The accumulation of real property
Summary of AFL Finding:
At page 61 the AFL alleges that, “… it would appear, based on the statements of its employees and volunteers, that the public benefit was displaced and the Organization [MAC] does not operate exclusively for charitable purposes.” In addition, with respect to a review of social media, the AFL notes on page 62 that, “…it is our position that the content posted publicly by individuals closely associated with the Organization could permeate throughout the Organization and displace the required public benefit.”
As well, at page 64 of the AFL with respect to foreign donations, the CRA alleges that, “While the CRA did not find any evidence to suggest that the Organization was being directly influenced by its foreign donors, the fact that such foreign donors are known to promote extremist ideology or associate with terrorist groups is a concern. Specifically, we note the Organization’s solicitation and acceptance of funding from Qatar Charity (QC).” The AFL then alleges that MAC received a considerable amount of funding from the QC prior to and during the Audit Period. At page 67 CRA also raises a concern with respect to MAC being influenced by Turkey.
At page 68 of the AFL, CRA states that, “It is the CRA’s preliminary audit findings that the Organization appears to have engaged in deceptive fundraising activities by failing to report the true source of its funding by using the IDB as a conduit to transfer donations from Saudi Arabia.”
As well, at page 69 of the AFL, CRA concludes that, “Given that the Organization was not accurate in disclosing the source of its funding from Saudi Arabia and appears to have made misrepresentations concerning its foreign fundraising practises by obfuscating the identities of its donors, it is our opinion that the Organization did not comply with its requirements by engaging in deceptive fundraising practises thus potentially displacing the public benefit”.
At page 69 and 70, the AFL concludes by alleging that,
“The activities in relation to views expressed by employees in their capacity as representatives of the Organization as well as the use of social media by some directors, employees, and volunteers of the organization do not appear to be undertaken in furtherance of any of the four categories of charity and do not provide a charitable benefit to the public. Our concerns in this regard are heightened due to the Organization’s association with foreign entities known to promote extremist ideology or associate with terrorist groups, and its apparent deceptive fundraising activities.”
The Charity has played an important part in countering and preventing radicalization and extremism.
In accordance with the Charity’s anti- money laundering and terrorist financing position, the Charity considers that extremist ideologies are inconsistent with its values as Canadian Muslims. Through the Charity’s efforts to promote civic awareness and duty it has tried to educate and train youths to bring positive change, thwarting the efforts of radicalization across the country. Through the Charity’s full-time schools across the country, the Charity preaches moderation and the contemporary practise of Islam.
The Charity has always been committed to working with stakeholders in law enforcement and other faith groups. With regards to law enforcement, the Charity has cooperated with the RCMP specifically on community programs, such as refugee settlement projects, RCMP recruitment seminars, community town halls with RCMP officers, and consultations with senior RCMP officers. At an advisory level, the Charity’s Executive Director participated in INSET meetings, and has met with the former and current Minister of Public Safety to discuss recommendations on National Security.
When it comes to countering radicalization, MAC’s core values of faith, justice, and being of benefit to all of humanity, has countered the rise of extremism and radicalization by advancing a balanced and moderate understanding of Islam that is relevant to Canadian society.
There has never been a single case since 1999 when the Charity was established in which an individual was radicalized or expressed radicalized thoughts in a MAC Mosque. Individuals with extreme thoughts do not find a welcoming climate in MAC Mosques because the Charity and its Imams preach a moderate and balanced understanding of Islam.
The Charity’s leadership has contributed to the public discourse on this topic, such as “Islamophobia is on the rise during COVID-19.”133 Online hate, primarily through social media, continues to fuel Islamophobia and animosity towards Canadian Muslim populations. On behalf of Canadian Muslims, the Charity has played an important role consulting with the government on online hate and government policy.
AFL Is Inconsistent with the Government of Canada and its Allies
The AFL relies upon the decision by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Bahrain to designate Qatar Charity as a terrorist organization. This decision has been widely reported as being highly political, particularly in light of the Arab Quartet’s dispute with Qatar, which culminated in the suspension of diplomatic relations.
The Qatari government rejected these allegations. The CRA relied upon biased state controlled news sources that participated in spreading misinformation in the quartet conflict with Qatar.134 Furthermore, if the UN itself has rejected the allegations made against QC, then how is it that the AFL raises concern about MAC’s acceptance of donations from the organization.135
Prior to and since the listing of Qatar Charity, the Government of Canada has continued to cooperate with Qatar Charity. A recent example includes Canada with Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, the World Bank, FCDO, WHO, UNFPA, and UNICEF with Qatar Charity engaged in discussions to improve maternal and child health services and how to strengthen cooperation between donors and the Somali Ministry of Health.136
The AFL accuses MAC of developing a relationship with the Turkish Government. The CRA explains at page 66 of the AFL its concern because “the Turkish Government is supportive of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood due to their ideological closeness and is a vocal opponent of the military regime in Egypt that ousted its close ally, former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi. After the ousting of President Morsi and the subsequent banning of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Turkish Government offered refuge to the senior leadership of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.”
Canada and Turkey have long standing diplomatic relations. In fact, Global Affairs Canada (GAC) states that “In recent years, as friends and allies, Canada and Turkey have expanded the depth and variety of their bilateral links as valued political, commercial, strategic, and security partners.” GAC also states that “Turkey and Canada’s Armed Forces have enjoyed a long standing cooperation. They are both committed to defending democratic values and global security within the framework of international law and global security. Both military forces are excellent partners in the multilateral sphere and work together well within NATO.”137 For the CRA to allege that the Government of Turkey is a government of concern is inconsistent with Canada’s position.
Furthermore, the CRA accuses Turkey for its relationship to President Morsi. Canada also maintained a close relationship with the Freedom and Justice Party (“FJP”) before and after President Morsi was elected as the first democratically elected President of Egypt. The Canadian Ambassador and the Deputy Ambassador visited the FJP headquarters and met with the party leadership as well as President Morsi.138 The Canadian Ambassador also met several times with the Presidential Office.
As for refugees from the Muslim Brotherhood and the Freedom and Justice Party, hundreds, if not thousands, of members of these organizations reside in Canada as protected persons, permanent residents and citizens. Many senior FJP members, Egyptian parliamentary members, and other recognised Egyptians who participated in the political landscape have come to Canada since 2013.
Views expressed by employees as Representatives of the Organization
To place matters into context, the Charity operates over 20 centres and locations where Friday prayers are delivered weekly at least once but some Mosques organize up to 4 prayers. This is an average of over 2000 prayer meetings and hundreds of sermons and lectures per year. This does not include schools, Ramadan programs, and during COVID-19 hundreds of webinars.
As noted above, the AFL only cites four situations out of the many thousands of sermons and lectures that occurred outside of the Audit Period:
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
The Charity was never asked during the audit for information about these situations, or for the Charity’s responses and actions taken, and improvements made by the Charity in policies and procedures concerning these incidents.
At page 61 the AFL also notes, “Further, since incidents involving the Organization’s speakers continue to arise it would appear that the Organization has not taken significant measures to ensure that its employees and volunteers are not displacing the public benefit.” Similar statements are made later in the AFL.
These allegations are false. The Charity is unaware of other incidents and the AFL without evidence attempts to suggest an increasing trend. While the Charity rejects that these incidents were statements expressing hate or extremism and will respond in detail, they are isolated incidents that were dealt with appropriately.
MAC Khateebs, Prayer Leaders and Speaker Policy
In 2017 the Charity issued a policy for khateebs, prayer leaders and speakers (attached as Schedule “30”) to ensure that khutbahs (sermons), prayers and supplications, and speeches delivered in MAC centres reflect the true message and universal values of Islam and the Muslim community such as justice, mercy, peace, respect, security, equity, dignity, and equality.
It specifically states that “sermons, speeches and supplications should not be a platform for discriminatory remarks or hate speech, nor for the sharing of political/partisanship views. Sermons, speeches and supplications should promote respect, tolerance, and harmony. All imams and speakers, including guests and teachers, should adhere to this protocol.”
All khateebs, prayer leaders and speakers, whether permanently or temporarily, are required to follow the policy at all MAC centres.
