A group of Palestinian Canadians filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against the Canadian government in Canada’s Federal Court, challenging the continued export of military goods and technology to Israel. Led by a coalition of Canadian and Palestinian applicants, including Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights (CLAIHR) and Al-Haq-Law in the Service of Man, the legal proceedings aim to halt arms exports to Israel, claiming violations of Canadian and international law.

The applicants seek a court order to cease the issuance of export permits for all military goods and technology destined for Israel, arguing that such exports pose a substantial risk of serious violations of international humanitarian law and acts of violence against women and children.

According to data supplied to the Canadian news outlet The Maple, since October 7, Canada has authorized over $28 million in exports of military goods and technology to Israel. Richard Sanders, the founder of Canada’s Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade (COAT), has asserted that:

Canadian military components, sold to the United States, assembled into major weapons systems like F-15s, F-16s, helicopters, helicopter warships, these are assembled in the United States and then either given or sold to Israel and many other countries, but Israel used those American-made weapons systems with the Canadian components on board in its bombardments of Gaza and the wars against Lebanon, so lots of civilians killed, massacred by these weapons systems that Canadian components are integrated into.

The key legal provisions under scrutiny include the Export and Import Permits Act (EIPA) and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 7.3 of the EIPA mandates the Minister to consider whether the export of arms could contribute to peace and security or undermine it, as well as the potential for serious violations of international law. Furthermore, Section 7.4 prohibits the issuance of export permits if there is a substantial risk of negative consequences, including serious violations of international humanitarian law.

The applicants highlight recent international legal developments, such as the ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) recognizing a “plausible” case for genocide in Gaza and urging states to prevent such atrocities. Additionally, UN experts have warned against arms transfers to Israel, citing likely violations of international humanitarian law.

The legal challenge is part of a broader global trend, with similar lawsuits filed in countries like the US and the Netherlands, reflecting growing international scrutiny over arms transfers to Israel.