towards the state of Israel.
2. So, I might face the same humiliations and the same assaults I faced before coming to Canada.
3. You, probably, understand, that, regarding my age, and my situation, I have no chances to start an independent
immigration procedure or any other procedure to obtain an immigrant visa outside Canada.
4. It is absolutely clear that I can only appeal for Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds, because other attempts not to be
removed from Canada, linked to other immigration procedures, are not for me.
 

B

[ B) What hardship would you have if appeal from outside Canada?]
1. When we were taken to Israel from Warsaw, I had a strongest shock. In result of that stressful situation my eyes disease
have been worsen. It became even more severe after what I still consider as persecutions, which we faced in Israel.
2. I was refused the proper medical help in Israel. Medical doctors-Israelis shouted on me, used abusive words and gestures.
We were expelled from the medical clinics we paid for. As the result my left eye was neglected. When we came to Montreal,
Canadian medical doctors saved my eyes. But they told me that for not become blind I have to avoid stresses and high
temperatures. Removing me from Canada to Israel you can put me under the both stress and heating (Israel is one of the
most hot countries in the world), and you'll make me blind. Please, don't do it to me!
3. Living 4 years in Montreal I've been used to local life. I have friends, relatives; I speak English more or less, and
understand some French words, too. I have no close friends or relatives in Israel, I don't speak Hebrew, and I don't know
Jewish religious rules. Regarding my age, my eyes disease (glaucoma), my general situation, please, do not send me back
there!
4. The members of IRB could say just anything about our claiM.. How could they not believe our honest and sincere claim,
hundreds of documents we presented, our innocence, I don't know and don't dare to know. I just know that I still have a
non-imagI.ble fear to go back there. My blood is freezing in my veins, when I think that I might be removed back there.
5. Please, try to understand that Israel is not my native country, I am a stranger there, I don't belong to Middle East culture
and traditions.
6.  Please, have a merci for me as if I was your mother, sister, or daughter.

Sincerely Yours,
Lisa Gunin
 
 
 

<Previous Document>

                                       THE ENFORCEMENT OF FAMILY GUNIN's PERSECUTION
                                                          by IMMIGRATION CANADA
 
 
 
                                          LIST OF EVENTS
                                          (short description)

                                   October, 1998 - September, 1999

       1) 08.10.1998. - The Second Stage Federal Court's Decision: to reject family Gunin's demand
       to revise their refugee case. Reasons: one reason - "cases with Immigration Tribunal's remark
        "no minimum ground" are automatically rejected".

       2) During the Federal Court's hearing the Immigration Canada's lawyer, Mrs. Murphy, based
       her arguments on Lev GUNIN's "dangerous personality", insisting that he is an aggressive,
       dangerous and anti-government trouble-maker, and because of that must be expelled from
       Canada.

       3) When the Federal Court's decision was received Lev and Alla Gunins were deeply
       depressed and were close to a suicide. On the 3-rd or 4-th day after receiving the Federal
       Court's decision Lev was so close to a suicide that only physical efforts could calm him down.
       To relax and avoid a suicide attempt Lev started to run - and completely damaged his already
       damaged by batteries and other incidents ligaments on his both legs.

       4) November, 1998. - Family Gunin submitted an appeal for Humanitarian and
       Compassionate grounds to Immigration Canada. The appeal for the Risk of
       Return, made by Gunins in 1997, was never answered.

       5) Immediately after submission of that appeal Gunins started to have difficulties in
       using their telephone line. The wider description of what is going on with their telephone
       line may be found on the next page

       6) Three times BELL's technicians came to Gunins apartment and checked BELL's
       installation in their apartment, but found nothing.

       7) Several times Lev GUNIN's computer (after using Internet or sending a fax Lev
       disconnects it immediately, so that when Gunins are using the telephone computer is
       never connected), was targeted by computer viruses. The viruses probably came not
       through Internet but through the telephone line itself. (See also next page)

       8) Unknown voiced started to give Lev Gunin and his family advises to live Canada
       "voluntarily", otherwise it will be "more worse" to theM.. The most persistent strangers
       called from outside Montreal, demanding a long distance collect call. They called
       several times a week during approximately 3 months, starting from March, 1999. When
       one day I. Gunin, Lev's older daughter, authorized the collect call, they began to
       mock over her. They spoke French. When Lev took over they told him that he received
       an unofficial removal order and was advised to leave Canada.

       9) Because of psychological pressure and tragical immigration situation Lev started to
       injure himself. He received 6 injuries, 4 times visited emergency - and some of the
       injuries never healed. Both Lev and Alla Gunin started to suffer from extreme declining
       of their health's state.

       10) Gunins' children are suffering from neurothyses because they are also suppressed by
       the situation.

       11) In March, 1999, Lev Gunin's work (night auditor) was termI.ted because it was
       a temporary job. He had to take unemployment. In the same time he had a work accident,
       and was seriously injured. Because of the bandage and the gravity of the injury in general
       he could not go to another work. In the beginning of July, when the bandage and the
       protective plate were removed, he could not search for a physical work. In the same time
       it is practically impossible to apply for a better job having no status in Canada.

       12) Because of his immigration situation Lev's unemployment benefits were often
       suspended, and he had difficulties to pay for a renewval of his Employment
       Authorization. And without it he could not receive the benefits...

       13) Because of all these reasons but inicially because of Immigration Canada's
       persecutions family Gunin started to face such extreme fI.ncial difficulties as
       never before. They were pushed much below the poverty line.

       14) Searching for work Lev Gunin applied to hundreeds potencial employers. No
       one called him back. He found out what is going on when one of the potencial
       employers told him that she was advised to call Immigration Canada or called
       herself (it is not completely clear) - and received a "recommendation" not to
       employ Lev Gunin.

       15) In August, 1999, Lev began to modernize and classify his web files with full
       description of Gunins immigration case. He did it because almost one year
       passed since Gunins applied for Humanitarian grounds, and an eventual Immigration's
       decision might arrive soon. In case of a negative decision Lev was planning to appeal
       to a number of organizations. To elimI.te the expenses on mails he decided to use
       his web site as a primary source. Since then his web site was subbotaged. He is not
       able to upload new versions of his pages to his Internet server. But something more
       serious and dangerous occured: the server started to send old versions or even blank
       pages with existing files' names to Lev's computer, erasing his renewed files and
       elimI.ting his work! In responce to Lev Gunin's official complaint his server's
       representetive claimed server's innocence and told that allien hackers could do that.
       An anonimous e-mail advised Lev not to place information about his immigration
       case on his web site - otherwise his web site will be closed, and his account - termI.ted.

       16) In the end of August - beginning of September Lev Gunin finished IGS course
       for security/investigation agents - and succesfully passed the exaM.. But he was refused
       the security agent licence because of his status. Quin Elisabeth Hotel's placement
       department's clerk responded to Lev's appeal for work that they do not want to
       employ people with no status in Canada.

       17) 08.09.1999 Gunins received a negative responce to their application
       for I. Gunin's Student Authorization. In his/her statement Vergeville's Case
       Processing Center's agent AJL/F (now Immigration Canada stopped even
       reveal real names of its agents: as KGB in ex-USSR or SS in fascist Germany
       did) mentions employment authorization instead of student authorization. He
       gives 2 "reasons":
             "I. Gunin was refused and employment [when we applied for student
       authorization!] authorization because a removal order, which might be
       executted, was issued for you. This is why you are not eligible to apply for
       employment authorization from within Canada".
            Refusing a child a student authorization Immigration Canada violated
       International treaties, Canada's laws and human rights granted by all existing
       laws and regulation. In Gunins' case only a conditional removal order is acting;
       a real removal order was never issued against theM.. In the same day, 08.09.1999,
       Gunins called Immigration Canada - and verified through both aitomatical
       information tool and an agent (started to speak to an agent at 12.24 p.M..) that
       there are no decisions in Gunins appeals for the Risk of Return and Humanitarian
       and Compassionate grounds, and no removal order issued before 08.09.1999.
       In the same time it is possible that Immigration Canada means anonymous advises
       to Gunins by unindentified callers to quit Canada, otherwise their life will be made
       unbearable and misarable. Same threats expressed during IRB refugee hearings
       in Gunins case gudge Mr. Boisrond and immigration officer Mrs. Malka.

<<Next Document>>
 
 
 
 

                      GRIGORY SVIRSKY
 

                   Grigory Svirsky is a famous writer, author of the movie's "Hostages" scenario.
                         Professor, member of Canada's and Russia's Writers' Unions

   An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Canada, Mr. Jean Chretien
   About Gunins' immigration case
 

 
              Translation from Russian origI.l

              To the Prime Minister uf Canada

              THE OPEN LETTER
              Grigory SVIRRKY,
              Professor ot literature, writer.
              In Canada since 1973.
 
 

              "THE BERLIN WALL IN CANADA"...

