scholarly journals Doubly flawed: Canada's refugee determination system in a post 9/11 era

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra-Marie Virgili
Keyword(s):  
Country Of Origin ◽  
International Community ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Determination System ◽  
Appeals Process

Canada’s refugee determination system not only remains vulnerable to terrorist exploitation but also fails to assist legitimate refugees in a post 9/11 era. Through conducting an analysis of the Immigration Act, this paper exemplifies how, historically, Canada has had difficulty in regulating refugee migration into the country. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act was implemented as a means of overhauling the Immigration Act, making for a more secure Canada. Although this newer legislation is successful in maintaining the rights of refugees, especially with the verdict of Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, it still lacks numerous safeguards. The lack of an adequate detainment policy, manifestly unfounded policy, the designated country of origin policy, the appeals process, and delayed deportation of foreign nationals leaves the system vulnerable to abuse by terrorists. Ultimately, Canada has become a potential base for terrorists who have access to the entire international community within the safety of Canadian borders.

scholarly journals Doubly flawed: Canada's refugee determination system in a post 9/11 era

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra-Marie Virgili
Keyword(s):  
Country Of Origin ◽  
International Community ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Determination System ◽  
Appeals Process

Canada’s refugee determination system not only remains vulnerable to terrorist exploitation but also fails to assist legitimate refugees in a post 9/11 era. Through conducting an analysis of the Immigration Act, this paper exemplifies how, historically, Canada has had difficulty in regulating refugee migration into the country. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act was implemented as a means of overhauling the Immigration Act, making for a more secure Canada. Although this newer legislation is successful in maintaining the rights of refugees, especially with the verdict of Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, it still lacks numerous safeguards. The lack of an adequate detainment policy, manifestly unfounded policy, the designated country of origin policy, the appeals process, and delayed deportation of foreign nationals leaves the system vulnerable to abuse by terrorists. Ultimately, Canada has become a potential base for terrorists who have access to the entire international community within the safety of Canadian borders.

scholarly journals Alternative Fact? More Democratic States Are More Likely to Provide Refugee Protection

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Perryman
Keyword(s):  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Protective Mechanisms ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Determination Process ◽  
Individualized Approach ◽  
Refugee Claimant ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
State Protection

Democracy is explicitly engaged in two aspects of the Canadian refugee determination process: state protection findings and Designated Country of Origin determinations. Democracy is also implicitly engaged in the selection of countries as so-called “safe countries.” This article reviews the literature on measuring the level of democracy in a given state, and the empirical evidence linking this level to a state’s willingness and ability to provide adequate protection to its citizens. The article argues that the Federal Court of Appeal was misguided in taking judicial notice of a correlation between the level of democracy in a given state and its ability to provide state protection. The article also reviews and questions the use of “democratic governance” as a factor in Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s Designated Country of Origin regime, as well as the implicit use of democracy in designating the United States as a “safe” country under the Safe Third Country Agreement. The article contends that the time has come to reconsider how democracy measurements are used in Canada’s refugee determination process, and advocates for an individualized approach to state protection determinations: one that eschews the alternative fact presumption of a connection between democracy and protection, and instead focuses on the protective mechanisms available to a refugee claimant based on their unique circumstances.

scholarly journals Planning for the Return of Separated Children Seeking Asylum: An Inter-Country Social Service Perspective

Refuge ◽  
2002 ◽  
pp. 68-72
Author(s):  
Sarah Crowe
Keyword(s):  
Social Service ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
International Community ◽  
Local Authorities ◽  
Governmental Agencies ◽  
Family Home ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Service Perspective ◽  
International Social

A variety of circumstances contribute to an increasingly large number of minors who leave family, home, and country to seek asylum on foreign soil. They present special challenges to state and local authorities, to relevant non-governmental agencies, and to the international community. This paper considers the planning needs for these minors for whom asylum is denied and for whom return to country of origin needs to be arranged. The paper highlights the need for a social service perspective, such as provided by International Social Service, to be included in the planning process.

scholarly journals Promoting Protection: Multilateral Efforts to Enhance Refugee Protection and the Search for Durable Solutions