Furthermore, the Charity has implemented an internal procedure to respond to any cases of reported statements in its centre by a khateeb or speaker that includes:
A committee is established to oversee the Charity’s procedures
Temporary suspension of the individual during an internal investigation to provide recommendations
A memo is sent to all staff, members and volunteers reminding them of our code of conduct, if necessary (See example in Schedule “25”)
In more serious cases an external firm is retained to investigate and provide recommendations and possible interventions.
The determination of the Charity’s review of these statements is set out in Schedule “26”, however, the following is true for all incidents:
For each of these incidents the Charity has followed the above procedures to determine what actions to take. In all cases recommendations from investigations were fully adopted.
None of these cases represented a statement that is considered discriminatory, hate speech, is illegal or has resulted in a criminal investigation.
The Charity submits that the AFL’s assertion that there are no measures in place is inaccurate. The Charity provides over 2000 sermons to its congregations per year through a large group of Imams. MAC identified and acted on these 4 incidents and the Charity’s internal review has not identified any other incidents. In reality, the Charity asserts that its policies, as well as its Khateebs, Prayer Leaders, and Speaker Policy, have been effectively implemented to assure a high degree of protection of the public good while advancing religion.
These rigorous policies and procedures in place ensure that the Charity complies with the CRA’s public benefit test, and the Charity does not allow its resources to be used to promote hate and intolerance in any way.
The CRA has made allegations that four statements by Imams are contrary to public policy, the CRA has looked at four situations:
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
The fact that they are all outside of the audit period should be emphasised once again.
In each of these cases a thorough investigation took place by the Charity. See Schedule “26” for details.
Social media use by directors and employees
Even though the finding in the AFL is clearly titled “Social media use by directors and employees,” the AFL could not identify a single individual who was a director or employee of the Charity. Because of this, the Charity believes that the finding should be reconsidered.
Nevertheless, the Charity has over 500 members, thousands of volunteers, and almost 1000 full time and part time staff. It is impossible for the organization to monitor the personal social media accounts, YouTube accounts, and personal blog sites of each and every one of them, nor is it responsible to do so.
Out of these many thousands, the CRA highlights four individuals. Three of the four individuals have made comments about issues related to the Palestine Israel conflict. The fourth individual has made a comment about the Syrian revolution and civil war. The AFL states “Moreover, the CRA has concerns that these opinions, expressed to the world on social media, are likewise being expressed within the Organization.” The AFL has not demonstrated any evidence of this.
The individuals highlighted have all written or posted discourse on Palestinian issues. When it comes to the conflict between Palestine and Israel, the Charity has consistently called for unequivocal support for human rights and for Canada to adhere to its longstanding foreign policy principle of an unwavering respect for human dignity, human rights and the rule of law. The Charity has never engaged in political discourse or debates.
As such the Charity’s response to the specific online content highlighted by the CRA are:
[REDACTED] – He is commenting on the occupation and human rights violations of the State of Israel and the right of Palestinians to self-defence.
[REDACTED] – [REDACTED] is not a senior member in the Charity nor has he ever held a leadership position in the organization. The title “Director of Community Engagement – Major events Coordinator for MAC Mississauga” that CRA alleged does not exist in the organization. The account @HamasInfoEn does not exist. Following Twitter accounts, retweeting, or liking posts, does not mean a person holds the viewpoints of the source account. Maan is no longer a member of the Charity.
[REDACTED] – [REDACTED]is not a senior member in the Charity nor has he ever held a leadership position. The CRA states “Mr. [REDACTED] appears to operate a Facebook and Twitter account called @OLive2Zaqsa where he chronicles his time in Jerusalem. Mr. [REDACTED] appears to be a prolific commentator on the events occurring between Palestine and Israel.” (Appendix I) The Charity cannot confirm if this is an account owned by Mr. [REDACTED], nor is it the Charity’s responsibility to investigate this.
Sheikh [REDACTED] – The CRA is raising concern about content related to Sheikh [REDACTED] after he served as an Imam at Rahma Mosque. The Charity takes no issue with Sh. [REDACTED]’s comments about praying for the mujahedin in Syria. The supplication is in reference to Syrian military defectors who refused to attack peaceful protestors on the orders of Bashar Al Assad, who stood up against the oppression of Al Assad with thousands of civilians fighting for their rights.
With regards to Sh.[REDACTED], the link to the YouTube video provided by the CRA is incorrect. The alleged comment made by Sh. [REDACTED] was both after he left his position with MAC and after his visit to one of MAC’s mosques. In the Charity’s opinion, the CRA’s effort to retroactively exploit a comment in order to infer influence or worse, culpability on the part of the Charity, constitutes an overreach.
The AFL’s reference to Anwar Alawlaki is also Islamophobic since it seeks to establish a three-way connection between the publication of a video snippet by Sh. [REDACTED] and the Charity. The CRA also ignores a well known fact that Anwar Alawlaki was a mainstream American Muslim leader who lectured at a Washington institute, trained Muslim chaplains for the military, and was even invited to give the Friday sermon on Capitol Hill. It was further in his life after spending 18 months in a Yemeni Prison that Awlaki’s message changed. Nonetheless, the Charity is concerned about the AFL’s attempts to make unsubstantiated linkages.
The Charity is concerned about the CRA’s choice to assess such social media posts with a selective interpretation from a bias towards Canadian Muslims. These individuals have all commented on Palestinian’s right to self-defence, rights of occupied persons to defend themselves, crimes committed against Palestinians and Palestinian right to self-determination. In general, it is important to distinguish between commenting on Israel and zionism versus equating such comments as antisemitic or inciting hate or violence. The Charity expects that the CRA should not take a specific partisan position and furthermore if it has concerns on such matters it should provide guidelines to the charity sector.
The Charity does not agree with the suggestion that the views of these individuals is reflective or permeates the organization. Again, the Charity has official social media accounts where it communicates with the public. Its educational material, youth work and other programming are monitored. The Charity promotes an authentic understanding of Islam that is based on the Quran and Prophetic teachings.
Foreign influence and lack of transparency with foreign donors
The AFL on page 62 referenced our firm concerning legal information provided by the author of this letter: “Charities should exercise vigilance in monitoring incoming donations with respect to the identity of the donor, and the manner in which the donor obtained the funds, as well as with regard to any donor restrictions on donated funds that could put the charity in contravention of anti-terrorism legislation. Charities must regularly review their donor lists for “listed entities” or organizations that may be terrorist groups, affiliated with terrorist groups, or inadvertently facilitating terrorist activity. They must also ensure that a donor would not be able to use any of the charity’s programs to permit the flow-through of funds directly or indirectly to a terrorist activity.”
In fact, the Charity’s Anti-Terrorism Policy, that our firm prepared as instructed by the Charity, was intended to do exactly what the above quote recommends be done, which is to assist the Charity in ensuring due diligence was conducted in relation to foreign donations.
The Charity has consistently ensured proper governance and control over foreign donations. The following is true for all foreign donations accepted by the Charity:
Major foreign wired donations have been strictly for capital projects. Meaning such donations were never for operations of MAC institutions.
Major foreign donations have been associated with a grant application.
Major foreign wired donations were only accepted via a legitimate institution such as a bank or an embassy.
Any agreed upon major foreign donations are conditions on due diligence based on Canada, US and UN terrorist listings to ensure that the donor is not a foreign controlled or influenced organization associated with, or supportive of, terrorist entities or extremist ideologies.
Any credit card foreign donation made through an online platform such as the Charity’s website that is over $10,000 would be checked through the Charity’s due diligence process. There have been no incidents to date.
At page 64 of the AFL, the CRA relies upon a statement in the 2015 Senate report “Countering The Terrorist Threat In Canada: An Interim Report”, for the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, that claims “To promote their own fundamentalist brand of Islam – Wahhabism – here in Canada, the committee has heard that wealthy Saudis, Qataris and Kuwaitis are using charities as conduits to finance Canadian mosques and community centres.” This statement is based upon testimony provided by Haras Rafiq, Managing Director, Quilliam Foundation in the United Kingdom. The Quilliam Foundation is a “counter-extremism” think- tank that has worked with a number of individuals and organizations that promote anti-Muslim views. Quilliam has historically supported the U.K. government’s Prevent strategy which has been criticized by government officials, human rights experts, academics, teachers, and community organizers for securitizing and criminalizing Muslims.
