IRB members could speak non-stop about how it was not typical, but they could not deny the fact of abuse itself. In
      Israel, where tortures by police or army are legal (see Supplements, Documents # 44), army or police could
      always torture and kill me or any other member of my family. In context of all that I described and explained above
      police action against me does not looks occasional. To show how police in Israel is dangerous for innocent
      unprotected people I support this paragraph by several documents (see Documents # 45, 46, 47).
      Please, believe me that I am not exaggerating the risk to my life. I have enough experience to detect it as real: and it
      is real!
      1.4.
      Our removal from Canada back to Israel could be an extreme sanction in itself. Because what happened
      in 1991 was not our freewill immigration to Israel but a forcible deportation to Israel executed by both
      communist and Israeli authorities (see Document #2). Our removal to a country we do not belong to and
      which citizenship was thrust on us against our free will is immoral and inhuman. To extradite us to Israel
      means to return us back to captivity.
      During more then 3 years I was refused a special permission, which is required for immigrants, to leave Israel (listen
      to my 1-st hearing's recording). In supported documents I explain why I did not mention that in my refugee claim but
      only during the hearings (see p.1 of this Document). We quit Israel with such extreme difficulties that we never
      could leave it any more if removed there, and could not fly persecutions any more. We, adults, and even our children
      could stay in captivity there to the rest of our lives!
      If we would be removed back to Israel extreme and most vulnerable sanctions could be adopted against us there.
      Such sanctions not just highly expected, but are obvious since Israeli authorities already practiced extreme
      administrative pressure on us in 1991-1994. There were next administrative sanctions.
      A). a) Refusal to give my wife, and me permission to work in our professions. b) Refusal to give me an employment
      authorization at all after 1992.
      1. We were not given an appropriate language course as all fresh immigrants.
      2. The Ministry of Culture and Education refused to make equivalents of my wife's, and mine diplomas, when they
      had to do that automatically according to Israeli rules. I have already presented all material evidences to the
      Immigration Board, and the board did not express any doubt in these documents authenticity. That fact was also
      mentioned during our immigration hearings.
      3. Without these equivalents, we were not legitimate for a permission to work in our professions, as well as for the
      most of the professional courses available.
      4. I was legitimate to enter only one course - "Talpiot", - which was denied me. The reason of the denial was not
      given.
      My protests and demands to provide me with a reason of the denial were lost without notice. Maitre Stanley Levin, the
      only Israeli lawyer who agreed to defend me in Israel, composed a letter to the Minister of Culture and Education Mr.
      Amnon Rubinshtein. Maitre S.Levin's letter and Mr. A. Rubinshtein's response were presented to the IRB (see
      Documents # 48 in Supplements). That topic was widely discussed during my immigration hearings; the
      Immigration Board expressed no doubts that this conflict took place in reality. In the same time the commissioners did
      attempts to misrepresent this event and to place it in dependence of mentioned in my wife's Israeli eternal passport
      nationality. Maitre Dore, who replaced my main lawyer during the time of the hearings, did a mistake, allowing the
      commissioners to lead him in that question. In reality, I would reject "Talpiot's" administration demands to show my
      wife's passport-related nationality even if it was marked as "Jewish": because for the people like me such a demand
      was disgracing and racist. And I do not think that this little incident was the real reason of the refusal. But I could not
      name the "reason" because the term "political persecutions" is too abstract for the commissioners.
      5. The Ministry's of Labor governmental Labor Exchange refused to register me as unemployed after the first
      accommodative trial period in Israel. Israeli regulations by then put some restrictions on employers to employ a
      person who was not registered by the governmental labor exchange. In reality, it was equal to a refusal of an
      employment authorization. In the same time this refusal prevented us from getting any social assistance, too. (See
      letter from Maitre S. Levin to the Labor Exchange administration: Supplements, Document # 49).
      (This also was discussed during the refugee hearings).
      6. When - in spite of that - I had found an official job and was employed, and my wife was employed, too, we were
      paid less then the minimum wage. We had to be paid by the government an additional amount of money till the level
      of the income security, but were refused.
      7. We struggled till our last day in Israel for the right to obtain an official explanation in writing of the refusal to register
      us at labor exchange, to pay us welfare, and to get an adjustment till the subsisting minimum, which had to be paid us
      according to the law. We demanded to present us the reasons of all these refusals, but we did not succeed in our
      demands...
