Last month Canadian MP Vince Gasparro announced in a video on social media that Kneecap were banned from Canada, meaning upcoming shows in Toronto and Vancouver would not be able to go ahead. One of his justifications for that ban was the pending criminal case against the band’s Mo Chara in the UK.
Following the dismissal of that case on Friday, there has been speculation that the ban may be lifted. However, it’s not yet known if that will happen, or – for that matter – if there ever was an actual ban in the first place. Because, as of Monday, Kneecap’s management were yet to receive any official communication from the Canadian government stating that the band could not enter the country.
When asked if the dismissal of the criminal case against Mo Chara impacted on the Kneecap ban, Gasparro said on Friday “there’s nothing more for me to add in terms of my video”, and “any further comments I’m going to leave to the officials at immigration and they’ll manage that accordingly”.
Officials at Immigration, Refugees And Citizenship Canada have said they can’t comment on specific cases because of privacy rules, a position also taken by the country’s Immigration Minister Lena Diab. Which makes you wonder why Gasparro felt fine announcing the Kneecap ban on social media.
On what basis – and in what capacity – Gasparro made that announcement last month is far from clear. Last week the Canadian MP – who is also a Parliamentary Secretary for Ruby Sahot, Canada’s Secretary Of State for Combatting Crime – said that he made the statement “based on the information that was available” at the time.
In his original post, Gasparro said that the band had made statements that are “contrary to Canadian values and laws” and were therefore “deemed ineligible to enter Canada”. Kneecap immediately hit back, threatening legal action and insisting that the MP’s claims about the band were “wholly untrue and deeply malicious”.
They said they had played shows in Canada “many times with zero issues and a message of solidarity and love”, and that “significant Zionist lobby groups” have been pressuring Canadian politicians to block their gigs because of the group’s support for Palestine.
There has been discussion in Canada in recent days over whether or not the MP may have breached Canadian privacy laws when announcing the supposed Kneecap ban last month.
According to CBC News, Canada’s Public Safety Minister – who Sahota reports into – was not aware of the video before it was posted, and when Immigration Minister Diab was asked if she had advanced warning of Gasparro’s Kneecap post she said “you will have to speak to him”.
Canada’s Privacy Commissioner also had no warning, which is relevant because – CBC News explains – “Canada’s Privacy Act says the head of a government institution should notify the privacy commissioner in writing in advance of a planned disclosure of someone’s private information”. Which would usually include information about an individual’s right to enter the country.
That rule does not apply to an MP. But Gasparro also has that role as a parliamentary secretary, they being MPs who act as “integral links between ministers, secretaries of state and Parliament”. And he did say he was announcing the Kneecap ban “on behalf of the government of Canada” and “on the advice of our officials”.
One legal expert told CBS News that Gasparro may have breached privacy laws if he learned about the ban “as someone who is being directly briefed on the matter by IRCC”. That said, the same expert added that this was something of a grey area legally speaking.
Kneecap have courted lots of controversy, of course, with their outspoken on-stage support of Palestine and criticism of Israel. While some have commended the rap trio for using their platform in that way, others have condemned the on-stage politics.
Some of the band’s critics have publicly called for countries to refuse visas whenever Kneecap try to tour internationally, and visa issues resulted in the band cancelling their US tour.
Mo Chara was arrested on a terror charge over allegations he displayed the flag of Hezbollah – a proscribed terror organisation – during a London show last year.
Critics used that charge as a justification for why countries should refuse or revoke visas for the band. However, last week the criminal case against the rapper was thrown out because prosecutors failed to get Attorney General approval for the charge within the required six months after the alleged flag incident.
Kneecap had four Canadian dates scheduled alongside the cancelled US tour and, until last month, it looked like those were going ahead. UK artists don’t need specific visas or travel permits to play a small number of shows in Canada and just need to apply for an Electronic Travel Authorisation or eTA. The band say they completed that application process and had eTAs issued.
Then came last month’s social media post from Gasparro declaring that “members of Kneecap have been deemed ineligible to enter Canada”, because they “have engaged in actions and have made statements that are contrary to Canadian values and laws that have caused deep alarm to our government”.
Principally, he said, they have “amplified political violence and publicly displayed support for terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah and Hamas”. These “are not expressions of art or legitimate political critique” but “dangerous endorsements of violence and hate”. Which is why, he went on, “one member of the band is currently facing terrorism-related charges in the United Kingdom”.
Should Kneecap proceed with their plan to take legal action against Gasparro over that post, more light would be shed on whether or not the MP broke any rules when announcing the ban. When asked about the threat of litigation last week, the MP said, “if they want to sue me, I look forward to it”.
Meanwhile, it remains unclear whether or not Kneecap can or cannot play shows in Canada, and whether last week’s ruling in the UK courts makes any difference.
Back in the UK, the Crown Prosecution Service has said it is reviewing last week’s ruling. That led the Daily Telegraph to speculate that prosecutors may appeal. Apparently CPS guidance suggested Attorney General consent wasn’t actually required for the terror charge to be filed, it just had to be in place before any court hearing, something prosecutors argued in court earlier this summer.
However, magistrate Paul Goldspring last week said that interpretation of the law “defied logic”. It remains to be seen if the CPS appeals the matter to get the perspective of a judge in a higher court or if it just rewrites its own guidance. The latter approach would seem a lot simpler.