Despite the AFL indicating, as noted above, that, “the CRA did not find any evidence to suggest that the Organization was being directly influenced by its foreign donors” (emphasis added), the AFL continued to highlight unsubstantiated arguments to shed doubt through examples of the Charity’s donations received from foreign entities or its outreach relationships with diplomats in Canada.
Nevertheless, the Charity responds to these unfounded allegations as follows.
Qatari Charity (QC)
The CRA raised concern about donations received from the QC. The decision by authoritarian regimes and other countries, which does not include Canada, to consider QC as an entity of concern, as noted in the AFL, occurred in 2017. This is five years after the Charity accepted donations from QC. As a result, any due diligence procedure would not have been triggered at the time.
QC, Qatar’s largest NGO, has worked extensively with the UNHCR, UNICEF, the World Food Programme, Oxfam, CARE, and USAID. The United Nations has spoken publicly denouncing decisions to list this organization and that the UN itself is not bound by Saudi Arabia’s politicized “terror list” after the kingdom named QC and other Qatari charities. The UN rejected the terrorist listings. In 2014, QC was ranked first by the UN for its relief efforts in the Syrian, Palestinian, and Somali crises. Since the start of the Syrian war more than six years ago, QC has helped about eight million Syrians.
The CRA states at page 66 of the AFL, “It should be noted that the wire transfer confirmations for funds received from QC include: waterwells & drilling expenses, educational expenses, building construction expenses and various project expenses.” The CRA then accuses QC for not “accurately disclosing to the bank the true purpose of the funds being transferred, being the ICCO land and building purchase.”
QC requires an application with a list of costs designated for the donation. As part of its application, the Charity listed its purchase cost including environmental testing and reports, architecture costs. The Charity also listed an estimate for renovation costs. As noted above, $2,454,288.96 was approved. The Charity cannot control why QC chose the particular descriptions in its wire paperwork. However, the application paperwork is what the CRA should rely upon in reviewing the actions of the Charity. The Charity provided the wired payments information.
While two refer to water well drilling, the remaining 16 payments accurately reference either building/project construction, various project costs or education [capital project], i.e. school, which is the nature of the construction. These documents are included in Schedule “27”.
MAC’s Relationship with Foreign Embassies
The Charity does not maintain day-to-day relationships with foreign embassies or diplomats. However, one of the features of MAC’s Summer Festival and Eid Festival in Ottawa is to invite diplomats from foreign embassies, particularly of Muslim countries, to join and participate in the religious ceremony and celebrations. This is no different than the Charity inviting Canadian politicians to attend these celebrations. Over the years these particular events have had diplomats from the Saudi, Egyptian and Turkish embassies among others.
The email highlighted in the AFL and appendices is an email with a conversation between the Charity’s representatives and Dr. Halim Yanikomeroglu with a request for the attendance of the Ambassador. The subject is clearly indicated at pages 66- 67 of the AFL as “Muslim Summer Festival & Eid Al-Fitr Celebration”. Dr. Halim had recommended that the Charity meet with the ambassador first as there was no pre-existing relationship.
The CRA highlights a number of visits of the Turkish Embassy and other Turkish community groups to MAC facilities. Based off these examples the AFL states at page 67 that, “For the Organization, which purports to be entirely Canadian based, that represents it “does not enter into agreements with Associates or Partners outside of Canada” and “is a wholly independent Canadian organization that only operates within Canada, it is unclear why it is developing a relationship with the Turkish Government.”
In this regard, the Charity notes as follows:
None of these interactions, or relationships, are non-compliance with the ITA and there is absolutely no evidence that these relationships resulted in any foreign influence on the organization. These relationships were not transactional.
In 2015 there was an invitation for the Ambassador to attend the MAC Summer Festival. This resulted in a visit by the Ambassador in November 2015, to MAC Ottawa’s Abraar School and February 2016 to Olive Grove School. This is very typical of embassies to build relationships with local Canadian communities.
It is important to note that the Charity serves over 150,000 Canadian Muslims of diverse backgrounds. Many Turkish Canadians attend MAC’s mosques and schools. In initial meetings with the Turkish Ambassador, the embassy was grateful to see MAC providing services to Turkish Canadians.
In 2016 the Consulate General of the Republic of Turkey visited the Charity’s head office. The Consul regularly met with community groups with his Turkey-Canada Friendship Group to encourage relationships among the local Canadian Turkish community and Canadian organizations. This is evidence that the purpose of the meeting was related to Canadian domestic relationship building and not relationships abroad.
Even if the invitation came to MAC email accounts, the invitations to the principal of Olive Grove School and Masjid Toronto’s Imam were in their personal capacity as community leaders.
The CRA highlights 26 emails between the principal of Olive Grove School and the Consul General. This in fact evidences that the principal maintained a personal relationship with the Consul General. The events the principal was invited to have no relevance to Olive Grove School, which further demonstrates that this was a personal relationship.
The AFL states as well at page 68 that it “is concerned about potential foreign influence with the Organization offering the Turkish Ambassador opportunities to speak at the Organization’s events, such as the July 29, 2016, fundraising dinner where the Ambassador was permitted to speak regarding the coup attempt in Turkey.” As clearly stated in the email, the Consul General reached out to the Charity to request to attend an Olive Grove School fundraising event as a dignitary. While the Charity typically invited dignitaries in larger major events, there is no reason that the Consul General could not attend or be provided an opportunity to speak to the community. The Charity does not view any concern with the Consul General speaking about the coup attempt in Turkey as this was a current event of interest to the community.
The AFL also states on page 68 that, “The Ambassador suggested that [REDACTED] communicate with Mr. Mahmut Demir, Religious and Social Affairs Counsellor of the Turkish Consulate and president of Diyanet-Canada to potentially help with the Organization’s museum.” The Charity at the time was investigating a potential Museum project of Islamic history. This project is directly related to its charitable purpose, “To educate Muslims and non-Muslims as to the teachings of Islam.”
Turkey plays an important role in the preservation of Islamic history. The Aga Khan Museum, a Canadian Charity, often hosts exhibits on Turkey’s Islamic history and sometimes cooperates with the Turkish Embassy and Consulate in its projects. This is no different in the Charity looking to work with the Turkish Embassy to support its Museum project. This project was never implemented. The Charity was directed to work with Mr. Mahmut Demir, Religious and Social Affairs Counsellor of the Turkish Consulate. His role as President of Diyanet- Canada was not relevant to the Charity.
The allegations made in the AFL about MAC’s interaction with the Turkish embassy does not come near the level of engagement other communities and their charities maintain with foreign diplomats. Particularly the Coptic Christian communities and Jewish communities have active presence of foreign diplomats at their programs. Charities in these communities actively use their resources to provide a platform for presentations by foreign diplomats on political issues affecting foreign countries. The CRA ignores that this is a common practise among other communities. On the other hand MAC does not actively participate with foreign diplomats. This is a double standard in the CRA’s approach and targeting of MAC. Many examples have been included in Schedule “28”.
Alleged Deceptive Fundraising practises
The CRA has misconstrued a legitimate relationship with the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) and removed the donations coming from IDB out of their context. The IDB is an international financial institution with the objective to foster economic development and social progress of its member countries and Muslim communities in non-member countries individually and collectively in accordance with the principles of Islamic Law.
IDB is rated AAA by the three major rating agencies (Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch), and has been designated as a Zero Risk Weighted Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Commission of the European Communities. Besides IDB’s strength of its capital base, low leverage and other factors make it a fitting partner for fixed- income investors. The IDB is not a commercial bank. Its membership consists of 57 countries. The basic condition for membership is that the prospective member country should be a member of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC). It is important to note that Jamal Khokhar, Canada’s Ambassador to Turkey, has recently been appointed to the role of Canada’s special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Since 2013, Canada has pursued its engagement with the OIC to facilitate cooperation on priorities such as good governance, human rights, diversity and inclusion, women’s economic empowerment, sustainability and the challenges faced by refugees.
