Canada can’t strip your citizenship without a trial, court rules – VICE News

2017/05/11 Leave a comment

Good ruling. Senate review of C-6 included restoration of procedural protections in case of revocation for fraud or misrepresentation (along with two other amendments) and still no sign from the government whether they intend to accept the one or more of the amendments:

A landmark ruling from the Federal Court means that Ottawa will no longer be able to strip Canadians of their

A landmark ruling from the Federal Court means that Ottawa will no longer be able to strip Canadians of their citizenship without a hearing.

In ruling on the case of a group of dual citizens who had their citizenship nullified because the Canadian government believed they obtained it through fraudulent means, the court found the government’s revocation powers unconstitutional.

Under the Citizenship Act, thanks to changes brought in by the previous government, the minister of immigration could revoke the Canadian citizenship of any dual resident who, they believe, obtained it through fraud or misrepresentation, or who has been convicted of a terrorist offence.

It was at the government’s discretion whether or not there would be a trial on the matter. Thanks to those streamlined rules, revocation could take place after merely sending a letter to the person affected.

Today, the court ruled that such a process ran afoul of the Bill of Rights, a rarely-used piece of the constitution and a precursor to the more widely-known Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Those facing citizenship revocation “should be afforded an oral hearing before a court,” Justice Jocelyne Gagné wrote, adding that they deserve to be afforded “an opportunity to have their special circumstances considered when such circumstances exist.”

Today’s ruling means that all current citizenship revocation cases will be put on hold.

In some ways, these changes were inevitable.

Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government pushed forward legislation in early 2016 to make similar changes to the Citizenship Act, removing the government’s ability to strip the citizenship of terrorists, and to afford the right to a trial to all those facing revocation. That legislation has been making its way through Parliament for more than a year, and was most recently amended by the Senate earlier this month — meaning it now heads back to the House of Commons for another vote.

Despite that, the Canadian government has nevertheless pushed forward to strip the citizenship of an array of people across the country. The current Liberal government, who campaigned on repealing Harper’s changes, has revoked more citizenships in a year than the previous government did in seven years.

Previously, under both the Trudeau and Harper governments, the government has moved to take away citizenship from Canadians who obtained their citizenship as children.

Joel Sandaluk, a Toronto immigration lawyer, represents a client who got notice that Ottawa was moving to take away his citizenship as recently as last month.

“It’s always been kind of a mystery as to why the government was still pursuing revocation,” Sandaluk says, noting that the government was pursuing legislation to make that very change, and it knew that this case was to be decided imminently.

“It’s either very canny politics or it just kind of feels a little bit manipulative,” he says.

It’s quite possible that the Liberals will need to go back to their own legislation, which is currently making its way through the Senate, to make sure it complies with today’s ruling, Sandaluk says. That means Ottawa likely won’t bother appealing the decision.

Source: Canada can’t strip your citizenship without a trial, court rules – VICE News

Filed under Citizenship, Revocation Tagged with ,

Conference Board Immigration Summit: My Citizenship Presentation

2017/05/10 Leave a comment

For those interested, this is the latest version of my citizenship deck, being delivered later today at the Conference Board Immigration Summit. A mix of 2016 and 2015 data as some of the specialized datasets have not yet been updated by IRCC.

Filed under Citizenship, Multiculturalism Tagged with

Minister Hussen on citizenship #Immigration150 conference

2017/05/10 2 Comments

Interesting insight at yesterday’s Conference Board of Canada Immigration Summit during the session with IRCC Minister Hussen.

In response to a broad question regarding multiculturalism from the moderator, CBoC Senior VP Craig Alexander, the Minister responded that the world has two choices: give into fear or make a “deliberate choice” to be open to people, skills and talent. This was not only “morally right” but also beneficial to economic development.

The Minister noted that when questioned in other countries about diversity, he replied that Canadian citizenship is based upon shared values, not on ethnicity, cultural origin or religion as in many other countries.

Canada’s ability to welcome all, whatever their origins, and integrate them well, is key to our success.

