without even discussing it with us. It was a description of humiliation over other Russian-speaking workers and me by employers-Israelis in
August 1991. Instead of typing this paragraph she made a statement in my name not just generalizing the situation, but placing an abstract
declaration about slavery in Israel. When I asked her later why she did it, she answered that immigration commissioners would never believe
that something like this exist in Israel. "They would call it "slavery" - and tell you that slavery doesn't exist in Israel. Why then she inserted
that pure statement about slavery in Israel in my name? If even a description of real events, which could be treated as a denunciation of
slavery is "bad", a pure statement about slavery (without any explanation) is "more worse" then?! I could only explain that by favor, which
Mrs. Broder did to the commissioners (immigration oficer in particular) - because they later used this exactly paragraph (in Mrs. Broder's
translation of my refugee claim) as a key indication of "exaggerations" and based their rejection of our refugee claim mostly on it. Mrs.
Broder also told me that she inserted this paragraph because I mentioned slavery in one of our conversations. I said that it does not mean
that I permitted to insert it.
3.6. I said that I do not remember if I really said that. In response Eleonora said that she secretly recorded all our conversations and now
could prove that I told it. She never agreed to correct her translation. She even threaten me by telling that she is going to present above
mentioned tapes to the immigration tribunal - and she claimed that I spoke enough on these tapes to make a conclusion that I am
dangerous to Israel and "was persecuted correctly".
3.7. The translation of our claim was also made in a sarcastic and humiliating manner as if the translator not just repeated the Russian text
in French, but wrote a humorist story about what was described. 3.8. Lucy constantly threatened us during my dispute with Eleonora, and I
think that her threats came as a reaction on my pretensions to Eleonora. She was threatening us from February till May 1995. She told that
she did a lot for us - but we are not thankful - and we are going to pay for it. She often told us with bravado that she knows everything about
us. She said that some people follow us, that my phone is bugged, and that my mails are searched. And she demonstrated her knowledge
about really discreet information, which should be known only to my lawyer. I asked my lawyer and demanded from Mrs. Broder not to make
publicly known information, which should be discreet, but Lucy demonstrated her access to everything, what took place in my lawyer's office
-from the dates of our appointments with him to the dates of our immigration hearings, and so on. She used to come to the immigration
tribunal each time when our hearings took place - and even appeared in the room where the hearing took place: each time without our
permission.
3.9. One time she told me with the same bravado (it was in February 1995) that a very partial committee is going to be assigned to my file.
She told me that an especially aggressive immigration officer would be called from Toronto "to calm" me down. She was right.
3.10. Later it came out that Mrs. Broder sabotaged not only our immigration claim, but also translations of the articles, of documents, in
other words - everything, what she has to translate. Her distortion of the my wife's birth certificate data enabled immigration officer to
excuse her report made to the Israeli embassy about us.
3.11. Not only Lucy was related to Israel, but also Mrs. E. Broder. Soon after we met she married a businessman from Israel, who
maintained all business contacts in Israel - according to his words. She was born in Odessa, but lived several years in Cuba: it is also an
information to reflect.
3.12. It is too painful for me to believe that my lawyer did not remove two above-mentioned paragraphs that Mrs. Broder inserted without
our permission because he acted on purpose. I still want to trust him, and I prefer to think that he was tired, and this was what caused his
mistake. When he was finishing to fix "mistakes", distortions and non-authorized "adjustments", which Mrs. Broder have did in her
"translation", it was late at night, and both him, and me, especially, my mother, were tired, and I did not check the translation properly. I also
trusted him, and this is why I signed the new version without a proper check. I also prefer to think that he did not let me verify translations of
all the documents in my file before the hearings (I asked him many times to give me documents of my file for a control) because he was
constantly busy, and could not prepare them to me. If he would give me that chance, I could discover before the hearings that Mrs. Broder
falsified the translation not only of our claim, but of all other documents as well (like my wife's certificate). I know that the immigration
committee, which gave no positive decision to "Russians" from Israel at all, would answer "no" even if there were no distortions in
translations at all.
3.13. Some sort of misunderstanding - I believe - happened between my lawyer and me, in result of which the most important remarks
about IRB's negative decision in our case were not submitted with the appeal. This is why I am asking you to take this submission in
consideration when decision in my appeal will be considered.