In fact the Government of Canada’s Trade Commissioner lists the IDB as an important source of loans and grants, and encourages Canadian organizations to seek procurement opportunities through the bank. The Government of Canada states “The IDB provides financing for public and private projects that support the social and economic development of member countries, as well as that of Muslim communities in non-member countries.”139
One of the IDB’s activities is project financing in the public and private sectors. For approved projects, the IDB creates a “fund” which is either financed only by the institution or co-financed with other financiers. Both through IDB, the Central Banks and the Ministries of Finance of member countries, the Islamic financial industry maintains close coordination with international bodies such as the United Nations Counter Terrorism Committee (UNCTC), the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the BIS, the IMF and other international regulatory bodies to streamline the Best Business practises for the industry.
The initial forty recommendations and the eight special recommendations issued by the Financial Actions Task Force (FATF) are implemented or being implemented by the IDB and its member states.140 The IDB maintained an anti-corruption policy.141 The IDB is a member of the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG), a FATF style regional inter-governmental (international) body that is committed to implement international standards against money laundering (AML) and the financing of terrorism (CTF).
The IDB operates a “Communities Outreach Programme”. The objective of the Communities Outreach Programme is to contribute to the socio-economic development of the Muslim minority communities in non-member countries in a way that helps them to be productive citizens in their countries and pave the way for inclusive development. The scope of the program is to provide assistance to Muslim minority communities in non-member countries in the area of education and health, e.g. support to access education and educational quality improvement of schools, vocational training centers, and support to access healthcare and quality health services.
An organization may apply for the Community Outreach Programme. The application is only approved if the IDB itself approves a grant amount for the organization. If approved, a grant fund account is established in which the funds are designated. A fund may be contributed to by private individuals as well. Regardless if the source of the funds is the bank or private individuals, the IDB owns the fund and only disburses amounts submitted by the organization with official receipts of eligible expenditures. Furthermore, the identities of private individuals who contributed to the fund are not disclosed to the organization. The disbursements do not have any association with the payments made by individuals’ financiers.
Whether the fund is financed by the bank, or the bank and private financiers, the IDB is the ultimate source of the fund. The IDB has a “Guidelines for Disbursement Application” and an “Outline of Project Completion Report” that explain how payment disbursements are made is attached at Schedule “29”.
The IDB has only supported the Charity’s school capital projects. A grant application was made, and when approved, a case was opened. This was not a bank account rather a grant fund account. IDB approved Olive Grove School for $250,000 USD. The grant was approved and the case remains open until the capital project is closed. An agreement exists with the IDB. The rules of the fund require that the Charity must submit capital expenses for the project that are approved in order for the IDB to transfer funds.
An individual who resides in a member state of the IDB is eligible to contribute to the fund if they choose to contribute vis-a-vis the bank. During fundraising trips, the Charity’s representatives have offered the option of a direct wire to the Charity or the IDB fund to individuals who want to support MAC capital projects. The IDB is responsible for due diligence policies and procedures for preventing financing of terrorism or money laundering and the bank states it complies with FATF.
The Charity is not aware of the exact amounts contributed by individual donors to the IDB fund. Even if the donor has notified the charity that they plan to contribute through the IDB, the charity will never get confirmation that the gift was made, how much it was for, or when it was made because the IDB does not provide such information. As previously stated, the IDB does not flow through private contributions to the fund directly to the Charity. The IDB makes payments depending on the expenses that have been submitted. It is important to reaffirm that a wired payment transfer matches MAC’s submitted expenses, and not the amounts contributed by individual financiers. In other words, the Charity cannot account for private individual contributions to the IDB fund.
As noted above, CRA takes the position that, “It is the CRA’s preliminary audit findings that the Organization appears to have engaged in deceptive fundraising activities by failing to report the true source of its funding by using the IDB as a conduit to transfer donations from Saudi Arabia.” The Charity rejects this allegation and asserts that the Charity’s relationship with the IDB is a formal application process as part of a grant program that is fully compliant with the FATF. In terms of what the Charity has done, there is nothing suspicious or deficient, and certainly nothing to support the charge that the Charity has been involved in “deceptive fundraising activities.”
2Statistics Canada. Immigration and Ethnocultural Diversity in Canada. Retrieved from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs- enm/2011/as-sa/99-010-x/99-010-x2011001-eng.cfm#a10
3 Statistics Canada. Immigration and Ethnocultural Diversity in Canada. Retrieved from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs- enm/2011/as-sa/99-010-x/99-010-x2011001-eng.cfm#a10
4 Statistics Canada. Immigration and Diversity: Population Projections for Canada and its Regions, 2011 to 2036. Retrieved from: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/91-551-x/91-551-x2017001-eng.htm
5 http://www.anewlife.ca/muslim-demographics-in-canada
6Hamdani, Daood. “Canadian Muslims: A statistical review.” The Canadian Dawn Foundation (2015). Retrieved from: https://muslimlink.ca/pdf/Canadian-Muslims-A-Statistical-Review-Final.pdf
7 https://united-church.ca/search/locator
8 https://united-church.ca/leadership/church-administration/united-property-resource-corporation
At page 61 the AFL alleges that, “… it would appear, based on the statements of its employees and volunteers, that the public benefit was displaced and the Organization [MAC] does not operate exclusively for charitable purposes.” In addition, with respect to a review of social media, the AFL notes on page 62 that, “…it is our position that the content posted publicly by individuals closely associated with the Organization could permeate throughout the Organization and displace the required public benefit.”
Our reply of August 12, 2021 indicated the irony of referencing at page 60 of the AFL Canada’s adoption of the Christchurch Call to Action in May 2019 (spurred on by a violent attack against Muslims in New Zealand) in an audit stemming from spurious Islamophobic media articles in Canada, which Postmedia has since retracted, as previously noted. The Charity was very supportive of Prime Minister Trudeau’s pledge to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online when Canada adopted the Christchurch Call to Action in May 2019. In fact, the Charity hosted his Excellency Mr. Daniel Mellsop the High Commissioner of New Zealand.131 The event remembered and honored the victims, it recognized the leadership stance of Prime Minister Jacinda Arden, and to take a unified stance against Islamophobia.
Through the Christchurch Call, governments are making voluntary, collective commitments to prevent people from abusing the internet to promote and sensationalize acts of terrorism. These commitments include building more inclusive, resilient communities to counter violent radicalization. In support of this pledge, the Charity plays a fundamental role in building a vibrant and tolerant Muslim community and beyond through the Charity’s interfaith and grassroots network of partnerships.
As it relates to extremism spreading on the internet, the Muslim community is a primary victim. In the midst of mass lockdown procedures, economic collapse and overall uncertainty, hateful people, especially those associated with the far-right, have targeted and blamed Muslims for the spread of COVID-19. This has resulted in violence against Muslims. In Edmonton, six weeks into the lockdown, a man sat in his vehicle outside the oldest mosque in North America, Al-Rashid, running what he called a “Ramadan Bombathon” which he broadcast on social media. The man took it upon himself to monitor the mosque for COVID-19 compliance during Ramadan – an attempt to intimidate the community. André Audet of Quebec had charges brought against him in connection with hundreds of online posts he made calling for the deaths of all Muslims and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Mosques have also increasingly been vandalized as a means of spreading fear. MAC Masjid Toronto has seen six major incidents at both of its locations since the start of the pandemic, including spray-painted racial slurs and broken glass. Al Rashid Mosque in Edmonton was again targeted with neo-Nazi graffiti, and four men were accused of public urination on the Islamic Society of Markham.
The number of violent crimes against Muslims have also risen, including a Vancouver hijabi being punched repeatedly on transit, a Montreal family enduring a racist confrontation at a park, a London, Ont. woman having racial slurs used against her in a store and Toronto women facing an anti-Muslim tirade on the TTC, among others. On September 12, 2020 the caretaker of an Etobicoke Mosque was stabbed to death. The suspect has been linked to neo-Nazi social media accounts. Earlier this year, on June 6, 2021, a pick-up truck was used in London, Ontario to murder three generations of a Muslim Canadian family. As a result of this hate motivated attack a 9-year-old child was left orphaned.