Refuge ◽  
2004 ◽  
pp. 18-23
Author(s):  
Elissa Golberg ◽  
Bruce Scoffield
Keyword(s):  
International Community ◽  
The State ◽  
Concerted Effort ◽  
Population Movements ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Quality Of Protection ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
The Status ◽  
Durable Solutions

Many commentators have expressed concern about the state of the international refugee regime, including perceived deficiencies in how States have addressed issues related to access to asylum and the differentiated quality of protection offered among countries. Importantly, however, the last three years have seen a concerted effort by the international community to reinvigorate debate over practical approaches to refugee protection and the need to identify solutions for refugees in protracted refugee situations. This process has resulted in a frank exchange of views among a broad range of States, NGOs, and academics about the challenges and opportunities presented by refugee and other population flows. It has led to a reaffirmation of the centrality of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, and a recognition that the development of new tools, strategies, and mechanisms is warranted if the international community is going to respond effectively to contemporary population movements. Canada has been at the forefront in these international discussions, promoting an agenda aimed at securing more holistic responses to refugee protection and using creative approaches to resolve outstanding refugee caseloads. A key challenge will be to sustain the momentum and focus on practical efforts geared towards securing the ultimate goal of refugee protection – finding durable solutions.

scholarly journals Canada's Refugee Status Determination System and the International Norm of Independence

Refuge ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 79-102
Author(s):  
Gerald P. Heckman
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Norm ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Canadian Immigration ◽  
Determination System ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights

Refugee protection decisions engage migrants’ fundamental life, liberty, and security of the person interests. As a result, refugee protection claimants enjoy institutional and procedural rights under conventional international law. These include the right to a fair adjudication of their protection claims by an independent tribunal. To be independent, a tribunal must meet the formal guarantees of security of tenure, financial security, and administrative independence and must actually be independent, in appearance and practice, from the executive and legislature, particularly in the appointments process. Refugee protection decisions must be made by first instance adjudicative bodies that either fully comply with the requirements of tribunal independence or whose decisions are subject to subsequent review by a tribunal that meets these requirements and has sufficient jurisdiction over the merits of the dispute. The Canadian refugee protection system fails, in certain respects, to meet international standards of independence. The Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board’s Refugee Protection Division enjoys statutory, objective badges of independence and appears to operate independently of the executive. However, the independence of Canadian officials engaged in eligibility determinations and in pre-removal risk assessments is very much in question because they have a closer relationship to executive law enforcement functions.

scholarly journals Canada - A Long Way To Go: The Designated Country of Origin Policy and Refugee Protection

2021 ◽  
pp. 13-16
Author(s):  
Rejean Ghanem
Keyword(s):  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Political Response ◽  
Determination Process ◽  
The Government ◽  
Government Of Canada

The Designated Country of Origin (DCO) policy was a political response to unwanted migration in Canada. Adapted from Europe, Harper took a liking to the EU’s SCO policy after Canada received a large influx of Middle Eastern and Balkan refugees seeking asylum. He adapted it in Canada, renaming it Designated Country of Origin (DCO). Under the DCO, the government of Canada would decide if a refugee's country of origin was dangerous enough to be considered for asylum. If the asylum seekers country is determined as safe, that person would be disregarded and sent back to their country of origin. Many refugees who had already settled in Canada had their files reopened and were told to return to their country of origin. The DCO policy became an integral part of the refugee status determination process in Canada to which some regarded as faulty, inefficient, and unjust. In 2019, the SCO was deemed unconstitutional and violated The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, wanted to create an asylum system that was considered fair and efficient. While it is important for an asylum seeker to prove they are truthful about the facts of their case, the DCO policy represents a climate of hostility towards migrants in Canada. In this piece, it will be argued that the DCO policy is a discriminatory migration tool used to “weed out” what the government deems as fake migrants. This policy could deny international protection to those who are genuinely in need. The DCO proves that the nation has a misleading reputation of being welcoming to all who come. The DCO threatened the human rights of asylum seekers who sought refuge in Canada. 