He noted that as Canadians, “we all assume that when people come as immigrants, they will become citizens” and that was not the case in many other countries.

He went on to emphasized that not becoming a citizen affects the ability to integrate and never becoming part of society and never able to contribute to their full potential. Canada does not that problem. Again, we assume that all immigrants will become Canadian.

Canada is unique in the regard. We take this for granted. It is our history of immigration that makes us open to immigration. By welcoming and including everyone, Canada can realize the potential of all and use the full resources of its population.

Powerful words, eloquently stated.

However, someone at IRCC should point out to him the recent data that show a dramatic drop citizenship applications – from 198,000 in 2014 to 92,000 in 2016 – and the increasing gap between new permanent residents and new citizens (296,000 compared to 148,000 in 2016, following the elimination of the backlog in 2014-15).

The key chart captures the trends.

So rather than assuming the immigrant-to-citizen path, we need to recognize the impact of previous changes and take steps to address this decline, starting with reviewing the steep fees as I have noted previously (and repeatedly).

 

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

Liberal government to debate Senate amendments to long-delayed citizenship bill

2017/05/05 4 Comments

It will be interesting to see whether the Liberal government accepts all three amendments and how quickly the House will deal with C-6.

I suspect that the government may accept the procedural protections amendment in the case of revocation for fraud and right of minors to apply independently of their parents or guardians, while rejecting the exemption for testing change to 60 from 55.

Personally, I favour accepting all three in the interests of getting C-6 implemented quickly. The age exemption issue – a difference of five years – has been largely an “evidence-free” zone:

While I expect the Liberal government to reject The Liberals’ long-delayed citizenship bill is finally moving ahead almost a year after the House of Commons passed it, but it’s not law yet.

The Senate voted Wednesday in favour of the bill that will revoke a Conservative policy to remove Canadian citizenship from dual citizens convicted of serious crimes such as terrorism and treason.

Three amendments were introduced, however, which means the bill gets sent back to the House of Commons, where Liberals will decide whether to accept the changes or not. If they don’t, it goes back to the Senate again. Government House leader Bardish Chagger’s office said Wednesday amendments will be brought to the floor for debate “in due course.”

The new law will also require prospective citizens to be in the country for three out of five years before their application, a change from the four out of six years that are currently required. Applicants will no longer need to declare an intent to reside in Canada.

Bill C-6, which fulfills a major election promise to repeal elements of Conservative legislation, has trudged slowly through the upper chamber since last June. After a spurt of opposition delay tactics, senators had made a backroom deal to have a final vote by Wednesday.

The bill’s sponsor, independent Sen. Ratna Omidvar, championed in particular an amendment, introduced by independent Sen. Elaine McCoy, that improves due process for people who are facing revocation of their citizenship due to fraud or misrepresentation.

After the Conservatives’ Bill C-24, revocation processes were streamlined such that people weren’t automatically granted a right to defend themselves if their citizenship was about to be taken away. The Liberal Bill C-6 didn’t reverse this change.

“Without this amendment,” said a statement from Omidvar’s office, “Canadians face an unjust administrative process and fewer safeguards than anyone wishing to challenge a parking ticket.”

Previous immigration minister John McCallum had told senators Liberals would “welcome” an amendment addressing this, but new minister Ahmed Hussen has not indicated support one way or the other.

Two other amendments were adopted. For older applicants, the law currently requires language proficiency in English or French up to the age of 64. The Liberal law proposed lowering this to 55, but senators decided to adopt Conservative Sen. Diane Griffin’s suggestion of a middle ground, setting it at age 60 instead. Another amendment, from Conservative Sen. Victor Oh, seeks to ensure minors can apply for citizenship separate from parents or guardians.

With physician-assisted dying legislation last summer, the House of Commons addressed Senate amendments right away (with the government rejecting most of them). On the other hand, the Senate is still waiting for the House of Commons to accept or reject an amendment on the RCMP union bill, C-7, which it adopted last June.

