A new Canadian holds a flag at a citizenship ceremony on Parliament Hill in April, 2019.Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press
A flagship bill that would tighten Canada’s immigration and asylum rules should be gutted, with key sections removed to address concerns regarding human rights and privacy, a Senate committee has recommended.
The Senate committee on social affairs, science and technology has been studying Bill C-12 and hearing from experts. In a new report, it expressed fears that parts of the proposed legislation would lead to an “overreach of executive powers” and have a disproportionate impact on women and members of the LGBTQ community.
The Senate committee called for the deletion of parts 5 to 8 of the bill and, failing that, for substantial amendments including to sections tightening up Canada’s asylum system.
The Senate committee on public safety, which has also been examining Bill C-12, reviewed the proposed legislation in detail on Monday and discussed amendments after considering the social affairs committee’s recommendations.
Immigration Minister defends proposed changes to asylum rules through border bill
Of particular concern to the social affairs committee was part 8, which would prevent asylum seekers who have been in Canada for more than a year from having claims for refugee protection heard by the independent Immigration and Refugee Board.
The purpose of the rule, according to Immigration Department officials who addressed senators, is to prevent potential misuse of the system, such as by international students who claim asylum because they want to remain in Canada.
But the Senate Social Affairs committee report warned that the change could mean that someone who visited Canada as a baby for a day and later returned at age 10 could be deemed ineligible to be heard at the independent tribunal.
Senator Suze Youance said in an email that “the one-year clause may cause prejudice to children,” adding that “parents’ actions should not limit the future rights of their children.”
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada in a written submission to the committee said that unaccompanied minors should be an exception to the one-year rule “given their lack of legal guardianship.”
The bill, which has already been debated in the Commons, would also tighten the rules for people who enter the country outside Canada’s ports of entry to claim asylum. Under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, people who cross the border but stay undetected for 14 days have the right to make a refugee claim. They would not, unlike most asylum seekers who first arrive in the U.S., automatically be sent back to the United States.
The 14-day rule has been sharply criticized by Bloc Québécois MPs who say it has been abused by people who enter Quebec illegally.
The Senate social affairs committee also raised concerns that the bill would curb the right for asylum seekers to have their claims heard at the Immigration and Refugee Board.
Editorial: Ottawa places a sensible limit on the right to claim asylum
Foreign nationals facing deportation would still be able to ask for an assessment of risk by an Immigration Department official before being returned to their home countries. This could lead to them being deemed eligible to stay here as refugees.
But expert witnesses had told senators that the risk assessment would not be an adequate alternative to a full IRB hearing.
The hard-hitting committee report also expressed concern that the bill would boost information-sharing powers between federal departments, provinces, territories and foreign entities, and could jeopardize confidentiality and even affect people’s safety.
“Individuals from the 2SLGBTQI+ community, gender diverse organizations, women and frontline service providers expressed significant concerns about confidentiality, victimization, safety and increased vulnerability if personal information is disclosed,” the Senate committee report said.
Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab, when she addressed the committee, said that the sharing of information was designed to streamline and speed up administrative work – for example, so applicants would not have to file the same information multiple times.
The committee warned that part of the bill allowing the cancellation of immigration documents en masse – including permanent resident visas and permanent residence cards – risked “discriminatory group-based decisions by future governments.”
Ms. Metlege Diab and departmental officials had told senators that the measures were designed to address administrative errors and fraud, plus issues of public health and safety or national security.
But the report said witnesses had drawn parallels with orders used against Japanese immigrants and Japanese Canadians, labour organizers and Jewish people fleeing Nazi Germany during the first half of the 20th century.
At the public safety Senate committee on Monday Senator Mohammad Al Zaibak raised fears about the potential future use of discretionary executive powers in the bill, saying national security and public safety were broad terms that could be abused. He suggested that the committee accept its sister Social Affairs committee’s recommendations. He also moved a number of amendments, including one to remove the Immigration Department’s power to share information with a foreign entity. But this amendment was not carried.
Gauri Sreenivasan, co-executive director at the non-profit Canadian Council for Refugees (policy and advocacy), welcomed the recommendation to remove parts 5 to 8 of Bill C-12.
“These harmful provisions would undermine Canada’s immigration and refugee system, weaken our commitment to human rights, and erode protections for women and LGBTQIA+ people, moving us towards a U.S. Trump-style treatment of refugees and migrants that has no place in this country,” she said in an email.
Isabelle Dubois, a spokesperson for IRCC, said the department is aware of the Senate social affairs committee’s report.