Чтение онлайн

held Israeli passports of refugee claimants in her hands - and knows that. It is also obvious that Israeli regulations oblige

people to carry "tehudat zehuts" everywhere with them. It was understandable from the context of our immigration claim

and even more clear from the context of the discussions during the hearings that not the first (genetically-related) mark in

"tehudat zehuts" but the second one (the country of origin) actually corresponds to the described by us events. Artificially

replacing the first by the second one Mrs. Malka already used a non-conventional, unacceptable "method". But she

committed even more severe violations in this question by other methods - as I explain in next documents).

I do not know if there were precedents of contacts between IRB and the Israeli embassy when the similar issue was

raised, but I could name dozens of examples when this issue was raised during immigration hearings, and no requests

were sent to the Israeli embassy. Anyway, this is such a rare and exceptional measure that only an exceptional need could

justify it. In reality there were no needs in that at all (see Group of Documents #4, Document 3). No event was based on

indication of nationality in my wife's "Tehudat Zehut", no event related to this indication was discussed during our

immigration hearings.

Mrs. Malka based her decision to send a request to Israeli embassy on Mrs. Broder's faken translation of my wife's birth

certificate. Mrs. Broder already distorted or sabotaged translations of all documents of my case: from my refugee claim to

newspapers' articles. This is why there were no doubts that she did it on purpose. There are two logical questions: If it

was not a well-coordinated with Mrs. Malka or the Israeli side provocation, then why Mrs. Broder distorted the translation

of my wife's birth certificate only, but not mine or my mother's, or the shildren's? If it was not a well coordinated with Mrs.

Malka or the Israeli side provocation, then why Mrs. Broder did this translation at all since two official translations of our

birth certificates already existed? I also ask the Federal court to investigate where the original of my wife's birth certificate

translation (that we made in Israel before coming to Canada) is kept now. (We gave the original of my wife's birth

certificate and the original of its translation through Maitre Dore to the IRB in relation with that question. We got my wife's

certificate back only after more then half a year but never got back the translation. The point was that Mrs. Eleonora

Broder had no need to translate my wife's birth certificate at all since a professionally-made and exclusively-looking

official translation already existed and was given to my lawyer before. By suspending this translation, somebody did an

attempt to destroy evidences of Mrs. Broder's sabotage. (See also Maitre Dore's note and a copy of existed before Mrs.

Broder's translation legal translation of my wife's birth certificate: Supplements, Documents #57,58,59 ).

By sending such a request to Israeli embassy Mrs. Malka violated 3 main principles, on which the legal status of refugee

claimants' immigration hearings are based. She:

a) Reported to Israel about our refugee claim in Canada, what is unacceptable and goes in contradiction with the very

essence of International human rights charters and conventions about refugees. b) Used situational blackmail in violation

of the criminal code to extort my wife's signature under a document (authorization of request), which authorization was

against my wife's personal interests and interests of her family because gave Israelis an additional reason to persecute

us and put our lives under an additional danger. c) Violated the principle of neutrality and non-approval of non-democratic,

racist laws, which existed in 2-3 countries in the World, because Israeli passport regulations about the indication of

nationality in eternal passports are in deep conflict with Canadian rules and the principles of Canadian democracy; she

also breached of our confidence to Canadian government abusing our belief that no part of our confidential statements to

Canadian immigration as well as the very fact of our refugee claim in Canada could not be betrayed to Israeli government.

In my opinion Mrs. Malka also abused her power as an immigration officer violating the border of distinctions between the

criminal court and the Immigration Board. As Maitre Dore correctly pointed (see Supplements, Document #57 ), Mrs.

Malka's interpretation of the answer, which was given by Israeli side revealed her clear partiality because she reject in

advance any other versions (interpretations). In her response to Maitre Dore's letter she repeatedly pointed to Israel's

answer as to an absolute. In the same time she could not ignore other eventualities (because they are obvious): that

Israelis could take advantage of giving that answer as a revenge on me, or that the Ministry's of Eternal Affairs record

was different from what was written in my wife's passport, or that it is just a mistake (Israel is well-known as a country,

where bureaucratic mistakes, casualties or disorders became a norm (please, read, for example, Efraim Sivela's book

"Stop the airplane, I have to go out!", "Stav", Jerusalem, 1979). She was not aware even by the fact that the answer from

Israeli embassy was incomplete, and (from some points of view) suspicious. It means that she rejected another main

principle of justice - presumption of innocence, replacing it by presumption of guilt!

E). There were many tiny events of administrative terror against us in Israel like sanctions at school or in kindergarten,