Source: Liberal government to debate Senate amendments to long-delayed citizenship bill | National Post

Filed under C-6, Citizenship

Trudeau devalues citizenship: Gordon Chong

2017/05/01 3 Comments

Over the top criticism and fear-mongering by Gordon Chong:

When Paul Martin Sr. introduced the bill in the House of Commons that became the Canadian Citizenship Act on Jan. 1, 1947, he said: “For the national unity of Canada and for the future and greatness of the country, it is felt to be of the utmost importance that all of us, new Canadians or old, … have a consciousness of a common purpose and common interests as Canadians, that all of us are able to say with pride and with meaning ‘I am a Canadian citizen.’”

Despite new acts in 1977 and 2002, as well as more recent legislation, those foundational words should be forever etched in our minds.

Subsequent revisions have vacillated between weakening and strengthening the requirements for granting citizenship.

The Harper Conservatives strengthened the value of Canadian citizenship in 2014 by increasing residency and language requirements with Bill C-24, the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act.

Applicants aged 14 to 64 were required to meet language and knowledge tests.

Permanent residents also had to have lived in Canada for four out of the six previous years prior to applying for citizenship.

The Liberals’ Bill C-6, an Act to Amend the Citizenship Act, proposes to reduce knowledge and language requirements (they only affect applicants aged 18 to 54) and reduce residency requirements to three of the previous five years.

Bill C-6 also proposes to repeal the right to revoke Canadian citizenship of criminals such as those convicted of terrorism.

As a citizenship court judge for several years in the ’90s, I can assure doubters that acquiring citizenship was relatively easy, especially for seniors over 65 with a translator.

Skilled professional translators have difficulty capturing the nuances between languages. It is not uncommon, for example, to see significant errors and omissions in the Chinese-language media when reporters rush to meet deadlines.

Obviously, without a comprehensive grasp of English, it is impossible to meaningfully participate in Canadian life.

Meanwhile, our federal government is frivolously throwing open our doors to potential terrorists and providing fertile conditions for the cultivation of home-grown terrorists by indirectly subsidizing the self-segregation and ghettoization of newcomers, further balkanizing Canada.

The cavalier Trudeau Liberals, peddling their snake oil political potions, are nothing more than pale, itinerant imitations of the Liberal giants of Canada’s past, shamefully repudiating their predecessors for immediate, short-term gratification.

These privileged high-flying Liberal salesmen with colossal carbon footprints should be summarily fired, solely for seriously devaluing Canadian citizenship!

Source: Trudeau devalues citizenship | CHONG | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun

Filed under C-24, C-6, Citizenship Tagged with

New Zealand PM Bill English hits out at ‘disappointing’ Australian citizenship changes – Updated

2017/04/26 Leave a comment

Collateral damage?

New Zealand Prime Minister Bill English has criticised the Turnbull government’s newly unveiled citizenship changes, expressing concern that tens of thousands of New Zealanders would now have to wait years longer to become Australian citizens.

The “special relationship” between the two countries needed to be maintained, Mr English said, adding that government officials were seeking to understand the impact of the changes on a streamlined pathway to citizenship unveiled last year for New Zealanders living in Australia.

Vandals target a war memorial on the eve of Anzac day, angering and disgusting locals in Warrandyte.

There is concern among Kiwis that the changed citizenship conditions – specifically the longer, four-year waiting period before being eligible – undermine the pathway finalised last year by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and former prime minister John Key.

“I wouldn’t agree it completely undermines it just because the deal was put in place and there is a path to citizenship and that wasn’t there before Prime Minister Turnbull agreed to put it in place, but it is disappointing for them – for the Kiwis [in Australia] and for ourselves – that it looks like it will take longer,” Mr English said in a press conference on Monday.

“We understand that Australia has a strong focus on its border control and citizenship. New Zealanders are caught up in that and we want to make sure we can maintain the ongoing special relationship and improved conditions and better deals for Kiwis who are in Australia.”

The pathway arrangement announced in February 2016 and coming into effect in July 2017 allows New Zealanders holding special category visas to secure permanent residency after five years in Australia earning $53,000 annually. They would have been able to attain citizenship a year later.