The Charity’s leadership has contributed to the public discourse on this topic, such as “Islamophobia is on the rise during COVID-19.”132
Online hate, primarily through social media, continues to fuel Islamophobia and animosity towards Canadian Muslim populations. On behalf of Canadian Muslims, the Charity has played an important role consulting with the government on online hate and government policy.
With respect to the allegations concerning views expressed by employees as being representative of the Charity, which are alleged to be contrary to public policy, the CRA has looked at four situations:
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
All 4 of these incidents fell outside the scope of the Audit Period. The AFL presents 4 incidents in which the Charity followed its internal procedure and conducted a thorough internal and/or external investigation. The summary is as follows:
[REDACTED] – His supplication was digitally manipulated in an attempt to decontextualize Mr. [REDACTED]’s comments and to give them a sinister meaning by CIJ News. The Charity’s investigation concluded that Mr. [REDACTED] did not espouse hate in this incident and there was no evidence of systematic problems of intolerance to other faiths by him. Furthermore, Mr. [REDACTED]’s independent decision to participate in interfaith and cultural sensitivity training were proactive steps taken to ensure this incident is not repeated. The recommendations of unpaid suspension by Dufresne Hébert Comeau, an external firm hired to investigate this incident were implemented.
[REDACTED] – The Charity’s investigation concluded that there was no concern with these comments in his sermon.
[REDACTED] – The CRA has not presented any evidence of concern related to [REDACTED] in his relationship to the Charity. However, after a November 2017 incident the Charity investigated and [REDACTED] severed ties with the Charity. Therefore, no further action was taken.
[REDACTED] – The Charity’s investigation found that the media report was an attempt to discredit Imam [REDACTED]and disseminate misinformation, propaganda, and ignorant stereotypes of Islamic teachings. Imam [REDACTED]’s sermon correctly referenced the authentic sources of the Quran and the Prophetic teachings in explaining the rights of a husband in relation to his wife as well as the rights of a wife to his husband. No further action was taken.
As such, two of these cases were biased Islamophobic representations by media and one case is not of concern. Overall, the AFL does not substantiate its claim that the viewpoints represent hate or intolerance and fail to deliver a public benefit.
With respect to the other comments concerning social media use by non-senior members of the Charity or others who have no relationship to it, the Charity has official social media accounts where it communicates with the public. Its educational material, youth work and other programming are monitored. The Charity promotes an authentic understanding of Islam that is based on the Quran and Prophetic teachings.
With regard to the allegations that recording the Islamic Development Bank (“IDB”) as the donor on the Charity’s T3010 constituted deceptive fundraising, the IDB is an international financial institution with the objective to foster economic development and social progress of its member countries and Muslim communities in non-member countries individually and collectively in accordance with the principles of Islamic law. One of the IDB’s activities is project financing in the public and private sectors. For approved projects, the IDB creates a “fund” which is either financed only by the institution or co-financed with other financiers. An organization may submit an application for the Community Outreach Programme. The application is only approved if the IDB itself approved a grant amount for the organization. If approved, a “fund” account is established in which the funds are designated. A fund may be contributed to by private individuals as well. Regardless of whether the source of the funds is the bank or private individuals, the IDB owns the fund and only disburses amounts submitted by the organization with official receipts of eligible expenditures.
With respect to the Charity, a grant application was made, and when approved, a case was opened. This is not a bank account; rather it is a grant fund account. If an individual resides in a member state of the IDB, they are eligible to contribute to the fund if they choose to contribute vis-a-vis a local financial institution. During fundraising trips, the Charity’s representatives have offered the option of a direct wire to the Charity or the IDB fund to individuals who want to support the Charity’s capital projects. The IDB is responsible for due diligence policies and procedures for preventing financing of terrorism or money laundering and is compliant with FATF.
The T3010 states:
“Part 2 – Information about donors not resident in Canada For gifts of $10,000 or more, within the fiscal period, that the charity received from a donor who is not resident in Canada, report the identity of the donor, the amount of the gift, and whether the donor is an individual, organization, or government body, unless the donor is any of the following:
a Canadian citizen
employed in Canada
carrying on business in Canada
a person that has disposed of taxable Canadian property”
The AFL identifies 2 examples where the Charity is aware of the identity of a private individual financier to the IDB fund for Olive Grove School. In one of these examples, “The CRA was also able to identify an additional instance in 2011 of the Organization [MAC] receiving 90,000 SAR donation that was credited to a loan held by IDB.” This donation was given by a Canadian citizen. In this regard, the Charity is not required to report this donation. The IDB had provided a $500,000 interest free loan to OGS to which this contribution was applied.
The AFL also states that, “Based on the CRA’s analysis of the Organization’s books and records, it appears that the Organization has received at least $916,421 from IDB, with a total of $54,804 being in the audit period. The Organization failed to report the true source of these funds and appears to have engaged in deceptive fundraising practises.” The $54,805 wired payment is a partial payment from the fund that matches submitted expenses by the Charity for the Dar-El-Iman expansion.
The Charity has played an important part in countering and preventing radicalization and extremism.
In accordance with the Charity’s anti- money laundering and terrorist financing position, the Charity considers that extremist ideologies are inconsistent with its values as Canadian Muslims. Through the Charity’s efforts to promote civic awareness and duty it has tried to educate and train youths to bring positive change, thwarting the efforts of radicalization across the country. Through the Charity’s full-time schools across the country, the Charity preaches moderation and the contemporary practise of Islam.
The Charity has always been committed to working with stakeholders in law enforcement and other faith groups. With regards to law enforcement, the Charity has cooperated with the RCMP specifically on community programs, such as refugee settlement projects, RCMP recruitment seminars, community town halls with RCMP officers, and consultations with senior RCMP officers. At an advisory level, the Charity’s Executive Director participated in INSET meetings, and has met with the former and current Minister of Public Safety to discuss recommendations on National Security.
When it comes to countering radicalization, MAC’s core values of faith, justice, and being of benefit to all of humanity, has countered the rise of extremism and radicalization by advancing a balanced and moderate understanding of Islam that is relevant to Canadian society.
There has never been a single case since 1999 when the Charity was established in which an individual was radicalized or expressed radicalized thoughts in a MAC Mosque. Individuals with extreme thoughts do not find a welcoming climate in MAC Mosques because the Charity and its Imams preach a moderate and balanced understanding of Islam.
The Charity’s leadership has contributed to the public discourse on this topic, such as “Islamophobia is on the rise during COVID-19.”133 Online hate, primarily through social media, continues to fuel Islamophobia and animosity towards Canadian Muslim populations. On behalf of Canadian Muslims, the Charity has played an important role consulting with the government on online hate and government policy.
AFL Is Inconsistent with the Government of Canada and its Allies
The AFL relies upon the decision by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Bahrain to designate Qatar Charity as a terrorist organization. This decision has been widely reported as being highly political, particularly in light of the Arab Quartet’s dispute with Qatar, which culminated in the suspension of diplomatic relations.
The Qatari government rejected these allegations. The CRA relied upon biased state controlled news sources that participated in spreading misinformation in the quartet conflict with Qatar.134 Furthermore, if the UN itself has rejected the allegations made against QC, then how is it that the AFL raises concern about MAC’s acceptance of donations from the organization.135
Prior to and since the listing of Qatar Charity, the Government of Canada has continued to cooperate with Qatar Charity. A recent example includes Canada with Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, the World Bank, FCDO, WHO, UNFPA, and UNICEF with Qatar Charity engaged in discussions to improve maternal and child health services and how to strengthen cooperation between donors and the Somali Ministry of Health.136
The AFL accuses MAC of developing a relationship with the Turkish Government. The CRA explains at page 66 of the AFL its concern because “the Turkish Government is supportive of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood due to their ideological closeness and is a vocal opponent of the military regime in Egypt that ousted its close ally, former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi. After the ousting of President Morsi and the subsequent banning of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Turkish Government offered refuge to the senior leadership of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.”