      8. We also turned to the Civil Court, and the court recognized me as an unemployed. But the labor's exchange
      administration refused to register me even then, in spite of the Civil Court's decision. (See this decision in
      Supplements, Document #50).
      All these above-mentioned items were mentioned during our refugee hearing but the commissioners avoided evaluating them in context of
      our refugee claim but transferred the discussions to the demagogical and political spheres.
      This justify the next question: was it a refugee hearing or it was a political process or a pro-Israeli propaganda forum?
      9. My wife, and me - we turned to a number of personalities, organizations and institutions like lawyer Maitre Stanley
      Levin, Histadrut, Sochnut, Civil Court of Petach-Tikva, Ratz (Movement for Human Rights and Peace), municipality of
      Petach-Tikva, municipality's legal consultant, and so on, without any result. (See the whole list in Supplements, #8).
      This topic was one of the most widely discussed during our refugee hearings!
      10. The commissioners could easy conclude that this situation removed our legal status in Israel from us. We became
      people without any legal status because we were socially (and legally) totally deprived. We could not obtain a bank card,
      credit card, take a loan, be responsible for any business operation, in other words, had no rights of citizens.
      11. After my wife was bitten on her job and turned to police, she was not paid her salary. No institution (this event was
      discussed during our immigration hearings) expressed a will to defend her rights.
      To examine documents related to this part see our file and also Supplements, Documents #51,52.
      B). Incredible financial pressure through illegal billing, taxation, or fines.
      1. Illegal billings. Exaggerated telephone bills, bills for long-distance calls, which we never did, etc., were coming. We had
      to pay all of them because it was no place where to turn to dispute them.
      2. Taxation. We had to pay taxes for TV, which we did not have by then (in Israel you must pay taxes for radio and TV), for
      medicine and medical services (some of them fresh immigrants or - in other cases - people with small income - did not
      have to pay). We were also forced to pay municipal tax instead of the owners of the apartment, which we rented. In that
      case as new arrivals we were eligible to pay reduced tax for immovable property, but were given this privilege only in 1994,
      short time before we left for Canada. In spite of the law that new immigrants do not pay taxes I was forced to pay taxes
      from money I earned playing concerts. Ministry of Taxation and Revenues has also submitted us an application form for
      paying taxes as if we had an enterprise and refused to pay taxes. This form was submitted to us not from Tel-Aviv, as
      normally was practiced, but from Jerusalem - as if I was a special person. There were other examples of such taxation.
      (Examples of such bills were presented to the commissioners).
      3. We had to pay fines for things we did not do and for violations we never committed.
      Supporting documents are enclosed (see Supplements, Documents #53,54).
      C). Draft Board has submitted me orders to appear sometimes every several days. I know that the compulsory military
      service for people of my age, who never were in the army in any country before, was not practicing. I do not think that they
      had intentions to take me to the army anyway. But they called me to appear there so often that it distorted my whole life
      and became an obstacle for work or social activity. I had also to spend a lot of money for bus tickets to appear at draft
      board, at Tel-ha-Shomer. They also refused to give me a permission to leave the country during more then 3 years.
      Supporting documents are enclosed (see Supplements, Documents #55). They were also presented to the
      commissioners.
      D). I could not say that the whole issue with my wife's eternal passport ("Tehudat Zehut") - during the refugee hearing
      was a well-coordinated with the Israeli side provocation (conspiracy) only because I have no material proof. But there are
      a lot of coincidences and indications in favor of such a suggestion. When (first I, and later my wife) we were given
      "Tehudat Zehuts", clerks told us that this document is the property of Israeli government and do not has to be shown to
      any foreigner or taken abroad. I knew many other Russian-speaking people who were told the same. Even Mrs. Malka, the
      immigration officer, has to recognize the existence of this regulation (please, listen to immigration hearings tapes, the last
      hearing), but she suggested that (as some of Russian speaking people did) we had to violate the law and to bring
      (smuggle!) our "Tehudat Zehuts" to Canada illegally!
