Trudeau may change law to protect Monsef | Malcolm

2016/10/07 Leave a comment

Malcolm conveniently ignores that Minister McCallum during the spring committee hearings on C-6 committed to reviewing the revocation process in light of testimony regarding the lack of procedural protections in C-24 for those accused of fraud or misrepresentation: “less protection than for parking tickets.”

So while the Monsef case may have accelerated this review, it was already underway.

And calling C-6 “comprehensive changes” is incorrect. C-24, the 2014  changes of the Conservative government, were comprehensive; C-6 is a relatively surgical set of changes, significant to be sure, but limited in scope:

The Trudeau Liberals have spun themselves into a corner when it comes to Maryam Monsef.

It now looks as if Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is willing to change Canada’s citizenship and immigration laws to protect one of his own.

Monsef says her mother recently told her she was born in Iran, not Afghanistan, as she had previously been told.

If her immigration application, when she was a child, included false information about her birthplace, then it is possible her immigration application was fraudulent.

The penalty for providing false representation to immigration officials is steep.

In similar cases where a parent provided untrue information on behalf of a child, it has led to the stripping of citizenship and even deportation from Canada.

As I pointed out in my last column, the Trudeau government recently stripped citizenship from an Egyptian national who became a Canadian citizen at age eight.

In that case, the woman’s parents lied on her application, and therefore, as per Canadian law, she risks being deported.

But when it comes to their own star cabinet minister, Monsef, the Trudeau Liberals are scrambling to deal with the controversy.

On Tuesday, Immigration Minister John McCallum testified in front of a Senate committee discussing Bill C-6, the Trudeau government’s controversial citizenship bill.

Under pressure from Liberals in the Senate, McCallum suggested that his government would consider placing a moratorium on the practice of citizenship revocation.

How convenient.

“I will consider that moratorium. I won’t rule it out unconditionally,” McCallum told the Senate committee. “What I am saying is that we would welcome a reform to the system.”

The Trudeau government had no problem imposing this law during its first eleven months in office. None at all.

During the last session of Parliament, Trudeau and McCallum introduced comprehensive changes to Canada’s citizenship and immigration laws through Bill C-6.

On the issue of citizenship revocation, Bill C-6 halted the government’s ability to strip citizenship from convicted terrorists and those who commit treason against Canada.

As Trudeau said famously during the last election campaign, after all, “a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian.” Even if that Canadian is a foreign-born terrorist.

But when it came to cases of fraud and misrepresentation, no changes were made under Bill C-6.

Quite the opposite, in fact, as Trudeau said he supported citizenship revocation under these circumstances.

On the campaign trail last September, Trudeau less-famously said that, “revocation of citizenship can and should happen in situations of becoming a Canadian citizen under false pretences.”

At the time, this statement contradicted Trudeau’s own position that Canadian citizenship is an absolute and inalienable right.

Now, that contradiction is catching up on him.

Until the Monsef scandal surfaced, the Trudeau government had no problem in stripping citizenship away from those who committed fraud and those who lied on their applications.

They had no issue with the process of revocation — determined by the relevant cabinet minister and not through lengthy court proceedings.

They agreed with the law, and implemented it routinely.

But suddenly, this law threatens to damage the Trudeau government’s reputation and punish a Liberal insider.

And all of the sudden, they’re willing to change course.

The Trudeau government is now suggesting it would rather change Canada’s longstanding immigration law, ad hoc, than face the inconvenient fact that, based on the story she’s provided, Monsef’s immigration application may have been fraudulent.

Source: Trudeau may change law to protect Monsef | Malcolm | Columnists | Opinion | Toro

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

Theresa May criticized the term ‘citizen of the world.’ But half the world identifies that way. – The Washington Post

2016/10/06 Leave a comment

global-citizenInteresting poll showing the relative identity balance between local and global citizenship:

In defense of the Brexit decision she now must implement, British Prime Minister Theresa May said Sunday that no “divisive nationalists” would hold up the process of exiting the European Union, and she firmly asserted that all four of Britain’s constituent “nations” — England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland — would Brexit together.