                 So was called a letter-affidavit, containing text of my statement for a conference in
              Toronto. The conference was organized on October 22, 1997 by the All-American
              Institute for Human Rights Defense (Washington, D. C.) This statement criticized the
              Management of Immigration Canada, which is obviously not in accord with any common
              sense and humor: most undesirable immigrants in its official document were announced...
              writers.
 

                                       ...
                 A writer is a creature, certainly, horrible. But a composer appears simply a horror, an
              invasion of aliens.

                 The name of this composer and musician is Lev Uunin. He's 42 years old, he is a
              polyglot, and is fluent in English, Prench, German, Polish, Byelorussian, and Yiddish. His
              wife Alla (39) has a technical education. The children - I. and M... - 11 and 12 years
              old, like their father - are gifted in music. I. plays piano and flute, M... is a young
              ballerI., once chosen by the Natiunal ballet of Canada for further studies, but... status,
              status! Of course, she participates in many performances even without the status, and her
              list of performances is already longer, than that of some adult ballerI.s.

                 This family does not require any help from the stale. The composer is skilled in many
              musical specialties. He tutored children; has performed in prestigious clubs, concert halls,
              and restaurants!.

                 Such a self-sufficient family, one should think, would be welcomed in any country...
              Naturally, except the most racist, xenophobic-anti-Semite.

                 And now the family is on the verge of catastrophe: The Immigration Management in
              Montreal has refused to give them the right to settle... in free Canada. Deportation
              threatens theM..
              Why suddenly?!

                 Oh, this family, Mister Prime Minister, has an awful past.
 

              1. First of all, they ran away from Israel. The Israeli consulate persecutes escapees by all
              means as fugitive slaves. Then, not only the Israeli consulate, but even the immigration
              authorities of Canada assume that Israel is a free country, and therefore consider escape
              from freedom as impossible...

                 However, it is really hard to understand why people run away from this "freedom". By
              number of refugees, Israel, according to official statistics, is on the third - fourth place
              (depending on the years), annually: directly after the brutal murder regimes of Iran and
              Somali.

                 The nature of human mentality is so, that people willingly believe myths. Myths are
              much more smoother than the truth. Why listen to the confused words of unfortunate
              refugees that Israeli nationalists have blocked all venues for Russian Jews except to
              Israel since the first of October, 1989. What has happened (for many years) is a real
              deportation of half-million free people to a small East country.

                 That, in itself, was a crimI.l abuse of authority, humiliation over the principles of basic
              human rights. But today the consequences of that crime are much more painful: nobody
              tried to foresee the results of this irresponsible operation, which has sharpen up to limits
              the socio-economic and political situation in the country. One can observe the extreme
              intolerance of aborigI.l Israelis (such as outcomers from the countries of Muslim
              fundamentalism: Morocco, Algeria. Iraq and etc.) for new arrivants. Upon their arrival in
              Israel, immigrants from Africa were deprived of privileges. As a rule, they were taken to
              Negev desert and left there; and only fragmentary army tents were thrown to theM.. The
              care of the state for tile new arrivants from Africa ended with this.

                 Naturally, former Africans were irritated by rumors that "Russians" are given
              "everything"... Suppressed hatred towards the authorities has found a convenient outlet:
              non-sanctioned murders of the immigrants from Russia, non-provoked battering of the
              "Russian" children in schools, a wave of rapes of new "Russian" immigrants. The last case
              reported by the world press (a week ago): a policeman (a Moroccan origin) extremely
              irritated by an Israeli soldier, who loudly spoke with his friends in Russian in a restaurant,
              stabbed the soldier with a knife and killed hiM.. (Moscow newspaper "Koмepcaнт
              Daily." ("Commersant Daily") of November 13, this year, and tens of other editions
              wrote about it).

                 In the last years the attitude of the Israeli aborigines to new arrivants has deteriorated
              alarmingly. The Israeli and American press in Russian has now informed the readers
              about a pogrom in Jerusalem's religious quarter " Mea Shearim". Angry crowds have
              beaten "Russians", burned their furniture, broken glasses in their motor vehicles. Only the
              intervention of the Israeli army stopped murders... One rabbi, associate of the mayor of
              Jerusalem, has called his co-religionists for this pogroM..

                 Why then has the immigration board heard, with a grimace of mistrust, the testimony,
              that the wife of composer Gunin, ethnically Russian (she's from a mixed family), was
              persecuted, called " Russian whore ", prostitute. According to supplied documents she
              was cleaning the subsidiary premises of a shop, where she worked as a cashier.
              Influenced by spasm of brutaliен aborigines took the mop from her hands and hit her on
              the head with it, then they severely beat her up half-to-death. She arrived home with
              injuries and bruisies.

                 And the small Gunins' daughters, who in kindergarten were preparing for holiday
              Sukkot's celebration, learning verses and songs with burning eyes, were separated from
              all others and locked in a dark closet with "You are not Jews, this holiday is not for you."
              as only explanation.

                 As soon as the composer published articles against narrow-minded small-town
              nationalism and racism, in defense of human rights, this intellectual man was beaten by
              everyone: by "kablans" - Israeli sub-contractors, who employed that "Russian" only for
              the heaviest work, then by police, whose brutality nowadays everyone speaks about
              (even the members of Israeli Knesset). Gunin even tried to find "truth" (protection) in a
              police station. But uselessly since the composer, after writing one of his articles was
              already once "invited" for "discussion" by police. After that discussion his lips were
              swelled, and the doctor diagnosed a brain concussion...

                 Israel is a free country. It is possible (theoretically) to leave her. You must only bring
              two dozen permits (visas for exit): from the army, from Immigration bank "Ydud", from
              building bank and other organizations, which can give out these papers, or can not to
              give out; at last, from police, which does not give any documents to plaintiffs, whatever
              you do...

                 One day Ana ran to a few embassies, with the vain hope to take her husband and
              small girls out from Israel immediately.

                 But only the support of Amnesty International to Gunins made their departure from
              Israel possible...

                 And here they are in blessed Canada.

              2. And here something even more awful was found out, - the composer and musician
              Lev GUNIN not only "escaped" with his family from a very free country, he furthermore
              has an independent and obstI.te personality. And even here he has not changed...
 

                 He was exasperated and demoralized by how unlawfully the trial of Gunins' case in the
              refugee court was managed. I have listened to all cassettes with records of refugee
              hearings. Each of them lasted from four to five hours.
              During that huge amount of time Canadian judges spoke out only three - four phrases,
              transferring the whole initiative to an immigration offficer whose name is Judith Malka.
              With passion and anger Malka (her Jewish family name means "queen") repeated all
              "proofs" of Israeli government about "fugitives and traitors" (Exactly by that name former
              Prime Minister of Israel Mr. Shamir, ardent Zionist called all Jews, who did not desire to
              live in Israel).

                 But the composer Gunin is not a Zionist, though he has nothing against ZionisM..
              He merely wants that his wife not be called "Russian prostitute", and not be beaten up.

                 He does not understand in general, why an immigration officer whose name is Judith
              Malka, cries hysterically: how could this Gunin call himself and his family, which were not
              allowed to get out of Israel, "Russian slaves"?!. Slaves driven to the Middle East.

                 Certainly, it was absolutely necessary for a tired out person to quit Israel immediately.
              But not alone! It was necessary to grasp from humanitarian reasons the prime minister
              Netanyahu, whom the iron Madeline from USA State Department puns to one side, the
              opponents of the peace agreements Sharon with Shamir - in an opposite, and the right
              psychopaths threaten to shoot him immediately as lzhak Rabin, if he will listen to the
              Americans. That's who is a true "prisoner of Zion"! He's only not beaten by police yet as
              Lev Gunin was.

                 Oh, the exhausted, tormented composer was not up to these thoughts in the court. He
              multiplied, and multiplied the facts of inter-ethnical hostility and the brutality of Israeli
              police, what is today not only denounced by the Israeli press publications, but even
              discussed by the deputies of Knesset...

                 Listening to the tapes, I expected that Lev Gunin would soon lead Immigration's Malka
              to a heart attack. FI.lly, as the matter of fact, she really broke up, and, almost loosing
              her conscience, has cried out, that Gunin has submitted the request for the status of the
              refugee just for having an opportunity to discredit and slander the state of Israel!

                 Naturally, after that cry Gunin and his family were not recognized as refugees.
              It was told about the reasons of that refusal directly, in the official document.

              I "... There are not enough proofs that "Russian" origins, mixed marriages are
              persecuted because of nationality, religion, [...] or because they express antifascist
              views".
 
 

              2 ''... Because the state of Israel has brought "Russians" on her own expense, they in
              general have no rights to ask for the status of the refugees in Canada...."
              And etc...
 
 

                 In Montreal, in the Rene Levesque Street, 200, where there the Council on refugee
              cases (Immigration and Refugee Board), is situated, there is the archive for documents
              that officially confirm inter-ethnic hostility in Israel, attacks on children from CIS
              countries, and systematic rapes of the women from Russia.
              Also are carefully kept UN documents, which testify about the same. The same has been
              published nowadays by various newspapers of the World.