Source: New Zealand PM Bill English hits out at ‘disappointing’ Australian citizenship changes

Appears that PM Turnbull has overturned the changes applying to New Zealanders living in Australia:

Malcolm Turnbull has assured his New Zealand counterpart that the recently announced citizenship changes will not undermine the fast-tracking of Kiwi applications.

The New Zealand prime minister, Bill English, had previously expressed disappointment about the changes, saying he was not forewarned of the Australian government’s plan, which appeared to undermine an agreement between the two nations made last year.

That agreement meant New Zealanders could apply for citizenship after one year of permanent residence, provided they arrived in Australia between 2001 and 2016, and earned more than A$53,000 a year for five consecutive years.

But English’s office released a statement on Friday, saying the New Zealand prime minister been assured otherwise by Turnbull.

A spokesman for English said he had been assured the changes would not affect New Zealand citizens who had moved to Australia between February 2001 and 2016.

“Prime minister Turnbull confirmed that the pathway to citizenship for eligible New Zealanders, announced in February 2016, has not been changed,” the spokesman said. “It remains in place and on track, and is separate from the citizenship changes which Australia announced last week.

“Prime minister English has thanked prime minister Turnbull for this confirmation.”

English’s office confirmed this meant those eligible New Zealand citizens would not need to wait four years before qualifying for citizenship.

Source: Malcolm Turnbull clarifies Dutton ruling on New Zealanders’ citizenship fears

 

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

There is one silver lining for Indians in Australia’s tough new citizenship rules: English skills — Quartz

2017/04/25 Leave a comment

One of the better analysis of the planned changes to Australia’s citizenship regime by Alex Reilly, of Adelaide Law School:

Australia already assesses who to allow in—and to whom to grant residency—before any issue of citizenship arises.

Permanent residents in Australia enjoy almost the full range of civil and political rights as citizens. They have access to the welfare system (after initial waiting periods), Medicare, and education. Citizens alone are able to vote, and they have a greater security of residence.

Citizenship is the last step on the path to full membership. By the time someone is applying for citizenship, they have already been in Australia for a minimum of four years, and have made a life here.

We should be encouraging permanent residents to take up citizenship and to commit fully to Australia. Citizenship, in this sense, is a positive mechanism for inclusion. The government’s focus on citizenship as a mechanism for exclusion in its rhetoric and some of the proposed changes is, therefore, counterproductive.

Source: There is one silver lining for Indians in Australia’s tough new citizenship rules: English skills — Quartz

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Terrorism concerns lead to changes at passport offices in bid to boost security

2017/04/25 Leave a comment

Prudent. But odd that focus is with respect to the receiving agent function at Service Canada centres, rather than the full service offices of Passport Canada, the responsibility of IRCC (but ATIP documents were from ESDC, not IRCC):

The federal government has been quietly making changes to passport offices in a bid to improve security and address concerns that the facilities could be easy targets for a terrorist attack.

Civil servants in passport and other government offices have for years faced bomb threats, and hostility from individuals who are disgruntled, drunk or suffering mental illnesses.

Internal government documents show that senior officials have more recently worried that someone with extremist views might see a passport office as prime target for an attack, particularly if the federal government revoked their passport privileges because they wanted to go abroad to join a terrorist group.

The briefing note to senior officials at Employment and Social Development Canada says the offices could now more easily become targets, or be collateral damage.

“ESDC Passport offices may be considered targets of symbolic value in future attacks,” reads part of the 2015 briefing note marked, “Canadian Eyes Only.”

The Canadian Press obtained a copy of the documents under the Access to Information Act.

Those concerns were stoked after two separate domestic terrorist attacks in October 2014.

In the first case, Martin Couture-Rouleau hit two soldiers with his car at a strip mall just outside St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que., killing Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, 53. Officials seized his passport that July after police prevented him from flying to Turkey.

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau killed Cpl. Nathan Cirillo at the National War Memorial in Ottawa before storming Parliament Hill. He had come to Ottawa from Vancouver after he ran into problems getting a Canadian passport so he could travel to Libya.

Both attackers were subsequently killed.