Canada and Turkey have long standing diplomatic relations. In fact, Global Affairs Canada (GAC) states that “In recent years, as friends and allies, Canada and Turkey have expanded the depth and variety of their bilateral links as valued political, commercial, strategic, and security partners.” GAC also states that “Turkey and Canada’s Armed Forces have enjoyed a long standing cooperation. They are both committed to defending democratic values and global security within the framework of international law and global security. Both military forces are excellent partners in the multilateral sphere and work together well within NATO.”137 For the CRA to allege that the Government of Turkey is a government of concern is inconsistent with Canada’s position.
Furthermore, the CRA accuses Turkey for its relationship to President Morsi. Canada also maintained a close relationship with the Freedom and Justice Party (“FJP”) before and after President Morsi was elected as the first democratically elected President of Egypt. The Canadian Ambassador and the Deputy Ambassador visited the FJP headquarters and met with the party leadership as well as President Morsi.138 The Canadian Ambassador also met several times with the Presidential Office.
As for refugees from the Muslim Brotherhood and the Freedom and Justice Party, hundreds, if not thousands, of members of these organizations reside in Canada as protected persons, permanent residents and citizens. Many senior FJP members, Egyptian parliamentary members, and other recognised Egyptians who participated in the political landscape have come to Canada since 2013.
Views expressed by employees as Representatives of the Organization
To place matters into context, the Charity operates over 20 centres and locations where Friday prayers are delivered weekly at least once but some Mosques organize up to 4 prayers. This is an average of over 2000 prayer meetings and hundreds of sermons and lectures per year. This does not include schools, Ramadan programs, and during COVID-19 hundreds of webinars.
As noted above, the AFL only cites four situations out of the many thousands of sermons and lectures that occurred outside of the Audit Period:
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
The Charity was never asked during the audit for information about these situations, or for the Charity’s responses and actions taken, and improvements made by the Charity in policies and procedures concerning these incidents.
At page 61 the AFL also notes, “Further, since incidents involving the Organization’s speakers continue to arise it would appear that the Organization has not taken significant measures to ensure that its employees and volunteers are not displacing the public benefit.” Similar statements are made later in the AFL.
These allegations are false. The Charity is unaware of other incidents and the AFL without evidence attempts to suggest an increasing trend. While the Charity rejects that these incidents were statements expressing hate or extremism and will respond in detail, they are isolated incidents that were dealt with appropriately.
MAC Khateebs, Prayer Leaders and Speaker Policy
In 2017 the Charity issued a policy for khateebs, prayer leaders and speakers (attached as Schedule “30”) to ensure that khutbahs (sermons), prayers and supplications, and speeches delivered in MAC centres reflect the true message and universal values of Islam and the Muslim community such as justice, mercy, peace, respect, security, equity, dignity, and equality.
It specifically states that “sermons, speeches and supplications should not be a platform for discriminatory remarks or hate speech, nor for the sharing of political/partisanship views. Sermons, speeches and supplications should promote respect, tolerance, and harmony. All imams and speakers, including guests and teachers, should adhere to this protocol.”
All khateebs, prayer leaders and speakers, whether permanently or temporarily, are required to follow the policy at all MAC centres.
Furthermore, the Charity has implemented an internal procedure to respond to any cases of reported statements in its centre by a khateeb or speaker that includes:
A committee is established to oversee the Charity’s procedures
Temporary suspension of the individual during an internal investigation to provide recommendations
A memo is sent to all staff, members and volunteers reminding them of our code of conduct, if necessary (See example in Schedule “25”)
In more serious cases an external firm is retained to investigate and provide recommendations and possible interventions.
The determination of the Charity’s review of these statements is set out in Schedule “26”, however, the following is true for all incidents:
For each of these incidents the Charity has followed the above procedures to determine what actions to take. In all cases recommendations from investigations were fully adopted.
None of these cases represented a statement that is considered discriminatory, hate speech, is illegal or has resulted in a criminal investigation.
The Charity submits that the AFL’s assertion that there are no measures in place is inaccurate. The Charity provides over 2000 sermons to its congregations per year through a large group of Imams. MAC identified and acted on these 4 incidents and the Charity’s internal review has not identified any other incidents. In reality, the Charity asserts that its policies, as well as its Khateebs, Prayer Leaders, and Speaker Policy, have been effectively implemented to assure a high degree of protection of the public good while advancing religion.
These rigorous policies and procedures in place ensure that the Charity complies with the CRA’s public benefit test, and the Charity does not allow its resources to be used to promote hate and intolerance in any way.
The CRA has made allegations that four statements by Imams are contrary to public policy, the CRA has looked at four situations:
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
[REDACTED] (2016)
[REDACTED] (2017)
The fact that they are all outside of the audit period should be emphasised once again.
In each of these cases a thorough investigation took place by the Charity. See Schedule “26” for details.
Social media use by directors and employees
Even though the finding in the AFL is clearly titled “Social media use by directors and employees,” the AFL could not identify a single individual who was a director or employee of the Charity. Because of this, the Charity believes that the finding should be reconsidered.
Nevertheless, the Charity has over 500 members, thousands of volunteers, and almost 1000 full time and part time staff. It is impossible for the organization to monitor the personal social media accounts, YouTube accounts, and personal blog sites of each and every one of them, nor is it responsible to do so.
Out of these many thousands, the CRA highlights four individuals. Three of the four individuals have made comments about issues related to the Palestine Israel conflict. The fourth individual has made a comment about the Syrian revolution and civil war. The AFL states “Moreover, the CRA has concerns that these opinions, expressed to the world on social media, are likewise being expressed within the Organization.” The AFL has not demonstrated any evidence of this.
The individuals highlighted have all written or posted discourse on Palestinian issues. When it comes to the conflict between Palestine and Israel, the Charity has consistently called for unequivocal support for human rights and for Canada to adhere to its longstanding foreign policy principle of an unwavering respect for human dignity, human rights and the rule of law. The Charity has never engaged in political discourse or debates.
As such the Charity’s response to the specific online content highlighted by the CRA are:
[REDACTED] – He is commenting on the occupation and human rights violations of the State of Israel and the right of Palestinians to self-defence.
[REDACTED] – [REDACTED] is not a senior member in the Charity nor has he ever held a leadership position in the organization. The title “Director of Community Engagement – Major events Coordinator for MAC Mississauga” that CRA alleged does not exist in the organization. The account @HamasInfoEn does not exist. Following Twitter accounts, retweeting, or liking posts, does not mean a person holds the viewpoints of the source account. Maan is no longer a member of the Charity.
[REDACTED] – [REDACTED]is not a senior member in the Charity nor has he ever held a leadership position. The CRA states “Mr. [REDACTED] appears to operate a Facebook and Twitter account called @OLive2Zaqsa where he chronicles his time in Jerusalem. Mr. [REDACTED] appears to be a prolific commentator on the events occurring between Palestine and Israel.” (Appendix I) The Charity cannot confirm if this is an account owned by Mr. [REDACTED], nor is it the Charity’s responsibility to investigate this.
Sheikh [REDACTED] – The CRA is raising concern about content related to Sheikh [REDACTED] after he served as an Imam at Rahma Mosque. The Charity takes no issue with Sh. [REDACTED]’s comments about praying for the mujahedin in Syria. The supplication is in reference to Syrian military defectors who refused to attack peaceful protestors on the orders of Bashar Al Assad, who stood up against the oppression of Al Assad with thousands of civilians fighting for their rights.
With regards to Sh.[REDACTED], the link to the YouTube video provided by the CRA is incorrect. The alleged comment made by Sh. [REDACTED] was both after he left his position with MAC and after his visit to one of MAC’s mosques. In the Charity’s opinion, the CRA’s effort to retroactively exploit a comment in order to infer influence or worse, culpability on the part of the Charity, constitutes an overreach.
The AFL’s reference to Anwar Alawlaki is also Islamophobic since it seeks to establish a three-way connection between the publication of a video snippet by Sh. [REDACTED] and the Charity. The CRA also ignores a well known fact that Anwar Alawlaki was a mainstream American Muslim leader who lectured at a Washington institute, trained Muslim chaplains for the military, and was even invited to give the Friday sermon on Capitol Hill. It was further in his life after spending 18 months in a Yemeni Prison that Awlaki’s message changed. Nonetheless, the Charity is concerned about the AFL’s attempts to make unsubstantiated linkages.