Źródła do historii działalności społeczności międzynarodowej wobec uchodźców i ludności przemieszczonej z Polski (do 1951 r.)

2021 ◽  
pp. 157-166
Author(s):  
Paweł Sękowski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
International Community ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World War ◽  
National Group ◽  
History Of ◽  
Displaced People ◽  
Polish Jews ◽  
Second World

The aim of this text is to draw attention to the most important sources for the history of refugees and displaced people (the so-called DPs) from Poland in the first years after the Second World War, created in connection with the activities and aid action of the international community towards these categories of Poles (including Polish Jews). The framework review of the sources shows that there are many archives, including many materials, relating to a total of over a million Polish citizens who found themselves outside their country of origin as a result of hostilities or in the first years after the war. These sources testify to the fact that the international community did not forget about Poles when they were in need and constituted the most numerous national group among all DPs and refugees in Europe, during the functioning of the international organizations UNRRA (1943–1947) and IRO (1947–1951). Finally, many of these materials make very valuable sources for genealogical research.

What Happens to the Acquitted?

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 663-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
KEVIN JON HELLER
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
International Community ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Family Reunion ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Safe House ◽  
Short Essay

AbstractAccording to the ICTR, Emmanuel Bagambiki is an innocent man. The trial chamber and the Appeals Chamber have each unanimously acquitted the former Prefect of Cyangugu of crimes relating to Rwanda's horrific 1994 genocide. And on 19 July 2007 Bagambiki was reunited with his wife in children in Belgium, having been granted asylum a few days earlier. It is tempting to conclude that justice has been done in Bagambiki's case. That conclusion, however, would be too facile: Bagambiki was acquitted in February 2006, nearly 18 months before his family reunion. In the interim he lived in a safe house in Arusha paid for by the United Nations, wanted by Rwanda for trial on related charges and unable to convince Belgium that he posed no danger to its peace and security. Bagambiki, moreover, is one of the lucky ones: the nightmare of being free but having nowhere to go continues for two of his acquitted roommates in the safe house, Andre Ntagerura and Andre Rwamakuba, Rwanda's Minister of Transport and former Minister of Education respectively. Bagambiki's ordeal and Rwamakuba and Ntagerura's ongoing plight illustrate one of the basic problems facing international criminal tribunals: what to do with the acquitted. An acquitted defendant normally has two options: return to his country of origin, or find a third country that will grant him asylum. Both options, however, have been problematic for defendants acquitted by the ICTR and are likely to prove equally problematic for defendants who may be acquitted in the future by the ICC. This short essay explains why – and identifies what the international community should do about it.

scholarly journals Bill C-31: Limited Access to Refugee Determination and Protection

Refuge ◽  
2001 ◽  
pp. 55-61
Author(s):  
Michael Bossin
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Limited Access ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Claimants ◽  
Determination System ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Assessment Procedures ◽  
New System

This article deals with the effect of the proposed Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Bill C-31) on access to Canada’s refugee determination system and its pre-removal risk-assessment procedures. The author examines public statements about government plans for increased overseas interdiction of refugee claimants, provisions that expand the definition of persons ineligible to have their claims heard by the Immigration and Refugee Board (particularly those concerning “serious criminality”), and the proposed new system for pre-removal risk assessment. His conclusion is that, should these proposals come into effect, fewer people will have access to refugee and other protection in Canada.

scholarly journals Refugee Determination Complexity

Refuge ◽  
2001 ◽  
pp. 48-54
Author(s):  
David Matas
Keyword(s):  
Internal Consistency ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
System A ◽  
The World ◽  
Determination System

Refugee determination systems are complex and unfair. This combination is surprising. Why has government after government in Canada and around the world generated refugee determination systems that are both complex and unfair? The answer is that governments intrude into systems that would otherwise be both simple and fair, in order to assert control. They assert control in order to achieve other, non-refugee protection objectives. These nonrefugee protection objectives are inappropriate for the design of a refugee determination system. A refugee determination system should be devised with four objectives in mind: fairness, internal consistency, simplicity, and compliance with international standards. The article examines Bill C-31 and makes recommendations for its improvement with these objectives in mind.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document