      When the day of our departure from Israel came, we had completely forgotten about this regulation, and our "Tehudat
      Zehuts" among other papers were taken to airport. That happened because for us it was a tremendous moment. (Only a
      person with sick imagination could suggest that a family like ours could take a hard decision to fly a country where we
      (nominally, but...) were citizens and spent more then 3 years just because of economic reasons or "exaggerations"). Car, in
      which I was with my friend Igor Puchinsky (my family went to airport in another car before me) was stopped at the military
      post by a solder - a Moroccan origin. He told us to get out from the car and to show our identities. I had only my foreign
      passport (my "Tehudat Zehut" was with my wife). He began to shout on me and threaten me by an arrest "because I had
      no Israeli ID". He claimed that the foreign passport is considered in Israel as a document for departure only and does not
      recognized as an ID. He told that a real ID is only "Tehudat Zehut", which is not permitted to be taken abroad. And he
      said that he suspect me in an attempt to smuggle my "Tehudat Zehut" abroad. May be my friend Mr. Puchinski's
      respectability, may be the intervention of the officer- an European origin, helped, but I was released. This incident
      reminded us that we still have "Tehudat Zehuts" with us. From another hand, even if we had an intention to smuggle
      them, we were too much afraid, and we destroyed them in airport.
      This I told Mrs. Malka during our last immigration hearing.
      (Any one, who had a chance to hold in hands an Israeli "internal passport" ("tehudat zehut") had a chance to notice that
      there are not one but two nationality-related marks in it: one is the brutal disclosure of the genetically-related information
      about a person, another one mentions his country of origin. Even if Mrs. Malka or her parents do not possess one, she
      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,
      such as these, which described in our refugee claim, illegal and unfair sanctions made by the owners of apartments,
      unfair decisions against us made by House Committee, and so on.
      The administrative terror, which we faced in Israel, turned our life in Israel into a nightmare. It was unbearable and
      tormenting in itself, but we also faced physical abuses, assaults, discrimination, and batteries. This is why the health of all
      members of my family was so much affected.
      These sanctions would be in force immediately from the very moment of our arrival again if we would be removed back to
      Israel. It had to be absolutely clear to the commissioners!
      But in case of our arrival we could expect this time more severe sanctions because of the next reasons. 1-st: authorities'
      attitude towards us were constantly changing to the worse during our life in Israel, and came to the most dangerous for
      us point just to the moment of our departure for Canada. If we would be sent back, this attitude would not start from
      "zero" (it was not zero even in 1991!), but would continue the most tense period of 1994. 2-nd: after our refugee claim in
      Canada and my complains to the human rights organizations we could not expect that the Israeli authorities would like me
      more now. This is why I am so sure about more severe sanctions:
      1. Imprisonment within days or weeks since our arrival.
      2. Forcible "treatment" inside a special mental hospital, where some political activists are placed. (Rabbi Meshulam,
      leader of an upraise in a town Igud, told me over the phone about existence of such hospitals).
      3. Imprisonment inside one of Mossad's secret cells.
      4. Children's separation from us, parents.
      5. Confiscation of our foreign passports, so that we would never been able to leave Israel any more.
      1.5. INHUMAN TREATMENT
      If we did not face inhuman treatment in Israel we would not come to Canada to claim a refugee status. (As - by the way
      thousands of other Russian speaking peoples. Only by the very number of Russian-speaking refugee claimants from
      Israel to the Western countries a conclusion could be made that they are not "economic refugees". And the economical
      situation in Israel is not so bad, too!). We came not because of the economic reasons. We did not escape from hunger or
      from extreme poverty. First two-three months in Israel we were in a shock because of what happened to us and because
      of the general social atmosphere in the country. But we could not go back to our native country, and we were ready to
      stay in Israel forever. When we discovered that a permission to leave the country is refused for me, we began to try even
      harder to accommodate in Israel. We did everything to use to Israeli society, to find our place within it. This was already
      discussed during our immigration hearings - when I said that we tried our best in our attempts to live in Israel.
      In their negative decision IRB members did not expressed any principle doubt in the events, which we described in our
      refugee claim. They even recognized in one sentence that some negative "reactions" causing conflicts could be expected
      from ultra-orthodox towards people, who (as mention the IRB members avoiding word "respect" but mentioning it) do not
      respect their supervision.