But the Brexit decision was fueled in many ways by nationalist sentiments, centering on perceived threats to Britain’s sovereignty and many of its citizens’ desires to prevent the supposed dilution of their national identity by immigrants crossing the European Union’s open borders.

Just three days after her comment about “divisive nationalists,” at her Conservative Party’s annual conference, May espoused her own brand of nationalism — one that seems to encompass all of Britain, but excludes those who may feel as though they have multiple nationalities, or identities.

“Today, too many people in positions of power behave as though they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass on the street,” she said. “But if you believe you are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what citizenship means.”

As it turns out, about half of the people “down the road” or whom one might “pass on the street” identify with the very phrase May disparaged — being a “citizen of the world” or global citizen.

In an 18-nation survey conducted by GlobeScan in conjunction with the BBC World Service that was released just over a month ago, 47 percent of Britons said they somewhat or strongly agreed that they considered themselves more as global citizens than citizens of the United Kingdom.

That number is just slightly below the 51 percent of all respondents who felt the same way. Below is a look at how respondents from each of the 18 surveyed countries responded. It is worth noting that “urban-only” samples were used in Brazil, China, Indonesia and Kenya.

Source: Theresa May criticized the term ‘citizen of the world.’ But half the world identifies that way. – The Washington Post

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

India’s Debate on Citizenship Continues

2016/10/05 Leave a comment

Of interest:

The Indian Citizenship Act of 1955 outlined the ways in which individuals may acquire citizenship in India and specifically denies it to undocumented migrants. The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill of 2016 attempts to remedy this but does so peculiarly. It looks into granting Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan citizenship after 6 years of residence in India (as opposed to 11 years, as is the status quo) even without documentation. The Bill draft has been made available online and a Joint Parliamentary Commission with members of both parliamentary houses is examining it — and was open for comments until September 30.

Public discussion about the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill of 2016 follows two lines. First it has been criticized for delineating citizenship on purely religious lines. Although this is not new in a country like India, which was partitioned along religious lines, in this case the bill allows citizenship to undocumented migrants from most major Indian religious groups except for Muslims, at about half the duration currently required. In so many ways, this brings to mind the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) campaign promise of providing a ‘natural home’ for Hindus in India as this policy is mostly directed towards Hindus from these countries.After facing the kind of opposition that resulted in the deputation of the Joint Parliamentary Committee, government officials attempted to clarify accusations of religious discrimination. They discussed a plan to change the term “religious minorities” in the Bill to “discriminated religious minorities.” However that still does not encompass discriminated Islamic minorities like the Ahmadiyya populations in Pakistan, who will not qualify for Indian citizenship under the relaxed rules should they migrate.

Activists in New Delhi held a protest rally on September 30 to decry this Bill, calling it communally motivated. Activist Kavita Krishnan, for instance, declared that the government needed to remember that India was not, in fact, a Hindu state and could not therefore provide a right of return to populations. They also questioned the need for singling out these specific categories of people, ignoring the persecution of several other groups – like atheists within these nations or potential climate refugees.

Source: http://thediplomat.com/2016/10/indias-debate-on-citizenship-continues/

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

Tests d’immigration [citizenship] plus chers en français : le commissaire aux langues officielles blâme Ottawa

2016/10/04 Leave a comment

This should provoke some broader reflection within IRCC about the overall cost of citizenship and the related impact on the naturalization rate. Not just an issue of differential costs for francophones and anglophones:

Le commissaire aux langues officielles est catégorique : le gouvernement fédéral manque à son devoir et nuit peut-être même à l’immigration francophone en acceptant des tests de compétence linguistique en français plus chers et moins accessibles que les tests en anglais.