                 But why the judges had to look to the truth into eyes? Eyes will ache! The Jewish
              Congress of Canada does not want to hear that in their beloved Israel somebody was
              deadly beaten, somebody was pogromed and persecuted... From ages the Erets Israel
              for them - their "pink dream", their "birthday of heart". How could it happen that inside
              the "pink dream" anybody is beaten? But if even really beaten, probably, he must be
              beaten!..

                 Thousands of Russian, Byelorussian and Ukrainian Jews, running from Israel, are
              rejected, with an active assistance of the Jewish Congress, from Canada, thousands of
              families are broken, children become orphans, many are lost. But the idea that the
              members of the Jewish Congress of Canada are accessories to a historical crime against
              the Jews of CIS, - this idea has not yet struck theM....

                          Dear PRIME MINISTER, Mister Jean CHRETIEN!

                 I wrote five documentary novels and stories about Israel, including the trilogy "Branch
              of Palestine", translated in all European languages. In my life I saw enough of such noisy
              Judith Malkas, hired or voluntary Israeli super-patriots, so enough that it would be
              enough for ten lives.

                 I am convinced, that you have judges with the sense of humor and understanding, who
              would not allow to transform the Canadian court into a battlefield for intolerant towards
              dissidents and broken apart Israeli society.

                 But now the speech goes not only about re-consideration of this obvious case, but
              simply about the rescue of the Gunin family. I talked to these people, saw their eyes.
              Lev Gunin and his wife Alla are exhausted, nervous people, they are on the verge of
              suicide. Four years they are carefully pushed towards this edge. The persecution of
              intelligentsia does not cease...
 

                 Young talented professionals are extremely important to Canada. Please, give Lev
              Gunin, a talented composer and musician, an opportunity to work quietly - in glory to his
              family and this remarkable country - Canada

                       Grigory SVIRSKY

                            12/26/1998
 

                      TORONTO
 
 
 
 

FROM MARCH TO AUGUST 1999
 

To Human Ressourses Development Canada
To CSST
For Russian Media  (in Russian language)
To Embasses: 1) Russian (in Russian only) 2) Israeli (Hebrew and English)
To International Red Cross
For Employment Authorization Immigration Division (En Francais - In French)
 
 
 
 
 
 

From Family Gunin, Montreal, November, 1998

Dear Friends!

Please, try to treat this letter as an unusual appeal, not just a desperate cry for help and justice.

In October 1998, the Federal Court of Canada issued a second decision in family GUNIN's appeal.  (The 1-st one was
positive). That tragic decision resumed our refugee claim, which took 4 years of our lives.

Let us make a brief description of events, which took place before that sad date.
The head of the family, Lev GUNIN, as all members of the family, was born in Bobruisk, Belarus, ex-USSR. Senseless,
ridiculous coincidences in 1971-72 turned him, a secondary school student, young composer, and advance piano player, into
a person, persecuted by Soviet authorities. They tried to prevent him from entering collegial - university studies; however, his
persistence and a lucky miracle broke that wishes circle, and he received first collegial, and then university degrees in music.
In spite of that, L. GUNIN could not build a successful composer's carrier because of persecutions. In the same time, he
played a specific role in ex-USSR, Belarus, and other countries' cultural life. He's the author of novels, stories, poetry,
contemporary and electronic music, works in history, essays, musicology, music history, philosophy, etc. His articles were
published in a number of newspapers all over the world.

In 1979-1986, Lev became an object of wide humiliations. He was beaten by somebody, who has links with militia (police)
and KGB. The authorities stood up in defense of the attackers. They persecuted L. GUNIN even more for bringing the
attacker to trial. In another incident he and his brother - they were hunted by two well-coordI.ted groups: mobsters, and a
gang of youngsters. "Hunters" were also leaded by militia (police). Later brothers GUNIN were interrogated by police /KGB
men. Lev's brother Vitaly became a victim of secret medical manipulations.

L. Gunin has multiple links with the cultural elite, famous personalities and dissidents in Moscow, St. - Peterburg (Leningrad),
Vilnius, Warsaw, and Belarus. He also has connections with the Western journalists in Moscow, and with representatives of
the governments of the Western countries.

1980-s. Because of persecutions L. GUNIN's decided to participate in the dissident movement. There are the main
directions of his dissident activities:
1. Participation in Human Rights movement and links with the most famous human rights activists.
2. Membership in underground literacy circles.
3. Defense of the Old City of Bobruisk from revelation and demolition.
4. Journalism and editorial functions for underground magazines.
5. Cooperation with forbidden (or unwelcomed) in ex-USSR NTS (People's Labor Union) and the National Front of
Belarus.
6. Participation in the Jewish national movement.
7. Creation of ideologically independent and stylistically controversial music, prose, poetry, philosophy, and historical,
political, and other works.

1985-1989. A conflict erupted between leading by L. GUNIN group - and the powerful institution of Israeli emissaries to
USSR, and controlled by them Jewish political Mafia. (Their goals - devastation of the local Jewish cultural life, confiscation
of huge aid from the Western Jewish communities, and concentration of the propaganda of immigration to Israel - L. Gunin
was fighting). He also confronted three important personalities - Kebich, Alimbachkov, and Lukashenko. All of them became
top political figures later: first one short before, and the two others - after his departure from USSR (The 1-st one became the
Prime Minister of Belarus, 2-nd - major of Bobruisk, and the 3-rd is the present dictator of Belarus).
 .
His attempts to emigrate to USA or Germany - to save his brother's life - failed. All attempts to obtain an Israeli visa for
permanent residency have been failed, too. (By then practically everybody could easily get such a visa). Israelis did not want
to allow him and his brother to immigrate to Israel.

1991. After his brother's death, Lev started to cancel all steps of immigrating to Israel. He did not want to go there by then.
Soon he received an order from KGB to leave his native country for Israel. Soviet authorities sent us (family Gunin) all
previously suspended visas. We could not say "no" to KGB, but planned to escape from Warsaw to Germany. At the
Central railway station in Warsaw, in presence of L.Gunin's Polish friends, Israelis captured us, and took us to Israel by
force. In Israel, Mossad (Shabbak) officers verbally accused Lev in an attempt to sabotage the whole operation of bringing
the Soviet Jews to Israel. Mossad approached him several times.

In Israel we faced next persecutions:
1) Israeli citizenship was thrust on us
2) Alla, Lev's wife, was abused, attacked, beaten, assaulted, and systematically discrimI.ted against
3) Elisabeth, his mother, was abused, attacked, and assaulted
4) Children became victims of systematic humiliations and mockery
5) Lev himself was deprived in his rights. Israeli authorities denied him:
a) valid diploma equivalent
b) professional courses
c) rights to enter other courses or university
d) full and valid employment authorization
e) registration  with the State labor exchange
f) tax exemption as all fresh immigrants were receiving
g) welfare when he was unemployed
h) proper and equal medical service
i) legal, and police defense
j) reduction of municipal taxes
k) authorization of departure, which is required in Israel to leave the country
l) etc.

He was beaten, abused, discrimI.ted against. Israeli state radio called him an enemy. One of the leading Israeli newspapers
suggested that his works (essays, articles, etc.) must be destroyed. Innumerous and systematic draft board's orders to appear
affected his normal life and his (his family) fI.ncial situation.

During his life in Israel L. Gunin published a number of articles & books in Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Moscow, and Germany,
criticizing Israeli government for human rights violations and fascist tendencies in Israel.

1994-1996. With an indirect Amnesty International's involvement we could come to Canada, and claimed a refugee status.
To support our claim we presented next types of documentary proof:
A. Legal documents
B. Documents, issued by Israeli government
C. Documents, issued by all kinds of Israeli institutions
D. Affidavits
E. Letters
F. Post receipts
G. Medical documents
H. Newspapers
I. Researches made by International committees and human rights organizations
J. Proof that in Israel we turned to innumerous organizations, institutions, police, court, and lawyers for protection
K. Our lawyer's documents
L. Etc.

Practically each statement, described in our refugee claim, was supported by the documentary proof. Only the list of
documents' description consisted of six pages.

1994-1997. In her translations, our lawyer's secretary/translator distorted all documents in our refugee claiM.. One of our two
lawyers submitted several messages to IRB in protest of some outraged events. He claimed that the IRB members took
advantage of the distorted translations, using them as a tool against us. IRB members used offensive, illegal methods against
Lev. They interrogated only hiM.. No questions were given to other family members. IRB commissioners demonstrated their
opinion that Lev GUNIN must be punished for his ideological (political) views. Two members of IRB, immigration judges,
gave the whole initiative to the third member, an immigration officer, a Jew and - probably - Israeli, who only spoke. During
our refugee hearings she manifested an outraged malicious hatred towards us, and maintained close contacts with the Israeli
embassy in writing, in our case. IRB members maintained the atmosphere of hostility and arbitrary attitude towards us.