The second incident prompted ESDC officials to call in the Mounties to review threats for every passport office in the country. Assessments were also carried out to see what could be done to the physical configuration of spaces, or the layout of services, to better protect the workers inside the office.

The RCMP report from April 2015 concluded that the offices face terrorist and criminal threats, although nothing direct or immediate.

A spokesman for ESDC, which oversees the 151 Service Canada offices that issue passports, said the department has and continues to make changes at existing and soon-to-be-opened facilities in response to the assessments.

Along with physical changes to the offices to increase security there have been operational changes that federal officials hope will lower the risk of an attack. Among the measures was extending the passport renewal period to 10 years from five years and letting Canadians renew their passports online to reduce the number of people who had to go to an office.

Source: Terrorism concerns lead to changes at passport offices in bid to boost security – The Globe and Mail

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

IRCC Departmental Plan 2017-18 – Citizenship section ignores the main issue of declining naturalization

2017/04/24 Leave a comment

I have been holding off these comments on the IRCC Departmental Plan until the final 2016 citizenship statistics were released. The above chart now includes these showing a steady decline in applications:  198,000 in 2014 (about the historical norm), 130,000 in 2015 and 92,000 in 2016. The number of new citizens, reflecting the additional funding to clear up the backlog of some 300,000 applications, rose to 263,000 in 2014, then dropped somewhat to 235,000 in 2015, with a sharper drop to 148,000 in 2016.

With the number of permanent residents close to 300,000, over time this will mean fewer immigrants taking up citizenship, a major break with the immigrant-to-citizen model.

This “elephant in the room” is mentioned nowhere in the IRCC Departmental Plan (or Performance Report), nor is there any discussion of the societal risks of fewer immigrants taking up Canadian citizenship.

IRCC maintains a meaningless performance management standard: IRCC uses the benchmark of  the overall naturalization rate of all immigrants, no matter how long ago they came to Canada, rather than the more relevant number who have become citizens in the last 6 to 8 years.

Planned spending is $62 million, projected to remain flat for the next three years (three percent of departmental spending).

Priority: Diversity and attachment

The Department provides newcomers with access to Canadian citizenship and promotes the rights and responsibilities associated with Canadian citizenship, thus fostering a sense of belonging for newcomers and Canadians.

  • Provide support for proposed legislative changes to the Citizenship Act (Bill C-6) which seek modifications to provisions such as revocation as well as residency and language requirements for citizenship applicants.
  • Continue to promote citizenship awareness, including through Canada 150 celebrations, and update the citizenship study guide, Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship to be more reflective of Canada’s diversity.

Priority: Efficient processing

The Department aims to ensure that its screening processes are faster for clients and more effective for Canadians.

  • Expand the eligibility for the new Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA) with proposed expansion for certain travellers from Brazil, Bulgaria and Romania. As well, explore further opportunities to facilitate travel to Canada by lower-risk foreign nationals, such as the increased use of automation to make visitor screening faster, more secure and effective for both travellers and Canadians.
  • Implement innovative approaches to increase efficiencies and reduce processing times, including reducing the processing time for spousal applications by half, to 12 months. Improve the citizenship application process, enabling qualified permanent residents to obtain citizenship more quickly. The Department will also target citizenship application backlogs and develop tools to improve how work is distributed and handled across its service delivery network.

Program 3.2: Citizenship for Newcomers and All Canadians

The purpose of the Citizenship Program is to administer citizenship legislation and promote the rights and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship. IRCC administers the acquisition of Canadian citizenship by developing, implementing and applying legislation, regulations and policies that protect the integrity of Canadian citizenship and allow eligible applicants to be granted citizenship or be provided with a proof of citizenship. In addition, the program promotes citizenship, to both newcomers and the Canadian-born, through various events, materials and projects. Promotional activities focus on enhancing knowledge of Canada’s history, institutions and values, as well as fostering an understanding of the rights and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship.

