An immigration bill introduced last week in Parliament opens the door for refugees resettled in Canada to have their permanent residence status stripped of them and for them to be deported, even years after their arrival, say refugee lawyers.
The government says there's nothing new happening; it's just streamlining a current two-part process into one step.
Immigration Minister Jason Kenney tabled Bill C-31 in the House on Feb. 16. The bill—which encompasses another bill on human smuggling, and new biometrics measures—is meant to speed up the refugee system to send fraudulent claimants packing quicker.
The bill resurrects aspects of a bill the Conservative government originally introduced in March 2010 that was revised through opposition pressure and passed with cross-party support in June 2010, but never fully implemented.
Mr. Kenney said more changes were needed. Among the changes proposed in Bill C-31, claimants from certain so-called safe countries wouldn't have access to a new appeal mechanism and would have their claims further fast-tracked.
The minister would no longer need to get the recommendation from an expert panel to declare a country safe, although there would still be statistical or human rights-related criteria he would have to assess. A person from a safe country who lost their asylum bid could still apply to have the Federal Court hear their case, but the government could deport them before it's heard.
The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers circulated a press release Feb. 17 drawing attention to another clause in the bill the lawyers say they were surprised to find. They say Clause 19 allows for a person who was given permanent resident status after making a successful refugee claim either in Canada or as a government-sponsored refugee from abroad to lose that status if the immigration minister determines that they no longer need Canadian protection.
Citizenship and Immigration Canada spokesperson Remi Lariviere said that the minister could apply to the Immigration and Refugee Board's refugee protection division to decide whether Canada's refugee protection has ended if the person got that protection fraudulently or if they have returned to the country from which they sought protection.
The refugee lawyers say the government could also look to end protection if the reasons for which the person asked for protection have ended.
If the board says the person's refugee protection has ended, the person could then lose their permanent resident status and be deported, say the lawyers.
Currently, the minister can apply to the IRB for an order that the refugee's need for protection no longer exists, if their circumstances have changed. But the loss of protected person status doesn't mean they've lost their permanent resident status.
That's because it is currently a two-step process, says Mr. Lariviere.
"This amendment would save a step within the system by revoking permanent resident status at the same time as protected person status," he said in an email to Embassy.
"This process, as well as the grounds for cessation of protected person status, is not new and exists under the current legislation. However, it is a two-step process. The proposed measures would streamline the process into a one-step process," he said.
"That means that if there are grounds to end an individual's Convention refugee or protected person status, that this would result in a concurrent loss of permanent resident status."
A Citizenship and Immigration Canada backgrounder on the law says that because of the current two-step system, it "is rarely pursued."
Rick Goldman, a spokesperson for the Canadian Council for Refugees, said he feared that if the government wasn't using the provision because it wasn't effective, it would use the 'improved' provision more.
"They're giving themselves a new tool," said Mr. Goldman, who is also a member of the refugee lawyers group. "[I can] only assume they're doing it to use it."
The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers says the change could be applied retroactively. They are concerned that it would put refugees in limbo who thought they were secure in Canada with permanent residence.
Mr. Goldman suggested that at-risk groups could include Rwandans, Burundians, and Sri Lankans, who have been granted protection in Canada recently but whose home-country situations may now be perceived as better.
Sri Lanka's civil war may be over, but the country is still not safe for many Tamils, said David Poopalapillai, national spokesperson for the Canadian Tamil Congress. And the Canadian government has acknowledged its ongoing human rights problems. He stressed that Canada also determines refugee cases on an individual basis.
"While we appreciate the government concern [to] adjust the backlog in our refugee system, some provisions they are bringing in must have checks and balances," he said.
Those include clauses on the designation of safe countries of origin and the taking away of permanent residence status, he said.
"We want the government to take a second look into these amendments and have a public debate."
With the change proposed, until a refugee with a permanent resident card becomes a citizen, they will always be vulnerable to deportation, said Peter Showler, a former IRB chair, and an executive member of the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and director of the Refugee Forum at the University of Ottawa.
He said Canada has been praised for its refugee system in that it quickly enfranchises a person to participate fully in Canadian society once they've been given protected person status. Conversely, in European countries where newcomers have not been given the same rights and privileges as citizens, it has been a breeding ground for disaffection that proved combustible, for instance, in riots in immigrant-heavy Parisian suburbs in 2005.
He acknowledged that some Canadians might think it's okay for a person to be told to go home if the situation that brought them to Canada is resolved and it's safe for them to return.
"But the view of that is well, for example, circumstances change," he said. "Otherwise, we're going to be like a European country. We're going to park people. We're not going to let them really become Canadians. We're going to make them half-Canadians. What it loses is this very positive aspect of allowing people to feel secure, be part of Canada and get on with their lives."
The idea behind the clause, he said, is that a real refugee would never go back to the country they fled. That's nonsense.
"Many people go back after some years. Even when it is still dangerous many will go back for parental funerals, remaining children, etc.," he wrote in a follow-up email.
"[T]he advice to refugee-permanent residents would be: get your citizenship as soon as possible," he wrote.
Currently, if the IRB accepts an asylum claim from a person who submitted it within Canada, the person gets protected person status. That means they can stay in Canada and can apply to become a permanent resident. They have to apply within 180 days of the government telling them they are a protected person.
A permanent resident can stay in Canada long term, but isn't a Canadian citizen. They may receive social benefits including health care, are protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but can't vote. To keep their status, they must be living in Canada for at least two years within a five-year period. They would lose their status if they have been convicted of a serious criminal offence and told to leave.
Refugees resettled from abroad through a government- or private sponsor-assisted refugee programs arrive in Canada as permanent residents. These include people recognized by the UN as refugees and cared for by the UN refugee agency, the UNHCR.
Asked to comment on this story, UNHCR's representative in Canada Furio De Angelis said Canadian authorities are still briefing the UNHCR on Bill C-31's details. "UNHCR will be undertaking a thorough review and we will present our observations to the Government," he said.
In any case, a permanent resident isn't eligible to become a citizen unless they've lived in Canada for at least three of the past four years before applying.
Original Article
Source: embassy mag
Author: Kristen Shane
No comments:
Post a Comment