Marilyn Sanford joins Peter Edelmann and Steve Meurrens to discuss whether the Canada Border Services Agency can search people’s electronic devices. In addition, we discussed the recent stay of proceedings in the Nuttall decision, a well publicized case in which two individuals were charged with attempting to blow up the BC legislature. Marilyn was counsel to Mr. Nuttall. Finally, Peter and Steven touched on recent developments in Canadian immigration law, including the Owner Operator Labour Market Impact Assessment recruitment exemption, a puzzling case in which the Federal Court upheld an officer’s determination that people who extend their visitor status in Canada cannot complete short term courses during that extension without first leaving Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada dismissing leave in the Torres case. Marilyn is a criminal defense attorney in Vancouver.
Getting an LMIA for an Employee
A reminder to employers that as a result of the global recession, concurrent processing for work permits and labour market opinions are no longer available. Not only that, but all Labour Market Opinions now expire six months after issuance.
Immediate Measures Are Needed to Help International Graduates Stay in Canada
John McCallum, Canada’s Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC”), has spent much of the summer conducting a speaking tour about upcoming changes to Canada’s immigration system. He has particularly focused on how he wants to welcome more international students as permanent residents. This will be a welcome development, because so far Minister McCallum’s tenure as immigration minister has been a disaster for international graduates whose post graduate work permits have already or are soon expiring. Mr. McCallum’s March 2016 cuts to Canada’s economic immigration levels have resulted in IRCC’s Comprehensive Ranking System’s points requirement for foreign nationals to receive an Invitation to Apply for Canadian permanent residency remaining out of reach for most international graduates. Minister McCallum has promised that improvements are coming in the fall, although the details are vague. Given that the Minister recognises that the current situation is untenable, it is incomprehensible why he has not introduced temporary measures to alleviate the frustration and dashed dreams that many international graduates living in Canada are experiencing, if they have not already had to return home. Mr. McCallum’s decision to not introduce temporary measures is especially galling given how simple and easy to implement they could have been. Express Entry … Read More
Borderlines Podcast Episode 4 – Citizenship Revocation, Cessation, and War Resisters with Jenny Kwan, MP
Jenny Kwan is the Member of Parliament for Vancouver East and is the New Democratic Party of Canada’s Immigration Critic. Prior to being elected a Member of Parliament, Ms. Kwan was a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) of British Columbia for the riding of Vancouver-Mount Pleasant, and a senior member of the provincial caucus of the New Democratic Party. Her Twitter is @JennyKwanBC 2:30 – 16:13 – We talk about Bill C-6, the Liberal Government of Canada’s reforms to Canada’s Citizenship Act. Ms. Kwan both talked about what she likes and dislikes about Bill C-6. A specific concern that she has includes the procedural fairness afforded to those facing citizenship revocation due to misrepresentation. The current process, which is the subject of numerous court challenges, is that an individual’s Canadian citizenship can be revoked by a bureaucrat if the bureaucrat determines that the Canadian citizen obtained their citizenship as a result of fraud. Humanitarian & compassionate concerns are not considered, and the only recourse that a former citizen has once their citizenship is stripped is to seek judicial review in Federal Court. During this portion of the discussion we also briefly discuss the topic of language testing requirements for grants of … Read More
Borderlines Podcast Episode 3 – Marriage Fraud, with Raj Sharma
Raj Sharma joins Peter Edelmann and Steven Meurrens to discuss marriage fraud. Raj Sharma is the managing partner of Stewart Sharma Harsanyi. He is a well known commentator on immigration law. In addition to his active blog and numerous presentations that he has given at immigration conferences and seminars, he has written numerous op-eds on immigration, diversity and multi-culturalism that have been published in many manjor Canadian newspapers. He has debated Martin Collacott of the Fraser Institute and Centre for Immigration Reform on whether Canada accepts too many immigrants; Deepak Obhrai (MP and Parliamentary Secretary) on additional and stricter language requirements for citizens; David Seymour of the Manning Centre on whether Canada’s new immigration policy is too exclusionary; Imam Syed Soharwardy on honour crimes in Canada; and a CSIS agent on the profiling of Muslims. He can be reached at raj@sshlaw.ca or on Twitter at @immlawyercanada 2:33 – 44:20 – We discuss marriage fraud, and how the previous government introduced several measures to try and prevent it. These measures included introducing a disjunctive test in which a marriage would not facilitate immigration if the marriage was not genuine or if the marriage had been entered into primarily for the purpose of immigration. It also included the introduction of conditional permanent … Read More
Borderlines Podcast Episode 2 – Jennifer Bond on Refugee Resettlement and Ensuring that Legislation is Charter Compliant
Jennifer Bond joins Peter Edelmann and Steven Meurrens to discuss refugee resettlement and ensuring that legislation is Charter compliant. Jennifer Bond is a professor at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law, and is also a Special Advisor to Minister of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship. Jennifer sat on the founding national executive of the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and is founder and current co-director of the University of Ottawa’s Refugee Assistance Project, a multi-year, national initiative aimed at mitigating and researching the access to justice implications of Canada’s new refugee legislation. She is also the Faculty Coordinator of the University of Ottawa’s Refugee Hub, supervisor of the Refugee Law Research Team, and a member of the Public Law Group. Her e-mail is jennifer.bond@uottawa.ca 00:26 – 21:31- We discuss international refugee resettlement law. Specific topics include whether countries are obligated to resettle refugees, Canada’s commitment to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees, and the role private sponsorship programs in the global refugee resettlement effort. Jennifer also explained the security screening that Canada undertakes when it resettles refugees, and how this security process compares to Canada’s other immigration streams. Finally, we asked Jennifer for her take on what we discussed last week, which is whether … Read More
Can the Federal Court Order Continued Detention
The Federal Court in Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Lunyamila has certified the following question of general importance: Does the Federal Court have jurisdiction to usurp the jurisdiction of the Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada to order the release of the detainee pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27, by ordering that the detainee shall remain in detention until further Court order? The timeline giving rise to the question was as follows: 5 January 2016 Mr. Lunyamila is ordered released from detention. The very same day the Minister applied for leave and judicial review under docket number IMM-63-16 and obtained an interim stay from Madam Justice Simpson. 8 January 2016 Mr. Justice Shore extended the interim stay to 19 January as a transcript of the hearing was not yet available. 20 January 2016 Mr. Justice Shore granted an interlocutory stay. While he noted that there would be another 30-day review upcoming and that the case might possibly be heard on an expedited basis he stayed the release “until the application for leave and judicial review is determined on the merits.” 2 February 2016 Mr. Lunyamila was again ordered released … Read More
Borderlines Podcast Episode 1 – Peter Edelmann, Deanna Okun-Nachoff, Steven Meurrens
Peter Edelmman, Deanna Okun-Nachoff, and myself have started the Borderlines podcast. The goal of the podcast is to provide a forum for the discussion of immigration law and policy. We are currently creating a website and social media channels. In the meantime, our first episode is available on Soundcloud. In this introductory episode the three of us discuss recent developments in Canadian immigration law, as well as some recent news items and a specific case. 00:30 – 8:39 – We discuss how immigration policy in general has changed under the Liberal government, with a specific emphasis on the Liberal’s repealing the portions of Bill C-24 which revoked the Canadian citizenship of certain individuals convicted of certain offences related to national security. 8:39 – 19:03 – The conversation shifts to Donald Trump, BREXIT, and whether Canada under the Liberal government is bucking an international trend towards increased protectionism. 19:03 – 25:06 – In discussing immigration policy under the new Liberal government, we note that unlike under the Conservatives, where Jason Kenney seemed to be directly or indirectly responsible for all government departments related to immigration law, the Liberals are providing autonomy to the Ministers of each Ministry, and what impact that this may have. 25:06 … Read More
War Deserters, Refugee Status and H&C
Being a war deserter does not in of itself mean that either a refugee claim or an application for permanent residency based on humanitarian & compassionate (“H&C“) grounds will succeed. Hinzman On July 6, 2010,the Federal Court of Appeal (the “FCA“) released its decision in Hinzman v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FCA 177 (“Hinzman“) Hinzman involved an American soldier who for moral and religious beliefs was against “all participation in war.” In 2004, upon learning that his unit would be deployed to Iraq, Mr. Hinzman fled the United States for Canada. He was AWOL from the US army since his arrival in Canada. He originally claimed refugee status, a claim which was unsuccessful. Mr. Hinzman then filed a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (“PRRA“) and an application for permanent residence based on H&C grounds. A Citizenship and Immigration Canada officer (the “Officer“) rejected the PRRA. She found that: [t]he possibility of prosecution under a law of general application is not, in and of itself, sufficient evidence that an applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution. The PRRA application is not an avenue to circumvent lawful and legitimate prosecutions commenced by a democratic country. Mr. Hinzman did not seek leave to apply for judicial … Read More
The Constitutionality of the PRRA Bar
The Federal Court has certified numerous questions regarding the constitutionality of s. 112(2)(b.1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which in essence provides that a person may not apply for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (“PRRA”) if they were previously a refugee claimant until 12 months have passed since their refugee hearing, or 36 months in the case of people from designated countries of origin. In Peter v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2014 FC 1073, Justice Annis certified the following two questions: Does the prohibition contained in section 112(2)(b.1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act against bringing a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment application until 12 months have passed since the claim for refugee protection was last rejected infringe section 7 of the Charter? If not, does the present removals process, employed within 12 months of a refugee claim being last rejected, when determining whether to defer removal at the request of an unsuccessful refugee claimant for the purpose of permitting a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment application to be advanced, infringe section 7 of the Charter? In Atawnah v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2015 FC 774, Madam Justice Mactavish certified the following additional question: Does the prohibition contained in section 112(2)(b.1) of … Read More