Planning highlights

  • Implement changes to the Citizenship Act following Royal Assent of Bill C-6, including corresponding updates to the Citizenship Regulations.
  • Update the citizenship study guide, Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship, in support of Canada 150 celebrations.
  • Continue to collaborate with federal partners and national Indigenous organizations to explore options to respond to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommendations.

2017–2018 Departmental Plan

The 2015-16 IRCC Departmental Performance Report does not provide any meaningful reporting on citizenship but states:

The Department, through its regular performance reporting processes, has developed specific performance indicators to cover the Citizenship Program’s key outcome areas, including awareness of the responsibilities and privileges associated with Canadian citizenship; desire and successful uptake of Canadian citizenship by newcomers; the integrity of the Citizenship Program; and the value attached to Canadian citizenship. As data are not available at this time, results will be reported in the future.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Britons abroad for longer than 15 years denied vote in general election | The Guardian

2017/04/24 Leave a comment

While as I and Rob Vineberg have argued against indefinite voting rights (Canadian expats shouldn’t have unlimited voting rights), it is nevertheless somewhat amusing that the May government made this commitment, tabled legislation, and then failed to implement, perhaps fearing that most non-resident Britons, particularly those resident in the EU, oppose Brexit and thus likely may be less likely to vote Conservative:

Campaign groups accuse Tories of breaking promise made in October to scrap time limit

Up to 3 million Britons living overseas are to be denied a vote in the general election, the Cabinet Office has confirmed.

In a letter sent to the New Europeans campaign group on Friday, the Cabinet Office said that “unfortunately” British citizens who had lived abroad for longer than 15 years would not be entitled to vote on 8 June.

The letter has prompted a furious reaction from Britons living abroad, and in Europe in particular, with campaign groups accusing the Conservatives of breaking yet another promise.

Nathan Lappin of the constitution group in the Cabinet Office told New Europeans that “there is no sufficient time to change the relevant primary and secondary legislation to enfranchise all British expats, scrapping the 15-year time limit, ahead of the dissolution of parliament before the general election”.

“The people most affected by the referendum were not allowed to vote in it, simply because they exercised their right to live in another country,” said Dave Spokes, one of the founders of the support group Expat Citizen Rights in EU. “Now it seems they will miss out again as their government has repeatedly failed to honour repeated promises to repeal this unjust and unfair rule.

“These people spent their lives working in the UK and many still pay taxes there. It is quite disgraceful that any government can so disregard so many of its citizens.”

Jane Golding, a British lawyer living in Berlin and campaigner for the rights of Britons abroad, said the promise has been broken twice as it was in the Conservative manifesto in the 2015 general election and the Queen’s speech that followed.

“So that is twice we have been denied the right to vote and to participate in the democratic process when this had been promised on an issue, leaving the EU, that directly affects our personal and professional status,” she said.

Last October the government promised to scrap the current 15-year time limit as part of a bid to strengthen ties with emigrants following the decision to leave the EU.

The plans followed a court battle spearheaded by the second world war veteran Harry Shindler, who fought in the Battle of Anzio in Italy in 1944. The 95-year-old, who moved to Italy to be near his grandson in 1982, has been unable to vote in the UK since 1997 but cannot vote in Italy either.

As recently as February, the constitution minister Chris Skidmore assured Shindler and others the government was on track, telling them “their stake in our country must be respected”.

In a written answer on the topic to the New Europeans founder Roger Casale, Skidmore promised “this government will not deny them the opportunity to have their say in how the country is governed”. He also revealed that the government estimated “a further 3 million British citizens resident overseas will be enfranchised”.

Samia Badani, director of New Europeans, said the decision not to expedite legislation was devastating for Britons desperate to have a say on their own futures in Europe but it was not too late to get them on the electoral register. “The time for legislation is now. When there is a will, there is a way,” she said.

Badani said: “We are very disappointed – this is another broken promise. We have been campaigning for the removal of the 15-year rule – which is very arbitrary – for years. We were promised that at the next general election all UK citizens could vote, but it now looks like a double-whammy: they couldn’t vote in the referendum and now can’t vote in the next general election.”

Source: Britons abroad for longer than 15 years denied vote in general election | Politics | The Guardian

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →