Commission lawyer disputes Liberal Party director’s previous testimony on MP Han Dong nomination
The Liberal Party’s national director Azam Ishmael faced sharp questioning from Hogue Commission lawyers Friday regarding his previous testimony claiming there were no concerns with the Don Valley North riding during the 2019 nomination, although confirmed intelligence has shown Chinese officials clandestinely coerced Chinese students to vote for a specific candidate.
During earlier testimony, Ishmael had been questioned about the alleged irregularities in the Don Valley North nomination process involving Han Dong. He appeared to downplay concerns about vulnerabilities in the Liberal Party’s procedures, and maintained the Liberals were not subject to Chinese election interference in 2019.
Ishmael was part of a small circle of senior Liberals — with secret intelligence clearances — including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who had been warned about events in Don Valley North before the 2019 election.
Intelligence reports, confirmed by Commissioner Hogue’s interim report and the NSICOP 2024 report, indicated that MP Dong allegedly benefited from a coordinated effort by Chinese consular officials to coerce Chinese international students into voting for him during the nomination process. Dong, while acknowledging that he had encouraged students to volunteer and vote, denies knowing about any Chinese interference.
A lawyer for NDP Jenny Kwan, however, undermined Ishmael’s previous testimony and his claims that the Liberals had not suffered any foreign interference in 2019.
Quoting from the redacted findings of NSICOP 2024, a report tabled for the Hogue Commission’s second phase hearings, Kwan’s lawyer said:
The first paragraph says, "According to CSIS, the PRC had a significant impact in getting Mr. Dong nominated as the Liberal Party of Canada's 2019 federal candidate in Don Valley North." Were you previously aware that this was CSIS' conclusion?
No, Ishmael replied.
So this is the first time you've learned that CSIS concluded this fact?
Correct.
Okay. And would you agree that if this is true, this would count as, to use your words, an "irregularity"?
Yeah, for sure.
Good, thank you. So let's move on to the next paragraph. We'll begin with the second sentence. It says, "Many of Mr. Dong's supporters arrived in buses supported by the PRC. Between 175 and 200 international Chinese students arrived in several buses." Were you aware of this fact?
We knew that buses were used in the nomination, which is not atypical.
And did you know that those buses were supported by the PRC?
No.
So this is the first time you're learning this?
Correct.
And you'd agree that that's an irregularity?
Correct.
Okay. Let's continue with that paragraph. The report states, "The consulate reportedly told the students that they must vote for Mr. Dong if they wanted to maintain their student visas." Were you previously aware of that fact?
No.
And you'd agree that's an irregularity?
Yep.
Okay. So let's move on. The report also says, "The consulate knowingly broke the Liberal Party of Canada's rule that voters in a nomination process must live in the riding." It explains that the students reportedly lived outside the riding. Were you aware of this fact previously?
Nope.
And that would be an irregularity?
Yeah. If they created fake material to vote in the nomination, absolutely.
Right. And you'd agree that it would break the Liberal Party of Canada's rules if those students, who lived outside the riding, nonetheless voted in the nomination?
Absolutely.
Okay. And similarly, you weren't aware that the students had been provided with fraudulent residency paperwork, were you?
Of course not, no.
And that would be an irregularity?
Yes.
That would violate the Liberal Party of Canada's rules?
Absolutely.
And then it says here, "The students sought to physically intimidate voters and distribute pro-Dong materials, contrary to party rules." Were you previously aware of that fact?
No. All reports from the meeting indicated it was a very successful local nomination meeting, with processes that rolled out typically.
And you'd agree that intimidating voters would break the Liberal Party of Canada's rules as well?
Absolutely, yeah.
So, I put to you that all of this constitutes, as you said, clandestine activity because it occurred, but you were not aware of it. Is that fair?
Yeah, I guess so.
Your testimony today was that you doubted the risk of foreign interference in nominations because it would be hard for such clandestine activity to occur unobserved. But in fact, CSIS concluded it did occur, did it not?
No. My testimony was that it would be difficult for it to go unobserved. But clearly, CSIS has observed it.
Liberal Party leader concedes no policy for investigating interference complaints
When recalled to the Commission on Friday, Ishmael also clarified that the party’s criteria for voting in Liberal nomination contests require voters to be at least 14 years old and ordinarily residing in Canada, with no requirement for permanent residency or citizenship. He also confirmed that the party does not vet potential candidates specifically for foreign interference threats and allows bulk membership sign-ups.