Denying our refugee claim, the IRB members not just acted unfair. Their negative decision was not just a refusal to recognize
us as refugees, but a declaration-manifest, which rejected the basic human rights in principle. In form of declaration, they
denied in principle rights to have an independent opinion, practice or not to practice religion, be protected by the state. IRB
members claimed that if government paid for immigrants' transportation, immigrants became the property of that government
(a kind of commodity). IRB members also claimed that police' and other institutions' refusal to give protection was justified if
people had an alternative political /ideological opinion (even if that opinion was not expressed to police). They claimed that
we alienated Israelis by keeping controversial opinions, and refusing to change our views. And so on...

The IRB's negative decision became not just a matter of our personal fate, but also a matter of human rights in general.

1998. In her speech in the Federal Court, Mrs. Murphy, the Minister's of Immigration representative, confirmed the IRB
members' negative attitude towards human rights, and also widened personal accusations against Lev Gunin, turning the
question of our refugee status into the question of his "I.dmissible" (by whom?) ideological views. As IRB did before, Mrs.
Murphy refused even to mention Alla Gunin, Elisabeth Epstein (Gunin), and the children.

The Federal Judge, Mr. Dube, just copied Mrs. Murphy's and the IRB statements, refusing to evaluate arguments of the
TWO sides. He claimed that - because in their refusal to recognize us as refugees IRB members used the formula "no minimal
credibility", - such cases are automatically denied by the Federal Court. In reality, his decision was made in contradiction to
another Federal Court judge's decision in our case, and also contradicted the IRB's fI.l (conclusive) decision. In that
decision IRB agreed that some persecutions against us (they called them "difficulties") could take place because we abused
the Israelis by refusing to obey their demands to change our views. Mr. Dube also revealed his partiality by distorting some
important events and attacking our lawyer in personal. A person, whose name was also Dube, was involved into negotiations
between the immigration officer, Mrs. Malka, and the General Consul of Israel, in our case. We could not find that person
among the IRB headquarters' staff, or among other immigration divisions. All faxes were submitted to Israeli consulate from
Mrs. Malka, without mentioning any other name (s). However, the responses from the consulate were submitted to Mr.
Dube. We feel that this mysterious Mr. Dube has something what to do with the Federal Judge Mr. Dube.

IRB and Mrs. Murphy's accusations against us were such, which are the prerogative of the crimI.l court. They accused us
so sharp as if we were killers or terrorists. In reality we are innocent people, never accused in defamation, or fraud. In the
same time, the way they acted might be easily considered as a crimI.l offence.
We are appealing not just because of incredible injustice, but because the removal back to Israel means DEATH for us. If
nobody in the whole world could prevent it, it would mean that if people are deprived and innocent they might be kidnapped
and taken to another country by force. It would mean that demonstrative humiliations over human rights, such as the IRB
members and Mrs. Murphy expressed, are tolerated. There are rumors among UN staff that the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights might be changed soon to fit to the brutal and ultra-religious regimes' requirements. Please, do something for us
before it happened!

The only way to save us is to help us in obtaining the permanent residents status in any civilized country. That could prevent
our eventual removal to Israel.

Please, help!

Family GUNIN:
Alla, Lev, I., and M... GUNIN
Elisabeth EPSTEIN-Gunin

Tel. (514) 499-1294
E-mail: [leog@total.net]

Web Page, dedicated to our case:
www.total.net/~mioara/witness.htm
 
 
 

Pour CSST
For CSST

La copie: pour le Droit de Homme de Quebec

(un fragment)
 

Declaration de M-me GUNIN

M-me Elisabeth Gunin
Montreal, Mai 1999
 

M-me Elisabeth Gunin
Que est que passe avec nous

Pendant plusieures ann?es mon fils a ete l'activiste des droit d'homme en
Ex-Union Sovietique. La c'?tait tres dangereux: il a ?t? battu et persecut?
tout le temps, sans arret.

A cause de ca en 1991 nous ?tions d?port?s de facto par les autorit?s de
R?publique Bi?larussie a l'exterieur de notre pays (en Pologne). Notre
citoyent? a ?t? abandonn?e, nos passports ?taient confisqu?s.

A la place de nos passports on nous a  donn? les visas
Israeliennes, mais nous n'avons pas plan? aller en Israel. Notre seule
destenation a ?t? ville Frankfurt, en Almagne.

Quand nous sommes arriv?s a la gare Centrale en Warsavie, nous ?tions
imm?diatement entour?s par les agents Israeliens, et, contre
tous notres protestations, appel a la police Polonaise, scandale et
les autres scenes, nous ?tions amen?s en Israel par force.

Mes enfants (mon fils et sa femme) ont ?t? persecut?s en
Israel comme en ex-USSR sinon plus grave. Mais nous ne
pouvions pas quitter Israel parce que le gouvernement Isra?lien
nous a refus? le permit de d?part, qu`est requis pour quitter cet
?tat. Juste avec l`aide indirecte de L'Amnestie Internationnalle
nous a obtenu ce permit et nous sommes arriv?s au Canada en
1991 pour revendiquer le statut de refugi?.

Naturallement que nous ?tions refus?s parce que si les autorit?s
d'immigration du Canada auraient accept? notre d?claration et les
faits que nous avons donn? avec la verit? precise ca pouvait affecter
les interess?s politiques d`Israel - le meilleurs amis du Canada, -
relations Canadiennes-Israeliennes, et le politique de la communit?
Juive au Canada. Expriment leur parcialit? sincerement, les membres
du commit? du statut de refugi? ont commit pendant leur interrogation
plusieurs actes abusifs contre nous. Le style abusif et moqueur
domI.it dans leur resum? officiel ?crit. Par exemple, d'accord
avec leur opinion, nous sommes la propri?t? du gouvernement
Israelien et ne sommes pas l?gitimes de demander le status de refugi?,
plus, nous avons "provoqu?" les Israeliens a nous persecuter
"parce que" nous refusions d`ob?ir a leures demandes de
convertir a la religion Juive ortodox.

Le dirigeur g?n?ral parmis les membres du commit? du status et la
nationnalit? Juive et - d'accord avec notre information - citoyen
d'Israel...

Pendant presque 5 ans, nous vivions avec la menace de d?portation.
A cause de cette torture psychologique nous somme toujours
deprim?s. Notre sant? psychologique a ?t? tres affect?e au r?sultat
de l'attitude de la commission du Status de R?fugi? dont nous
consid?rons comme extremement cruel. Je suis sur que la d?pression
a provoqu? par cette attitude cruelle est la cause de la haute pression,
migraine et les probl?mes de m?moire de mon fils.

Apres avoir re?u le d?cision de la Cour F?derale (qui a
automatiquement refus? notre appel sans ?tudier les d?tails de
notre cas), il a commenc? a se blesser inconsciament. Jamais, il
ne se blessait comme ca. Il a ?t? battu, mais ne se blessait jamais
par ses propres mains. C`est le r?sultat de son ?tat psychologique.
Il a re?u au total 5 blessures, qui restrictaient ses mouvements et
d?rangaient ses possibilit?s d`executer le travail manuel.

A la fin de Mars, son travail temporaire dans Le Caillier a ?t?
termin?. Quand c`est arriv? il a d?j? trouv? 2 autres travails
alternatifs, plus la possibilit? ?ventuelle (a son avis) de rester
travailler dans Le Caillier 10-15 heures par semaine. Sinon sa
derniere blessure (plus grave que les autres; il a ?t? bless?
pendent son travail), il pouvait commencer de travailler
imm?diatement apres la fin de son dernier travail (qui ?tait
temporaire). Puisqu`il ne pouvait pas travailler a cause de sa
blessure, il a perdu la possibilit? de commencer de travailler
imm?diatement et ?tait forc? d`appeler pour le chomage.

Depuis le vingt Mars jusqu'a aujourd`hui son doigt bless? n'est
pas encore gu?rit (la copie du dernier CSST ?valuation est incluse);
il ne peut pas utiliser sa main pour le travail. C`est pourquoi il a
besoin de chercher un travail non-manuel. Mais quel travail
professionnel il peut obtenir? Pendant 15 ans, il ?tait un professeur
de musique - jusqu'a notre d?portation de notre pays natal (il y a
presque 8 ans) a cause de mon activit? des droits d'homme. Mais
sans le status il n`est pas l?gitime d`enseigner au Canada. Il possede
des excellents savoirs d'ordI.teur mais il n'a pas de diplome,
puis le formation professionnelle lui interdit aussi (par le permit du
travail). Ses autres blessures pas encore gu?ries completement.

General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
To Mr. E. Assor,
Information Officer

Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on 98-07-20. In your response you told me:

"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss this
matter with her".

July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).

Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.

Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.

My reasons for that request are: a)enforcement of a confirmation; b) fear.

"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation (like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture & Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.

Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am not able to control that fear by logic.

However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence, then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and compassion reasons.

Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.

Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin

Montreal, July, 29, 1998.

To Israeli General Consulate
To General Consul Mr.

From Mr. Lev GUNIN,
NomI.lly - Israeli Citizen.

DECLARATION
Starting from 1986 I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives just disappeared.

