“Canada faces key accountability test as Tanzanian human rights case against Barrick reaches Ontario Court of Appeal,” 24 November 2025

At issue is a pivotal question for Canadian law: when can a multinational parent company be held to account in its home country for serious human rights abuses committed abroad?

In 2024, the Ontario Superior Court dismissed the case… The plaintiffs are now challenging that decision. The outcome of this appeal could set an important precedent for how Canadian courts handle transnational human rights cases, and whether those harmed by Canadian companies overseas can seek remedy in the country where corporate power is centred.

The case concerns allegations of killings, shootings and torture committed between 2021 and 2023 by members of the Tanzanian Police Force assigned to provide security at Barrick’s North Mara gold mine… The plaintiffs argue that the police abuses formed part of a continuing pattern and that Barrick… should be held responsible because of the way it designed, directed and oversaw security and human rights practices at the mining site.

The case has been brought by 29 members of the Indigenous Kurya community… The legal action has been brought in Ontario because... the plaintiffs argue that a corporation should be accountable in the country where it is based and that Canadian courts have both the authority and the responsibility to scrutinise those actions where serious harm is alleged.

Barrick disputes that the case should be heard in Canada… arguing that the alleged abuses were carried out in Tanzania by members of the Tanzanian Police Force, a state institution that it does not control or supervise...

...Barrick argues that Tanzania… is the appropriate place for the case to be heard… This argument, known as forum non conveniens, is central to the appeal. Barrick’s statement on its position can be found here...

Amnesty International Canada has been granted leave to intervene as an amicus curiae… arguing that Canadian courts should apply jurisdiction and forum rules in line with the right to an effective remedy for serious human rights abuses.