      During the immigration hearings the immigration officer spoke about events of inhuman treatment, which we faced in
      Israel, in a humiliating manner. The same manner, absolutely identical, presents in the negative decision. Humiliation
      appeared because of their attitude towards severe inhuman treatment like assaults and batteries as towards minor
      events. They discussed, mentioned, or described inhuman treatment, which we faced in Israel, as well as our reaction to
      it, as something humorous. They let us know that we took such events too seriously, and, if we could take them lighter, it
      could prevent other similar events. But I am absolutely sure that if the IRB members could find themselves on our place,
      their reaction could not be different from our.
      After everything that happened to us in Israel, after characteristics, which I got in Israel as an "enemy", after contacts
      between Montreal's Immigration Board with Israelis, after their negative decision, which defining me as a dangerous
      "exaggerator" and "found me guilty" in "spreading slender" against Israel, what other treatment except of inhuman could
      we expect in Israel?
      1.6.RESUME
      In this document I explained why my family, and me - we would be not like other people if removed to Israel: because my
      personal confrontation with Israeli political structures began long before we were taken to Israel, because we did not want
      to go to the state of Israel and were taken there against our will, because of the scandal at the Central railway station in
      Warsaw, because I refused to cooperate with Mossad, because in Israel I became relatively well-known for my articles
      against human rights violation in Israel and was defined by Israeli authorities as an "enemy", because our personalities
      are not compatible to Israeli society, because we do not practicing Judaism, and because of a number of other reasons,
      which were described in that document.
      Our 3 years in Canada proved that I am not a pathological troublemaker. 3 years in Canada could show that we could live
      avoiding conflicts, respecting the laws and regulations, and quickly accommodating. My children are good students, they
      have a lot of friends, and they are completely suitable to the local society. My older daughter is an advanced piano player,
      and she passed exams at McGill University with the best mark. My younger daughter is a talented ballerina, her pictures
      are everywhere in Ballet studios, she is an advanced dancer, and she also was chosen to enter the National Ballet School
      in Toronto from dozens of other pretendents. Their French is nice and literary, they also advanced in English. And we are
      not on welfare any more! We could be peaceful and useful members of the local society if we would be given a chance to
      stay here. (Group of documents # 4 in Supplements are corresponding to this paragraph).
      THIS IS THE BEST PROOF THAT OUR TROUBLES IN ISRAEL ERUPTED NOT BECAUSE IT WAS OUR FAULT (as the
      commissioners tried to show), AND NOT IN RESULT OF OUR "EXAGGERATIONS"! WE FACED PERSECUTIONS IN
      ISRAEL BECAUSE OF OBJECTIVE REASONS AND COULD NOT GO BACK BECAUSE OF RISK TO LIFE, EXTREME
      SANCTIONS, AND INHUMAN TREATMENT. OUR REMOVAL TO ISRAEL WOULD BRING US TO A TRAGIC END.
      Theoretical suggestions if people like us could face a tragic end (without figuring out the impact our personal claim
      events: as commissioners did) in Israel are completely useless in our case because our case and our personalities are
      unique.
      Please, give us a chance to stay here, because if we would be removed back to Israel lives of my children, my wife, my
      mother, and my life, would be terminated! Please, do not send us towards tragic end. Try to understand your full
      responsibility for what will happen if we would be sent back to Israel.
      1.7. MY FINAL STATEMENT
      As the most honest people I am not impudently self-confidential. I might be shocked by aggressive and ironical
      interrogators (as Mrs. Malka): but this is just one more proof of my honesty and innocence. To support our refugee claim
      we presented to the Immigration Board so many documentary proofs as probably no refugee claimants in Canadian
      Immigration's history! All of them, including legal, and medical documents, official correspondence and newspapers'
      articles, related to me, other documents, were ignored, and only one document was considered as "non-related" without
      any reasonable explanations. If the forces, which acted against us, could encourage such an outraged injustice and unfair
      treatment of us even here, in Canada, in Israel they could eliminate us for sure. Sending us to Israel you must realize that
      you send us to death. Removal to Israel means for us a death penalty. But Canada has no death penalty even in
      Canadian criminal code! ! ! Especially, for children! I ask you to think about it while composing you final decision. Please...
      Sincerely yours,
      Lev Gunin
      Next Document
      PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: DOCUMENT 1 FROM DOCUMENTS
      Four Mrs. Louis-Phillippe SIMARD, Manager, Post Determination 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 criminal 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,