My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such visas directly to Israeli embassy in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli embassy. A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me are
unwelcome in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization "Cojasor" arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli embassy's staff,
but when I came to the embassy they did not let me in. Later a visa for my brother for a medical treatment to France was
confiscated by the communist authorities.

After my brother's death I did not want to go to Israel any more. I was already in conflict with the political machine of the
state of Israel because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to demolish
the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration to Israel.

Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, will arrive now.  That was true. But my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We had
a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your men and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of our
protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.

We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different from your standards.

Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please, termI.te my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.

Sincerely,
Lev GUNIN

General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
To Mr. E. Assor,
Information Officer

From L. Gunin
Former USSR citizen
DECLARATION
Starting from 1986 I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives used to disappear.

My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such visas directly to Israeli consulate in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli consulate. A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me
are unwelcomed in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization - "Cojasor" - arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli consulate's
staff, but when I came to the consulate/embassy they did not let me in. Later a visa for my brother for a medical treatment to
France was confiscated by the communist authorities.

After my brother's death I did not want to go to Israel any more. I was already in conflict with the political machine of Israeli
emissary to ex-USSR because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to
demolish the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration to Israel.

Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, will arrive now.  That was true. But my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We had
a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your men and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of our
protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.

We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different from your standards.

In Tel-Aviv I did attempts to obtain the citizenship of Belarus. But they never gave us our true citizenship back. First attempts
to get rid of Israeli passport I did in Israel, in 1994. But persecutions against me deteriorated, and we had to leave Israel as
soon as possible.
 
Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please, termI.te my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.

From 1994 here, in Montreal, I tried to learn how to get rid of Israeli citizenship. I contacted the Ministry of Interior Affaires
in Israel, the cabinet of Prime Minister, your consulate... But only now, in 1998, you answered me. This is the copy of our
conversations:
 
"Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on 98-07-20. In your response you told me:

"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss this
matter with her".

July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).

Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.

Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.

My reasons for that request are: a)enforcement of a confirmation; b) fear.

"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation (like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture & Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.

Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am not able to control that fear by logic.

However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence, then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and compassion reasons.

Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.

Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin

Montreal, July, 29, 1998"

In response she called me and told that before obtaining Canadian citizenship I can not appeal for termI.tion of my Israeli
citizenship. Please, give me an official response in writing. Your verbal response has no legal input. I need I valid document,
which could explain under what law or regulation you can not termI.te my Israeli citizenship. I also want to remind you that
according to international laws my Israeli citizenship is not valid because I was taken to Israel by force and was held there as
a hostage.

Your understanding is highly appreciated.

Regards,
L.Gunin
August, 24, 1998.

General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
To Mr. E. Assor,
Information Officer

From A.-M.. Augenstat
Telephone for contacts: (514)923-2967

I am Lev GUNIN's immigration consultant.  My intervention was caused by your refusal to answer the next statement of my
client:
 
"From L. Gunin
Former USSR citizen
DECLARATION
Starting from 1986 I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives used to disappear.

My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such visas directly to Israeli consulate in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli consulate. A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me
are unwelcomed in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization - "Cojasor" - arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli consulate's
staff, but when I came to the consulate/embassy they did not let me in. Later a visa for my brother for a medical treatment to
France was confiscated by the communist authorities.

After my brother's death I did not want to go to Israel any more. I was already in conflict with the political machine of Israeli
emissary to ex-USSR because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to
demolish the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration to Israel.

Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, will arrive now.  That was true. But my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We had
a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your men and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of our
protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.

We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different from your standards.

In Tel-Aviv I did attempts to obtain the citizenship of Belarus. But they never gave us our true citizenship back. First attempts
to get rid of Israeli passport I did in Israel, in 1994. But persecutions against me deteriorated, and we had to leave Israel as
soon as possible.
 
Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please, termI.te my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.

From 1994 here, in Montreal, I tried to learn how to get rid of Israeli citizenship. I contacted the Ministry of Interior Affaires
in Israel, the cabinet of Prime Minister, your consulate... But only now, in 1998, you answered me. This is the copy of our
conversations:
 
"Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on 98-07-20. In your response you told me:

"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss this
matter with her".

July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).

Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.

Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.

My reasons for that request are: a)enforcement of a confirmation; b) fear.

"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation (like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture & Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.

Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am not able to control that fear by logic.

However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence, then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and compassion reasons.

Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.

Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin

Montreal, July, 29, 1998"

In response she called me and told that before obtaining Canadian citizenship I can not appeal for termI.tion of my Israeli
citizenship. Please, give me an official response in writing. Your verbal response has no legal input. I need I valid document,
which could explain under what law or regulation you can not termI.te my Israeli citizenship. I also want to remind you that
according to international laws my Israeli citizenship is not valid because I was taken to Israel by force and was held there as
a hostage.

Your understanding is highly appreciated.

Regards,
L.Gunin
August, 24, 1998."

He has submitted that declaration by fax.
I see no reasons why you can not give him a written answer. We would like not to use measures, which you could interpret
as non-friendly. I think that your ignorance is not in our common interests. My client's request is reasonable and fully
correspond to existing international practices.

Best regards,
A.-M.. Augestat





  FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION

Refers to March-August 1999 Events

Page additionnelle pour IMM (12-1998) F Page 2 de 3

J'ai 5 raisons pourquoi j`ai absolument besoin du noveau permit de travail:

1. Ma famille et moi ne pouvions subvenir sans travailler. On recevait l'aide sociale jusqu'a ce que nous avons commenc? de
travailler (ca veut dire qu`on recevait l'aide sociale avant). Les raisons que nous avons envoy?es ?taient evalu?es, et nous
avons re?u quelques permits de travail (le copie du dernier est inclus). Mon travail donc est l'alternative de l'aide sociale.

Pendant presque 5 ans nous vivions avec la menace de d?portation. A cause de cette torture psychologique moi et ma femme
- nous sommes toujours deprim?s. Notre sant? psychologique a ?t? tres affect?e au r?sultat de l'attitude de la commission du
Statut de R?fugi? dont nous consid?rons comme extremement cruel. Je suis sur que la d?pression a provoqu? par cette
attitude cruelle c`est la cause de ma haute pression, migraine et les probl?mes de m?moire.

Apres avoir re?u le d?cision de la Cour F?derale (qui a automatiquement refus? notre appel sans ?tudier les d?tails de notre
cas), j`ai commenc? a me blesser inconsciancement. Jamais, je ne me blessait comme ca. J'?t? battu, mais ne me  blessait
jamais par mes propres mains. ?`est le r?sultat de mon ?tat psychologique. J`ai re?u totalment 5 blessures, qui restrictaient
mes mouvements et derangaient mes possibilites d`executer le travail manuel.

A la fin de Mars, mon travail temporaire dans Le Cailliere a ?t? termin?. Quand c`est arriv? j`ai d?ja trouv? 2 autres travails
alternatifs, plus la possibilit? ?ventuelle (a mon avis) rester travailler dans Le Cailliere 10-15 heures par semaine. Si non ma
derniere blessure (plus grave que les autres; j'?te bless? pendent mon travail), je pouvait commencer de travailler
immediatement apres la fin de mon dernier travail (qui ?tait temporaire). Puisque je ne pouvait pas travailler a cause de ma
blessure, j`ai perdu la possibilit? de commencer de travailler immediatement et j'?tais forc? d`appeler pour le ch?mage.

Depuis le vingt Mars jusqu'a aujourd`hui mon doigt bless? n'est pas encore guerit (la copie du dernier CSST ?valuation est
incluse); je ne peux pas utiliser ma main pour le travail. C`est pourquoi j`ai besoin de chercher un travail non-manuel. Mais
quel travail professionnel je peux obtenir? Pendent 15 ans, j'?tais un professeur de musique - jusqu'a ma d?portation de mon
pays natal (il y a presque 8 ans) a cause de mon activit? des droit d'homme. Maintemant, mon permit de travail m`interdit
d`enseigner au Canada... J'ai des excellents savoirs d'ordI.teur mais je n'ai pas de dipl?me, puis le formation professionnelle
m`interdit aussi (par le permit du travail). Mes autres blessures pas encore gueries compl?tement. Tout ces raisons ensemble
me d?rangent de chercher n'importe quel travail et s'explique pourquoi je ne trouve pas le travail pendant mes 2 premiers
mois de ch?mage.

Mai je n`ai jamais arrete mes tentations de trouver un travail - contre toutes les difficult?s. Mais pour continuer de chercher
un travail j`ai besoin du permit de travail! Je suis sur qu`avec le permit de travail je trouverai un nouveau travail: si pas
aujourd`hui - alors demain.

2. Sans le nouveau permit de travail mes prestations de chomage seront annul?es. J`ai d?ja re?u la lettere envoy?e par
l'administration du D?vellopement des ressources humaines du Canada a ce sujet.

3. Sans le nouveau permit de travail je ne suis pas l?gitime pour obtenir de CSST aussi.

4. J`ai aussi re?u la lettre de L'Inspecteur g?n?ral des institution fI.ncieres, mentionn? mon entreprise "Aide Domicile Plus".
Sans le nouveau permit de travail cette entreprise peut etre ferm?e.