I submitt examples of Mrs. Broder's sabotage in Supplements, Documents # 92,93, 94, 95, 96, 97.
NEXT DOCUMENT: [[[GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4]]]
PREVIOUS DOCUMENT: [[[DOCUMENT 3 of DOCUMENTS]]]
GROUP OF DOCUMENTS NUMBER 4 APRIL-MAY 1997
DOCUMENT 1 (2-nd version)
(Was submitted to Amnesty International via E-MAIL)
MY COPY OF APPEAL TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
Why I appeal? 1) Because my complains, which I once submitted to Amnesty International from Israel, played if not the main, a very
important role during all the 3 immigration hearings in our case. 2) Because if not directly, then indirectly (from a particular point of view) IRB
members insinuated that I must be punished for my contacts with Amnesty International. 3) Because what happened during my
immigration hearing here in Montreal (Quebec, Canada) is so incredible and horrible that will encourage human right violations everywhere
on a wider scale. 4) Because in the former USSR as well as in Israel I was a human rights activist and was considered a human rights
activist by the people and press. 5) Because during the hearing the immigration officer falsified Amnesty International's (and other human
rights organizations') documents and lied about them. 6) Because if a family comes to a country (which accepts refugees in general) but
faces abuses, ungrounded accusations, threats, hatred and injustice within an immigration court room - that means a mayhem for the
human rights, placing the very basis of human rights in jeopardy. 7) Because I'm absolutely certain (and I have presented undeniable
evidences to the immigration board) that I'm going to be killed and the members of my family are going to be killed if we will be turned back
to Israel since I could suggest that something like a death penalty was considered there against me for my views.
Why I Appeal Before I Have The Immigration Board's Final Decision In My Case? 1) Because I have to dispute the very procedure of the
hearing in our case, which abused us and placed our lives under the definite danger. 2) Because I know of some examples when a final
negative decision was sent to refugee claimants together with a deportation order without the rights to appeal. 3) Because after what
happened during our immigration hearing I feel insecure even here. 4) Because it looks like they violated some legal and moral norms while
hearing our case not for giving us later a positive decision. 5) Because now, when the information about us was submitted by the
immigration officer to Israel there can be a wave of wider pressure from Israel to turn us back. I was actually expelled from the former
USSR, where I was persecuted for my artistic, philosophical, ideological and political views, where I was beaten, prevented from social and
professional success, watched and threatened. I was deported to Israel. When we moved away from the USSR we tried to escape to a
third country but were captured by Israelis and were taken to Israel by force.
We were systematically assaulted, beaten, disgraced, threatened, discriminated against (persecuted) in Israel. We were denied a
permission to leave the country, and could not go away for 3 1/2 years. We collected thousands of evidences in discrimination and
persecutions. Israeli state radio made a provocation, aiming to eliminate me, Israeli newspapers called to destroy all my works - but for this
immigration board it's still not "enough"...
*Why I Think My Human Rights Were Violated By the Court?
Inside The Courtroom: 1)Some of the main documentary proofs (statements, affidavits, letters, receipts, articles, etc.) have been
disappeared or were ignored as if they were (disappeared).See pages A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5. 1-a)Only my college diploma was mentioned
during immigration hearings, and the commissioners acted as if my university diploma does not exist. In reality I mentioned it during the
hearings and the copy of this diploma also was in my file. 2)Other extremely important documents were mentioned but were ignored (if not
they might be an obstacle to what the judges incriminated me). Pages B-1,B-2,B-3,B-4.B-5. 3) Other documents were mentioned as
incomplete proof of particular events, when in reality they were given to support other events. In the same time documents which relate to
these events were ignored. Pages C-1, C-2. 4) In the same way my words were ignored, too. For example, I was asked an insinuating
question. My answer closed that question by a clear and unbeatable contra-argument. So, what then? Then the same insinuation was
repeated - but this time in an affirmative form: As if I said nothing. The same question could be given 2, 3, 5 times non-stop. If I gave the
same answer again and again they shouted on me, used threats, aggression, incredible accusations to force me to change my answer. It's
clear that such a method violates moral and legal norms - and any hesitation by a refugee claimant under such an illegal psychological