The Charity is concerned about the CRA’s choice to assess such social media posts with a selective interpretation from a bias towards Canadian Muslims. These individuals have all commented on Palestinian’s right to self-defence, rights of occupied persons to defend themselves, crimes committed against Palestinians and Palestinian right to self-determination. In general, it is important to distinguish between commenting on Israel and zionism versus equating such comments as antisemitic or inciting hate or violence. The Charity expects that the CRA should not take a specific partisan position and furthermore if it has concerns on such matters it should provide guidelines to the charity sector.
The Charity does not agree with the suggestion that the views of these individuals is reflective or permeates the organization. Again, the Charity has official social media accounts where it communicates with the public. Its educational material, youth work and other programming are monitored. The Charity promotes an authentic understanding of Islam that is based on the Quran and Prophetic teachings.
Foreign influence and lack of transparency with foreign donors
The AFL on page 62 referenced our firm concerning legal information provided by the author of this letter: “Charities should exercise vigilance in monitoring incoming donations with respect to the identity of the donor, and the manner in which the donor obtained the funds, as well as with regard to any donor restrictions on donated funds that could put the charity in contravention of anti-terrorism legislation. Charities must regularly review their donor lists for “listed entities” or organizations that may be terrorist groups, affiliated with terrorist groups, or inadvertently facilitating terrorist activity. They must also ensure that a donor would not be able to use any of the charity’s programs to permit the flow-through of funds directly or indirectly to a terrorist activity.”
In fact, the Charity’s Anti-Terrorism Policy, that our firm prepared as instructed by the Charity, was intended to do exactly what the above quote recommends be done, which is to assist the Charity in ensuring due diligence was conducted in relation to foreign donations.
The Charity has consistently ensured proper governance and control over foreign donations. The following is true for all foreign donations accepted by the Charity:
Major foreign wired donations have been strictly for capital projects. Meaning such donations were never for operations of MAC institutions.
Major foreign donations have been associated with a grant application.
Major foreign wired donations were only accepted via a legitimate institution such as a bank or an embassy.
Any agreed upon major foreign donations are conditions on due diligence based on Canada, US and UN terrorist listings to ensure that the donor is not a foreign controlled or influenced organization associated with, or supportive of, terrorist entities or extremist ideologies.
Any credit card foreign donation made through an online platform such as the Charity’s website that is over $10,000 would be checked through the Charity’s due diligence process. There have been no incidents to date.
At page 64 of the AFL, the CRA relies upon a statement in the 2015 Senate report “Countering The Terrorist Threat In Canada: An Interim Report”, for the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, that claims “To promote their own fundamentalist brand of Islam – Wahhabism – here in Canada, the committee has heard that wealthy Saudis, Qataris and Kuwaitis are using charities as conduits to finance Canadian mosques and community centres.” This statement is based upon testimony provided by Haras Rafiq, Managing Director, Quilliam Foundation in the United Kingdom. The Quilliam Foundation is a “counter-extremism” think- tank that has worked with a number of individuals and organizations that promote anti-Muslim views. Quilliam has historically supported the U.K. government’s Prevent strategy which has been criticized by government officials, human rights experts, academics, teachers, and community organizers for securitizing and criminalizing Muslims.
Despite the AFL indicating, as noted above, that, “the CRA did not find any evidence to suggest that the Organization was being directly influenced by its foreign donors” (emphasis added), the AFL continued to highlight unsubstantiated arguments to shed doubt through examples of the Charity’s donations received from foreign entities or its outreach relationships with diplomats in Canada.
Nevertheless, the Charity responds to these unfounded allegations as follows.
Qatari Charity (QC)
The CRA raised concern about donations received from the QC. The decision by authoritarian regimes and other countries, which does not include Canada, to consider QC as an entity of concern, as noted in the AFL, occurred in 2017. This is five years after the Charity accepted donations from QC. As a result, any due diligence procedure would not have been triggered at the time.
QC, Qatar’s largest NGO, has worked extensively with the UNHCR, UNICEF, the World Food Programme, Oxfam, CARE, and USAID. The United Nations has spoken publicly denouncing decisions to list this organization and that the UN itself is not bound by Saudi Arabia’s politicized “terror list” after the kingdom named QC and other Qatari charities. The UN rejected the terrorist listings. In 2014, QC was ranked first by the UN for its relief efforts in the Syrian, Palestinian, and Somali crises. Since the start of the Syrian war more than six years ago, QC has helped about eight million Syrians.
The CRA states at page 66 of the AFL, “It should be noted that the wire transfer confirmations for funds received from QC include: waterwells & drilling expenses, educational expenses, building construction expenses and various project expenses.” The CRA then accuses QC for not “accurately disclosing to the bank the true purpose of the funds being transferred, being the ICCO land and building purchase.”
QC requires an application with a list of costs designated for the donation. As part of its application, the Charity listed its purchase cost including environmental testing and reports, architecture costs. The Charity also listed an estimate for renovation costs. As noted above, $2,454,288.96 was approved. The Charity cannot control why QC chose the particular descriptions in its wire paperwork. However, the application paperwork is what the CRA should rely upon in reviewing the actions of the Charity. The Charity provided the wired payments information.
While two refer to water well drilling, the remaining 16 payments accurately reference either building/project construction, various project costs or education [capital project], i.e. school, which is the nature of the construction. These documents are included in Schedule “27”.
MAC’s Relationship with Foreign Embassies
The Charity does not maintain day-to-day relationships with foreign embassies or diplomats. However, one of the features of MAC’s Summer Festival and Eid Festival in Ottawa is to invite diplomats from foreign embassies, particularly of Muslim countries, to join and participate in the religious ceremony and celebrations. This is no different than the Charity inviting Canadian politicians to attend these celebrations. Over the years these particular events have had diplomats from the Saudi, Egyptian and Turkish embassies among others.
The email highlighted in the AFL and appendices is an email with a conversation between the Charity’s representatives and Dr. Halim Yanikomeroglu with a request for the attendance of the Ambassador. The subject is clearly indicated at pages 66- 67 of the AFL as “Muslim Summer Festival & Eid Al-Fitr Celebration”. Dr. Halim had recommended that the Charity meet with the ambassador first as there was no pre-existing relationship.
The CRA highlights a number of visits of the Turkish Embassy and other Turkish community groups to MAC facilities. Based off these examples the AFL states at page 67 that, “For the Organization, which purports to be entirely Canadian based, that represents it “does not enter into agreements with Associates or Partners outside of Canada” and “is a wholly independent Canadian organization that only operates within Canada, it is unclear why it is developing a relationship with the Turkish Government.”
In this regard, the Charity notes as follows:
None of these interactions, or relationships, are non-compliance with the ITA and there is absolutely no evidence that these relationships resulted in any foreign influence on the organization. These relationships were not transactional.
In 2015 there was an invitation for the Ambassador to attend the MAC Summer Festival. This resulted in a visit by the Ambassador in November 2015, to MAC Ottawa’s Abraar School and February 2016 to Olive Grove School. This is very typical of embassies to build relationships with local Canadian communities.
It is important to note that the Charity serves over 150,000 Canadian Muslims of diverse backgrounds. Many Turkish Canadians attend MAC’s mosques and schools. In initial meetings with the Turkish Ambassador, the embassy was grateful to see MAC providing services to Turkish Canadians.
In 2016 the Consulate General of the Republic of Turkey visited the Charity’s head office. The Consul regularly met with community groups with his Turkey-Canada Friendship Group to encourage relationships among the local Canadian Turkish community and Canadian organizations. This is evidence that the purpose of the meeting was related to Canadian domestic relationship building and not relationships abroad.
Even if the invitation came to MAC email accounts, the invitations to the principal of Olive Grove School and Masjid Toronto’s Imam were in their personal capacity as community leaders.
The CRA highlights 26 emails between the principal of Olive Grove School and the Consul General. This in fact evidences that the principal maintained a personal relationship with the Consul General. The events the principal was invited to have no relevance to Olive Grove School, which further demonstrates that this was a personal relationship.