5. Sans le nouveau permit de travail je ne peux meme pas obtenir l'aide sociale - apres avoir commanc? de recevoir les
prestations de chomage!

Resum?: tout les eventuelles solutions de ma situation - difficile et compliqu?e - sont impossibles sans le nouveau permit de
travail.

Documents additionelle inclus:
1. CSST
2. Prestation de chomage
3. D?claration de soci?t?
 
 
 
  Index des documents
(Liste des documents inclus)

1. Formulaires (IMM 1249 (12-1998) F - avcec la page additionnelle
2. Liste de controle des documents
3. Copie de la facture de la banque de $150 pay?s (2 pages)
4. Certificat de situation statutaire (QU?BEC) - Lev GUNIN
5. Certificat de situation statutaire (QU?BEC) - Alla GUNIN
6. Les copies des 4 passports Israeliens
7. Programme f?d?ral de la sant? : Lev GUNIN (copie)
8. Citizenship and Immigration Canada confirmation in proceeding Lev GUNIN`s application for Humanitarian and
Compassionate grouns
9. Developpement des ressources humaines Canada - UI benefit statement
10. CSST - Rapport m?dical
11. Facture de L`inspecteur g?n?ral des institutions fI.nci?res - Direction des entreprises
12. Permit de travail: le dernier permit de travail pour Lev GUNIN (expir? le 04 Juin 1999)
 

Dear Consulate staff!
Dear Mr. E. Assor!

My consultant recently submitted you the next message:

" General Consulate of Israel in Montreal
  To Mr. E. Assor,
  Information Officer

  From A.-M.. Augenstat
  Telephone for contacts: 923-2967

  I am Lev GUNIN's immigration consultant.  My intervention was caused by your refusal to answer the  next statement of
my client:
 
"From L. Gunin
Former USSR citizen
DECLARATION
Starting from 1986, I did attempt to emigrate to Israel. I had to leave the former USSR because of my Jewish patriotic views,
persecutions from the communist authorities and my brother's serious sickness. But all invitations (visas) issued and submitted
to us by our friends and relatives used to disappear.

My friend Gennady SHULMAN helped me to organize a submission of such visas directly to Israeli consulate in Moscow,
but then all visas for us were suspended within the Israeli consulate. A senior embassy's officer told me that people like me
are unwelcome in Israel, and that he did not want me to find a medical treatment for my brother for the cost of the state of
Israel... In 1989, in Paris, a French Jewish organization - "Cojasor" - arranged a meeting for me with the Israeli consulate's
staff, but when I came to the consulate/embassy, they did not let me in. Later a visa for my brother for a medical treatment to
France was confiscated by the communist authorities.

After my brother's death, I did not want to go to Israel any more. I was already in conflict with the political machine of Israeli
emissary to ex-USSR because I was a patriot of the local Jewish community in Belarus, and the Israeli politicians wanted to
demolish the local Jewish culture in an attempt to accelerate immigration to Israel.

Soon I was ordered to leave USSR for Israel. People, who gave me that order, told me that all lost visas to Israel, which
disappeared before 1990, would arrive now.  That was true. But my family, and me, - we did not want to go to Israel. We
had a plan to move to Germany. But in Warsaw we were captured by your men and were taken to Israel by force, in spite of
our protests, only because we were the Israeli visas holders.

We did not want to live in Israel, but we thought about quitting that country not just because the Israeli citizenship was thrust
on us, but also because of severe persecutions. You know better what your system, your society and your state is able to do
to a person whose political views, behavior, and attitudes are different from your standards.

In Tel-Aviv, I did attempts to obtain the citizenship of Belarus. But they never gave us our true citizenship back. I did first
attempts to get rid of Israeli passport in Israel, in 1994. However, persecutions against me deteriorated, and we had to leave
Israel as soon as possible.
 
Your citizenship is a grudge I did not want to carry any more. Please, cancel my Israeli citizenship. My Israeli passport is
already expired, and I did no attempts to extend it. By this termI.tion, you could commit a real humanitarian action. I prefer
rather to die then to go back to Israel.

From 1994 here, in Montreal, I tried to learn how to get rid of Israeli citizenship. I contacted the Ministry of Interior Affaires
in Israel, the cabinet of Prime Minister, your consulate... Only now, in 1998, you answered me. This is the copy of our
conversations:
 
"Dear Sir!
My name is Lev GUNIN. I am the one who contacted you via e-mail on 98-07-20. In your response, you told me:

"Please call Sharon at the Consular department at (514) 393-9281 from
Monday to Friday, between 1 and 3 in the afternoon. You can discuss this
matter with her".

July, 28, I have contacted her, and she spoke to me politely, and said that I could come to the Consulate during certain hours
to proceed my request (concerning termI.tion of my citizenship).

Your and her politeness encouraged me to submit you my very last request.

Would you be able to evaluate kindly a possibility of an indirect contact between us, without my personal appearance? You
could submit me your application forms to 3455 Aylmer St., Apt. 291, Montreal, Quebec, H2X 2B5. I could complete them
at home and send them back to you together with my Israeli passport and money order. I am ready to compensate any of
your additional expenses.

My reasons for that request are a) enforcement of a confirmation; b) fear.

"Enforcement of a confirmation" means that I need an additional confirmation (like a Canadian post receipt) indicating that I
really handed over my passport to you. If even I'll get a receipt from you, I am afraid it is not enough. My experience tells me
that Israeli official documents of all kinds normally are composed on such paper and with such ink that the text disappears
within 3-4 months. Even the letter from the Minister of Culture & Education Hon. Amnon Rubinstein, which I got once,
became unreadable after 6 months.

Point "b)" means that I am afraid to come. My fear that you may take me by force to Israel from your consulate might sound
ridiculously. But it came in result of my bad experience. Now I am not able to control that fear by logic.

However, if there is no way to proceed my request without my presence, then I must appear. But I am asking you to make
an exclusion for me not because you are obliged but for humanity and compassion reasons.

Please, inform me about your decision by telephone (514) 499-1294, or by e-mail: [leog@total.net] as soon as possible.

Excuse me for taking your time.
And thank you for your kindness.
Regards,
Lev Gunin

Montreal, July, 29, 1998"

In response she called me and told that before obtaining Canadian citizenship I can not appeal for termI.tion of my Israeli
citizenship. Please, give me an official response in writing. Your verbal response has no legal input. I need I valid document,
which could explain under what law or regulation you can not termI.te my Israeli citizenship. I also want to remind you that
according to international laws my Israeli citizenship is not valid because I was taken to Israel by force and was held there as
a hostage.

Your understanding is highly appreciated.

Regards,
L.Gunin
August, 24, 1998."

He has submitted that declaration by fax.
I see no reasons why you can not give him a written answer. We would like not to use measures, which you could interpret
as non-friendly. I think that your ignorance is not in our common interests. My client's request is reasonable and fully
corresponds to existing international practices.

Best regards,
A. - M.. Augestat"

Your answer was (Sept., 15, 1998):
"As we told you before, you can not cancel your Israeli citizenship if you do not have another citizenship."

My consultants, lawyers, and me - we have discussed and evaluated a compromise solution. My family, and me, we could
start an independent immigration procedure from a third country if my expired Israeli passport could be extended. It could be
a compromised solution.

Because you often refuse to extend expired passports of Russian speaking people in our situation I would like to know if you
are ready to extend my expired passport. Please, do not tell me to come to your embassy (consulate) for discussing it.
Please, answer "yes" or "no".

Thankful for your response in advance,
Leo Gunin

Please, respond to me (514) 499-1294 - Leo

Or to one of my counselors (450) 923-2967 - Anna - Maria
 
 
 
 
 

                          UPDATE IN FAMILY GUNIN PERSECUTIONS

                                         C O N T E N T

 (Lev Gunin is one of the most persecuted people in the world. His family - loving and devoted wife (a true hero), two
 wonderful daughters (talented in art and music), and his old mother - became targets of outraged humiliations and
 abuses).

 1. Granting GUNINS the landed immigrants (permanent residency) status, Immigration's officials in spite of that
 continued persecutions. The proceeding of the landed immigrant status for Gunins is now frozen.
 2. The devastating and tragic impact of Immigration's persecutions on family's social, fI.ncial, health, and legal
 situation.
 3. The complete history of GUNINS tragedy: http://www.total.net/~leog/Rights/LevGUNIN/appealX.htm

 Short description of previous events:

 A poet, writer and musical composer, Leo (Lev) GUNIN became a victim of communist
 authorities' persecutions in his native Belarus. Even after he was considered as relatively famous
 and important for 3 cultures (Yiddish, Polish, and Russian), persecutions never stopped. Because
 of them he started to be involved in human rights' activity and became one of the most active
 dissidents in his native republic. Persecutions destroyed his family, and his, life, and devastated his
 professional career. In 1991 the communist authorities forced GUNINS to accept Israeli visas,
 abandoned their citizenship - and deported them to Warsaw. There GUNINS were kidnapped by
 Israelis (which ruined their plans to move from Warsaw to Germany) - and taken to Israel by
 force. Persecutions in Israel were as severe as in ex-USSR. Israeli authorities were refusing them a
 visa for exit during 3 and a half years. Only with indirect Amnesty International help GUNINS
 could get free - and left Israel in 1994 for Canada. Almost 6 years after their arrival they are still
 brutally persecuted by Immigration Canada on request of Israel and also because of all
 governments' solidarity...