When asked by a Commission lawyer if this posed a potential vulnerability in the party’s processes, Ishmael denied it.
The lawyer pressed further on the vulnerabilities outlined in the Commission’s documents, which describe how foreign states exploit loopholes in Canadian party nomination processes. The documents state that political parties set their own rules, and members can vote in nomination races regardless of citizenship status. In some cases, foreign actors pay membership fees.
The lawyer referenced the alleged irregularities in Don Valley North in 2019, although without directly naming the case. The lawyer asked if foreign states could clandestinely pressure foreign nationals living in Canada to vote in a nomination race.
“Let’s hypothetically imagine that a foreign state attempts to accomplish that end by clandestinely pressuring a group of foreign nationals who legitimately live in that riding, potentially to support a particular candidate in a Liberal nomination contest. The state directs them to sign up to become registered Liberals, tells them to show up at the contest at a specific time, and vote for a particular candidate, all done clandestinely. Let me ask you: Do you agree that authoritarian governments are likely to have the ability to apply considerable pressure to foreign nationals living in Canada?”
“I would assume they have some ability to do that,” Ishmael answered.
“But at the same time, when it comes back to the party, I think the key word you used was ‘clandestinely.’ They’re doing this clandestinely. The Liberal Party of Canada is not a police force.”
The Commission lawyer pressed him again.
“Is it fair to say that there is no specific protocol [for Liberal officials to investigate irregularities in nominations]?”
“Correct,” Ishmael responded.
“You hope they’d use good judgment?”
“Correct.”
A different lawyer representing Chinese Canadians asked Ishmael whether the Liberals and other Canadian parties should be relying on party volunteers and donations "to protect them from foreign interference."
"Uh, donations that come into political parties in Canada are some of the most heavily regulated in the world," Ishmael responded.
The lawyer then asked Ishmael to confirm how long a person must "ordinarily reside" in Canada to qualify for a vote in a Liberal nomination.
Ishmael, the Liberal Party's national director, conceded he did not know the threshold, stating that local riding officials would be responsible for determining whether a party member could prove they had resided in Canada for any specific amount of time.
The lawyer confirmed also with Ishmael that Liberals have no policies in place with regards to reviewing sources of donations.
Ishmael also confirmed that, like the Conservative Party, the Liberals provide no formal training to MPs on how to vet staff hires for potential espionage threats.
This suggests that Canada’s major political parties are vulnerable to infiltration by Beijing’s United Front networks.
Intelligence reports obtained by The Bureau from confidential sources, corroborated by the NSICOP 2024 report and Hogue Commission documents, state that China’s election interference networks involve collusion between Chinese Consulate officials, political candidates, their staff, and community leaders, all working to clandestinely support politicians sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party.
Earlier on Friday, Conservative Party official Mike Crase faced questions about allegations raised in the NSICOP report, which suggested that the party’s leadership contests had been targeted by hostile states.
The redacted version of the report, tabled on Friday, says:
“Foreign actors also targeted party leadership campaigns. [Three sentences were deleted to remove injurious or privileged information. The sentences described two specific instances where PRC officials allegedly interfered in the leadership races of the Conservative Party of Canada.]”
A lawyer asked Crase: "Is the party aware of allegations that the CPC leadership races were targeted for foreign interference attempts in the last two leadership contests?"
“I was not the executive director at the time, or a party employee, during either of the leadership races you’re referring to,” Crase replied. “So, I don’t have any specific information beyond, um, two very brief paragraphs in the NSICOP report that touch on it."
The Bureau has previously reported that an officially designated United Front leader in Vancouver, who campaigned for Kenny Chiu’s opponent in 2021, was caught on video attending a United Front Work Department meeting with senior Chinese leaders, including President Xi Jinping. This individual was allegedly involved in efforts to support the Liberal Party in the 2021 election while attacking Chiu, a Conservative MP, for introducing legislation seeking to establish a foreign agent registry.
Ishmael was not questioned on his knowledge of this case, but he acknowledged that disinformation remains a key threat in foreign interference.
Previous testimony from Conservative MP Michael Chong and NDP MP Jenny Kwan, delivered on Wednesday, highlighted growing calls among Parliament members for MPs and Senators cited in the June 2024 intelligence report—who allegedly colluded with China—to be named, so they can defend themselves in the House of Commons.
sam@thebureau.news