The AFL states as well at page 68 that it “is concerned about potential foreign influence with the Organization offering the Turkish Ambassador opportunities to speak at the Organization’s events, such as the July 29, 2016, fundraising dinner where the Ambassador was permitted to speak regarding the coup attempt in Turkey.” As clearly stated in the email, the Consul General reached out to the Charity to request to attend an Olive Grove School fundraising event as a dignitary. While the Charity typically invited dignitaries in larger major events, there is no reason that the Consul General could not attend or be provided an opportunity to speak to the community. The Charity does not view any concern with the Consul General speaking about the coup attempt in Turkey as this was a current event of interest to the community.
The AFL also states on page 68 that, “The Ambassador suggested that [REDACTED] communicate with Mr. Mahmut Demir, Religious and Social Affairs Counsellor of the Turkish Consulate and president of Diyanet-Canada to potentially help with the Organization’s museum.” The Charity at the time was investigating a potential Museum project of Islamic history. This project is directly related to its charitable purpose, “To educate Muslims and non-Muslims as to the teachings of Islam.”
Turkey plays an important role in the preservation of Islamic history. The Aga Khan Museum, a Canadian Charity, often hosts exhibits on Turkey’s Islamic history and sometimes cooperates with the Turkish Embassy and Consulate in its projects. This is no different in the Charity looking to work with the Turkish Embassy to support its Museum project. This project was never implemented. The Charity was directed to work with Mr. Mahmut Demir, Religious and Social Affairs Counsellor of the Turkish Consulate. His role as President of Diyanet- Canada was not relevant to the Charity.
The allegations made in the AFL about MAC’s interaction with the Turkish embassy does not come near the level of engagement other communities and their charities maintain with foreign diplomats. Particularly the Coptic Christian communities and Jewish communities have active presence of foreign diplomats at their programs. Charities in these communities actively use their resources to provide a platform for presentations by foreign diplomats on political issues affecting foreign countries. The CRA ignores that this is a common practise among other communities. On the other hand MAC does not actively participate with foreign diplomats. This is a double standard in the CRA’s approach and targeting of MAC. Many examples have been included in Schedule “28”.
Alleged Deceptive Fundraising practises
The CRA has misconstrued a legitimate relationship with the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) and removed the donations coming from IDB out of their context. The IDB is an international financial institution with the objective to foster economic development and social progress of its member countries and Muslim communities in non-member countries individually and collectively in accordance with the principles of Islamic Law.
IDB is rated AAA by the three major rating agencies (Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch), and has been designated as a Zero Risk Weighted Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Commission of the European Communities. Besides IDB’s strength of its capital base, low leverage and other factors make it a fitting partner for fixed- income investors. The IDB is not a commercial bank. Its membership consists of 57 countries. The basic condition for membership is that the prospective member country should be a member of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC). It is important to note that Jamal Khokhar, Canada’s Ambassador to Turkey, has recently been appointed to the role of Canada’s special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Since 2013, Canada has pursued its engagement with the OIC to facilitate cooperation on priorities such as good governance, human rights, diversity and inclusion, women’s economic empowerment, sustainability and the challenges faced by refugees.
In fact the Government of Canada’s Trade Commissioner lists the IDB as an important source of loans and grants, and encourages Canadian organizations to seek procurement opportunities through the bank. The Government of Canada states “The IDB provides financing for public and private projects that support the social and economic development of member countries, as well as that of Muslim communities in non-member countries.”139
One of the IDB’s activities is project financing in the public and private sectors. For approved projects, the IDB creates a “fund” which is either financed only by the institution or co-financed with other financiers. Both through IDB, the Central Banks and the Ministries of Finance of member countries, the Islamic financial industry maintains close coordination with international bodies such as the United Nations Counter Terrorism Committee (UNCTC), the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the BIS, the IMF and other international regulatory bodies to streamline the Best Business practises for the industry.
The initial forty recommendations and the eight special recommendations issued by the Financial Actions Task Force (FATF) are implemented or being implemented by the IDB and its member states.140 The IDB maintained an anti-corruption policy.141 The IDB is a member of the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG), a FATF style regional inter-governmental (international) body that is committed to implement international standards against money laundering (AML) and the financing of terrorism (CTF).
The IDB operates a “Communities Outreach Programme”. The objective of the Communities Outreach Programme is to contribute to the socio-economic development of the Muslim minority communities in non-member countries in a way that helps them to be productive citizens in their countries and pave the way for inclusive development. The scope of the program is to provide assistance to Muslim minority communities in non-member countries in the area of education and health, e.g. support to access education and educational quality improvement of schools, vocational training centers, and support to access healthcare and quality health services.
An organization may apply for the Community Outreach Programme. The application is only approved if the IDB itself approves a grant amount for the organization. If approved, a grant fund account is established in which the funds are designated. A fund may be contributed to by private individuals as well. Regardless if the source of the funds is the bank or private individuals, the IDB owns the fund and only disburses amounts submitted by the organization with official receipts of eligible expenditures. Furthermore, the identities of private individuals who contributed to the fund are not disclosed to the organization. The disbursements do not have any association with the payments made by individuals’ financiers.
Whether the fund is financed by the bank, or the bank and private financiers, the IDB is the ultimate source of the fund. The IDB has a “Guidelines for Disbursement Application” and an “Outline of Project Completion Report” that explain how payment disbursements are made is attached at Schedule “29”.
The IDB has only supported the Charity’s school capital projects. A grant application was made, and when approved, a case was opened. This was not a bank account rather a grant fund account. IDB approved Olive Grove School for $250,000 USD. The grant was approved and the case remains open until the capital project is closed. An agreement exists with the IDB. The rules of the fund require that the Charity must submit capital expenses for the project that are approved in order for the IDB to transfer funds.
An individual who resides in a member state of the IDB is eligible to contribute to the fund if they choose to contribute vis-a-vis the bank. During fundraising trips, the Charity’s representatives have offered the option of a direct wire to the Charity or the IDB fund to individuals who want to support MAC capital projects. The IDB is responsible for due diligence policies and procedures for preventing financing of terrorism or money laundering and the bank states it complies with FATF.
The Charity is not aware of the exact amounts contributed by individual donors to the IDB fund. Even if the donor has notified the charity that they plan to contribute through the IDB, the charity will never get confirmation that the gift was made, how much it was for, or when it was made because the IDB does not provide such information. As previously stated, the IDB does not flow through private contributions to the fund directly to the Charity. The IDB makes payments depending on the expenses that have been submitted. It is important to reaffirm that a wired payment transfer matches MAC’s submitted expenses, and not the amounts contributed by individual financiers. In other words, the Charity cannot account for private individual contributions to the IDB fund.
As noted above, CRA takes the position that, “It is the CRA’s preliminary audit findings that the Organization appears to have engaged in deceptive fundraising activities by failing to report the true source of its funding by using the IDB as a conduit to transfer donations from Saudi Arabia.” The Charity rejects this allegation and asserts that the Charity’s relationship with the IDB is a formal application process as part of a grant program that is fully compliant with the FATF. In terms of what the Charity has done, there is nothing suspicious or deficient, and certainly nothing to support the charge that the Charity has been involved in “deceptive fundraising activities.”
2 Statistics Canada. Immigration and Ethnocultural Diversity in Canada. Retrieved from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs- enm/2011/as-sa/99-010-x/99-010-x2011001-eng.cfm#a10
3 Statistics Canada. Immigration and Ethnocultural Diversity in Canada. Retrieved from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs- enm/2011/as-sa/99-010-x/99-010-x2011001-eng.cfm#a10
4 Statistics Canada. Immigration and Diversity: Population Projections for Canada and its Regions, 2011 to 2036. Retrieved from: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/91-551-x/91-551-x2017001-eng.htm
5 http://www.anewlife.ca/muslim-demographics-in-canada
6Hamdani, Daood. “Canadian Muslims: A statistical review.” The Canadian Dawn Foundation (2015). Retrieved from: https://muslimlink.ca/pdf/Canadian-Muslims-A-Statistical-Review-Final.pdf
7 https://united-church.ca/search/locator
8 https://united-church.ca/leadership/church-administration/united-property-resource-corporation