 NEW OUTRAGED INJUSTICE
 1. During several months after they were granted the landed immigrants status GUNINS were
 fighting for extending their Israeli passports, which Federal Immigration requested (or, - in
 GUNINS' case - it could be an alternative documents of citizenship cancellation). Instead of the
 requested documents they received another document: a surrogate receipt that their expired
 passports were confiscated by the consulate and will never been extended. In giving them such a
 paper the Israeli consulate demonstrated an unusual human approach in spite of initiating
 persecutions in past. Formally such a document is normally accepted by Canadian Immigration as
 a routine ground for proceeding landed immigrants papers. However, it is not known yet if it will
 be accepted in GUNINS case... In spite of the human approach of Quebec's Immigration (Gunins
 were already given Quebec's Certificat de selection du Quebec) Federal Immigration didn't stop
 humiliations yet. On April 19 Leo GUNIN called Federal Immigration because the money
 GUNINS ordered for the landed immigrants' status were never removed. He was told that the
 procedure of the landed immigrants status for GUNINS was frozen and in doubt because of Leo
 GUNIN's mother situation. It was clear now that Leo's suggestions that Immigration's brutal
 humiliations over his old mother (see the page about a camouflaged attempt to kill his mother and
 other outraged developments on Internet:
 http://www.interlog.com/~syedma/dstand/leo_updte01.html ) were generated as a punishment for
 him! In reality his mother's immigration file (she's a spouse of a Canadian citizen - and she was
 also granted a landed immigrant status and was already given the Certificat de selection du
 Quebec) has nothing to do with Leo and his family's file: because they were granted the status in
 humanitarian appeal. The pretended dependence between Elisabeth Epstein's (her maiden name)
 and Leo Gunin's files could sound as an April's joke if a joke could be compatible with
 well-known black image of Canadian Immigration. In reality the immigration officer was given the
 number of only Leo's file, and if through his file he could accent his mother's situation it means
 that the two files were really combined together. If so, this is a violation of all procedural, juridical,
 immigration and human rights laws and regulation. In Gunins case Immigration already violated all
 the most basic Canadian and international rules. Their whole immigration history sounds as an
 Israeli and Canadian (Federal Immigration's) vendetta. But even on top of all these violations and
 persecutions the sabotage of their landed immigrants status even after granting it looks sinister and
 even more outraged. To know for what views and opinions Lev GUNIN is suffering, go to
 http://www.total.net/~leog/ - and there choose Human Rights.

 2. The devastating and tragic impact of Immigration's persecutions on
 family's social, fI.ncial, health, and legal situation.

 Content in brief:

 A. Artificial employment prevention. Social and professional tragedy
 B. FI.ncial disaster
 C. Health declining
 D. Children's suffering

 A. There are both objective and subjective reasons why both Leo Gunin and his wife are
 employed in minimum wages works with no perspective and no chances to recover from
 incredible poverty.

 Objective reasons are: 1) They have no status in Canada and because of that can not be employed
 as professionals 2) Immigration's Canada persecutions require attention, time and excessive
 attempts to fix the situation 3) By new and new persecutions Immigration Canada force Leo and
 Alla to spend the whole time on paperwork, completing innumerous forms, writing answers, and
 so on; that is just one of thousands of obstacles for better employment 4) Gunins are depressed by
 their immigration situation, they just can not think about anything else 5) They are not eligible to
 attend any professional or language course until they have no status in Canada 6) They are not
 eligible for any government and other employment assistance 7) Because of the tremendous
 fI.ncial devastation they have no tools for a sophisticated job search 8) Leo's and Alla's real
 employment history (curriculum vitae) in Israel and Canada reflects persecutions and rises
 potential employers' questions, which can not be answered - because no employer will hire a
 persecuted person 9) Their health is constantly declining; and so on... There are hundreds of other
 objective reasons.

 Subjective reasons are: 1) Some suggestions could tell that Immigration intervenes in Leo's
 attempts to find a better work, not recommending his potential employers to hire him 2) Without
 the status Leo can not get the license to teach music, can not run his small busyness, can not be
 employed in his profession 3) When he once received a request to compose music for a
 performance - and did it, - he was then rejected because "it is not possible to have the name of
 somebody who's not accepted by the state on public place" 4) He once was admitted to a Jewish
 choral, but later was refused "because if he could claim a refugee status from Israel, he's an enemy
 of Israel"! 5) When the Russian school "Fillipok" (now renamed and called "Gramota") was in a
 desperate need of a Russian speaking music teacher - even then Leo was refused on political
 ground 6) Russian newspapers in Montreal refuse to publish not just his articles but even his adds;
 for example, Info-Bulletin's editor/publisher told him that she lived many years in Israel, and Leo's
 articles published in ex-USSR and in Israel with critics of the Israeli human rights situation abused
 her patriotism: that's why she refused to place his adds! 7) All potential employers who could hire
 him as a musician used to say that they knew or heard about his "anarchism" - and did not want to
 employ him because of that. When he responded that he's not an anarchist or terrorist but a
 human rights activist they said that for them it is just the same 8) Leo are refused even a voluntary
 performances, even without being paid. Rozhinsky, the organizer of the "Russian Winter" musical
 festival, is permanently restricting Leo from the festival because of the political reasons 9) Leo
 completed a course of security agents but was refused a license because of his immigration
 situation 10) Leo was many times refused employment in computer technology, HTML
 programming, computer networks or computer rooms maintenance, programs installation or
 software testing because he's "a kind of hacker or terrorist". Nobody never told him where they
 obtained that referral froM.. Even such enterprises as Copie Express refused to employ him! 11)
 Leo did thousands attempts to find a full time above minimum wage work - and was never hired.
 He believes that all such persecutions are somehow conducted from Immigration and from Jewish
 environment 12) From all newspapers where Leo turned to as a journalist (such as Globe and Mail
 - for example) he never received any answer or opinion about submitted articles; they just ignored
 him! Even when he tried to reach the newspapers by telephone, he used to be disconnected! 13)
 Leo is one of probably 10 most important Russian vanguard poets in the world. However, an
 attempt to publish his book (for his own money!) of poetry was turned away by a Russian
 publishing house. In the same time the above mentioned Rozhinsky, who's not even a poet, rather
 an amateur on a primitively and law scale, published a book of his "poetry" without any problem!
 14) By suppressing and persecuting such a gifted, talented in many areas person as Leo Gunin
 Canada lost an opportunity to use his talents, skills and abilities! Because Leo is a famous,
 well-known personality, people will consider about Canada after attitude to hiM.. Inhuman, cruel,
 humiliative approach towards Leo and his family will speak by itself.

 B. FI.ncial disaster:
 Because almost 6 years Gunins were refused the status in Canada, they had to pay more in taxes,
 pay for various immigration programs, for employment and student authorization, for immigration
 lawyers, and so on. They also were not receiving children allowances and other benefits, which
 landed immigrants and citizens are receiving. Because Leo was in reality restricted from his
 profession (music), journalism and all areas, which require professional skills, he could work for
 minimum wage only. The lack of status in Canada is also one of the main factors in Gunins better
 employment attempts failure. The family's fI.ncial situation is devastating and tragic!

 C. Health declining:
 A number of descriptions of their health problems in result of persecutions can be found from the
 page http://www.total.net/~leog/Rights/LevGunin/appealX.htm Besides, both Leo and Alla have a
 kind of depression, caused by the status in Canada denial and other persecutions. D. Children
 suffering: The children (13 and 14 years old) suffer from the same reasons as the adults. They
 afraid of their unstable situation, afraid of bringing in the post because there could be a punishing
 message from Immigration. They are very suppressed or even depressed. They feel like they are
 not like other children but excluded from the normal society. They also complex and feel uneasy
 about their poverty. They feel deprived and discrimI.ted because other children can visit a cafe
 or McDonald, or a cinema, or their parents have cars, and so on. Because the children understand
 that their poverty is much related to persecutions they feel unprotected and threatened. Several
 times Immigration threatened the children that they will be expelled from school. M... is a
 talented ballerI.. She participated in movies, in dozens of ballet and theatre performances, she
 also writes poetry and prose, and she's a painter. She's also a gifted viola player. However, she has
 no rights to study, and her parents must pay for any official ballet studies several times more then
 if they were landed immigrants or citizens, what is impossible. No sponsor will give money for a
 child without the status. On television and in movies, where M... participated, she was always on
 the back - probably because of the same reason. I. is a gifted piano player, each year she's
 passing exams at university with the best remarks. She's also composes and arranges music, she's
 a good music theoretician, a choral singer, plays also flute, writes poetry and prose. I. has
 participated in dozens of cultural events and performances as a member of one of the best tremble
 chorales in the world, as a piano player, was on television and took one of the awards as a piano
 player on young piano players' festival. In the same time she has no piano (!) - because
 Immigration is sacking all fI.ncial resources away from the family! And because her parents are
 persecuted and deprived.

 That text was prepared by Lushin Valery Stepanovich
 
 

Citizenship and Immigration Canada
Citoyennete et Immigration Canada
CIC - DDN (RNH)/ CIC - RSM (RNH)
JETS-14th. FL/TJES-14e365 Lurier Ave. West (quest)
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 1L1
 

         From Mrs. Elisabeth EPSTEIN's son
[Elisabetha EPSTEIN (GUNIN)
Dossier: 2948-65678         ID: 3082-7317
Address:
5757 Lemieux St., Apt. # 115
H3W 3H1
Montreal, QUEBEC]

         L. GUNIN  tel.(514)499-1294
         E-mail: leog@total.net
 

 
14 January, 2000
 

Dear Sir or Lady!

Because in the latest time (since last Mrs. Robillard days) Immigration
stopped to reveal its agents' names (which is a recall of totalitarian
tribunals' practice), many decisions used to be made by anonymous
people. The very fact that I can not turn to you by name disgraces not
only me, but you, too.

I am Elisabeta EPSTEIN (GUNIN) son, and I must turn to your common
reason and consciousness because of your decision in her case.

I think that your recent ruling concerning my mother's medical exams is
completely unreasonable, ungrounded and outraged. The "strun creatinine"
test (testing the kidney function) was already done to my mother during
medical exams performed by Dr. Gianakis for Immigration. That test
didn't reveal any kidney malfunctioning. Dr. Gianakis conducted a very
careful exam - and did not find any serious heart disease, too. So,
there was no need to order my mother the expensive (for her)
echocardiographical and blood tests. Nobody would believe that your real
goal is not to destroy my mother, affect her health by terrorizing her -
and provoke her heart attack or a stroke. This is why the Immigration
officer, Madam Roy, first made a negative decision in my mother's case,
and only then replaced it by another one, which recognized her marriage
as a true marriage, not a marriage of convenience. She did it to provoke
my mother's stress, and to affect her health (her husband's health).

The initial decision made by Madame Roy was senseless. It was a negative
decision, which refused to grant her so-called exemption - and should
lead to deportation. It was based on doctor's W. Brzezinska testimony.
That decision was illegal because: 1) the marriage interview has nothing
what to do with the medical exams; 2) Mrs. Roy's decision was based on
my mother's physician, Mrs. Wanda Brzezinska, statement about my mom's
health, which also has no connection with an marriage interview; 3) Mrs.
Brzezinska made a false statement about my mom's health; if my mother
had such a serious heart and kidney diseases, why then Mrs. Brzezinska
never prescribed her any treatment or sent her to a specialist?
(hospital?), never treated her for kidney or heart illnesses
(malfunctions)? 4) violating basic regulations and requirements, Mrs.
Roy's 1-st "decision" did not mark any terms for an appeal, what made it
non-real, illegal: and proved that its only goal was to provoke my
mother's shock; 5) Mrs. Roy is not a medical doctor - and could not
evaluate any medical data to make a fI.l decision in my mother's health
anyway - even with Mrs. Brzezinska's rapport. Other details of that
marriage interview were the same outraged, too. By the way, Mrs.
Brzezinska was famous for her touchy private conversations with her
patients, and the content of conversations was always known to
Immigration authorities.

Now you only pretending to be interested in my mother's additional
exams. In reality your decision is to expose my mother to additional
stresses and turmoil. It is just another turn of our immigration ephos,
just another excuse for punishing us in a new way for our refugee claim
against the state of Israel.
 

Almost six years we were under constant threat of deportation, under the
fire of unfair Immigration's decisions and psychological pressure. Our
fear to be send back to Israel - country, where we never wanted to go
and were taken by force, facing there severe persecutions - was so
strong that me, my wife and my mother, all 3 adults, had suicidal
intentions. That everyday's fear has destroyed our health, devastated
our lives. Because of that and many other situational, administrative,
psychological, and etc. troubles and inconveniences, related to almost
six years in a limbo and intensive Immigration's pressure, we are
destroyed, our lives are already ruined!

After so many years of persecutions in ex-USSR, in Israel, and in
Canada, tragic deaths of her husband and younger son (my brother),
German occupation and evacuation survivor, my mother can not stand any
more threatening and compulsive governmental decisions, unfair and
partial treatment. Her prostration, her fear and desperation after your
absolutely unreasonable ruling, based on Mrs. Brzezinska's false report,
was so deep that we all were afraid about her mental and physical
integrity. It looks non-coincidental and suspicious that a letter with
your ungrounded ruling and an outraged letter from Israeli consulate
came on the same day. The goal of the two letters was to destroy my mom
- to punish us for our refugee claim against the state of Israel!

How could be her health in question if she was never treated in Canada
for kidney or heart diseases? never was prescribed any medications for
heart or kidney-related diseases? How could you rule additional tests if
an exam and tests she made for Immigration did not reveal any concern?
If her health will really decline - it is only because of Immigration's
humiliative treatment. You are responsible for all the consequences,
even if Immigration doesn't want to reveal your names.

If my mother really had heart or/and kidney insufficiency - and Mrs.
Brzezinska new it, then by not prescribing any treatment and medications
to her she committed a crimI.l offence! But if in conspiracy with Mrs.
Roy she just made a false statement to affect my mother's health - this
is a crimI.l offence, too! Because my mother is hypochondriac and
easy-suggestible (which both Mrs. Brzezinska and Mrs. Roy new and
attempted to play on it), their actions were equal to an attempted
murder. It happened after Mrs. Roy's telephone conversation with me
(when she tried to find out what would be my mother's reaction in case
of a negative decision) and my warning that my mother could overreact -
and have a heart attack or a stroke in case of it. "Your negative
decision could kill her, - I told Mrs. Roy. Your demands for additional
tests made my mother more hypochondriac and suspicious about her health,
more worried and distressed. It hardly affected her health!

May be it was the reason, why a simple flu (a grippe), my mother had
just after receiving your demands, completely destroyed her and lasted
so long. Her virus-initiated flu (influenza) lasted almost 2 months, and
her new physician told her that because of the grippe she can not go
through the tests you demanded earlier then after 2 month from now. This
is the explanation why we had to delay the tests. If now something
happens to my mother in result of all last ungrounded rulings, I'll
demand a full crimI.l investigation.

But your ruling also provoked excessive and abusive administrational and
organizational tasks for my old mother. Because there were no
instructions in your rulings, we did not ask Dr. Gianakis to issue a
prescription or give us a special form for tests you demanded. We also
wanted tests should be done by an independent laboratory. That's why he
only wrote us the name of one of the tests on a peace of paper - and
verbally mentioned another one (echo cardiogram). So, before my mother
had a grippe, we went to a number of laboratories trying to have a blood
test (strum creatinine) for my mother. She was refused. In other
hospitals the result was the same! Wasn't it a hard task for my old
mom?! You had to know that to fulfill your order through an independent
laboratory is administratively impossible! You had to enable my mother
administratively a possibility to go through the independent tests,
otherwise she just physically could not do theM..

By the way -

I must warn you that my mother did not authorize me to write a letter of
that kind, she only asked me to inform you about the reasons of the
delay. So, do not blame her for that letter. I hope that you'll fI.lly
find a minimum ground for responsibility, non-partiality and humanity.
 

            Your truly,
            L. Gunin

          14 January, 2000
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________

UPDATE TWO

UPDATE IN FAMILY GUNIN PERSECUTIONS 

UPDATE THREE

                                         - DOCUMENT NUMBER TWO -
To Immigration's Canada Complaint Board 
(faxes: (780) 632-8101  (514) 283-8237) 
From Lev GUNIN (514-499-1294)

A COPY OF DOCUMENT SUBMITTED TO IMMIGRATION 
ON MAY 15 2000

By this letter we ask Immigration's agent assigned to my file to make a special ruling to order medical examI.tions for all members of our family, not only for Alla GUNIN, my wife. As we know from our legal advisers, this procedure is required for all family members for the landed immigrant's status. If you insist that only my wife has to do the medical examI.tion, please, send us a written warrant. We have a well-grounded suspicion that somebody might use the delay in ordering the medical examI.tion for all members of our family for artificial sabotage of issuing us the landed immigrant's status. We will appreciate your cooperation.

           YOURS TRULY
           Lev GUNIN
           in name of family GUNIN

  The 15 of May 2000

P.S. In some letters from the Ministry of Immigration was mentioned indirectly that I was fI.lly considered as "medically ineligible". However, I never received an official and direct decision. Labeling me as "medically ineligible" was a crimI.l misconduct, and included falsification and misinterpretation of the medical data, deception and administrative mischief. For more details read Document 4.