Après un an d’enquête, Graham Fraser présente un rapport préliminaire qui donne raison aux francophones qui s’étaient plaints de la différence de tarifs entre les tests en français et en anglais. Pour devenir résident permanent, il faut prouver qu’on maîtrise l’une des deux langues officielles, en réussissant, par exemple, un examen reconnu par Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada (IRCC).
Le problème, c’est que les évaluations en français coûtent souvent des centaines de dollars de plus.
Résultat : pour économiser, des immigrants francophones optent plutôt pour l’examen en anglais. Un choix déchirant pour certains.
Pourquoi cette différence de prix?
Les tests de français offerts au pays sont tous conçus et corrigés en France, soit par la Chambre de commerce et d’industrie de Paris ou par le Centre international d’études pédagogiques. Pour recevoir leur correction finale, les examens doivent être renvoyés outre-mer par la poste.
Autre coût : le salaire des examinateurs. Chaque candidat qui passe le test doit être examiné par deux personnes, ce qui n’est pas le cas pour l’un des tests d’anglais.
Même si les organisations désignées pour administrer les tests sont des tierces parties, insiste Graham Fraser, ces services doivent être « disponibles et de qualité égale » en français comme en anglais, en vertu de l’article 25 de la Loi sur les langues officielles.
IRCC n’a pris aucune mesure pour s’assurer que les candidats aient accès de manière égale aux services d’évaluation linguistique. L’égalité réelle comprend l’égalité d’accès, d’usage, de qualité et de statut.
En plus d’être plus chers, écrit le commissaire, les tests sont aussi plus difficile d’accès pour les francophones. Le Test d’évaluation de français (TEF) n’est d’ailleurs pas du tout offert à l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard, ni à Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, ni dans les territoires.

Graham Fraser cite en exemple le cas d’un francophone de Whitehorse, au Yukon, qui a dû se rendre à Vancouver, en Colombie-Britannique, pour passer son TEF. Une fois la partie écrite de son test complétée, il a dû attendre quatre jours sur place avant qu’on évalue ses compétences en compréhension orale.
Une fois le test complété, note Fraser, les francophones attendent souvent plus longtemps avant d’obtenir les résultats. Par exemple, en Colombie-Britannique et en Nouvelle-Écosse, « le délai d’attente [pour s’inscrire] pouvait respectivement atteindre trois et cinq mois. »
Le commissaire recommande au gouvernement fédéral « d’entreprendre immédiatement des démarches » pour mettre fin à cette situation qui dure depuis des années, et qui pourrait avoir des conséquences négatives sur l’accueil d’immigrants francophones et, ultimement, sur la vitalité du français au pays.

Source: http://ici.radio-canada.ca/regions/ontario/2016/09/27/001-tests-immigrants-plus-chers-francais-commissaire-fraser.shtml

Filed under Citizenship, Language Tagged with , ,

Monsef case brings calls to strengthen appeal rights for those facing citizenship revocation

2016/10/04 Leave a comment

More on citizenship revocation for fraud or misrepreasentation, provoked by Monsef and the upcoming Senate review of C-6:

Not having a connection to Iran is a good thing, according to Sen. Omidvar.

“Once you get Iranian citizenship, it’s with you for the rest of your life whether you want it or not,” said the Indian-born Senator, who is an internationally recognized expert on immigration, diversity and inclusion named to the Senate by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) earlier this year. “I was an Iranian citizen by marriage, and so when I went to Iran, the only way I could stay there was if I relinquished my passport from India and was issued an Iranian identity.”

Although she left Iran and came to Canada in 1981, and subsequently became a Canadian citizen, she would still be considered an Iranian citizen were she to return to Iran. “That is why I never want to go back,” Sen. Omidvar said in an interview.

Last week, she moved the second reading of C-6 and hopes the Senate will be able to amend the bill to provide “an avenue for an appeal or a hearing” for Canadians whose citizenship is being revoked based on misrepresentation or fraud.

Sen. Omidvar explained that in the case of Ms. Monsef—who at the age of 11 came to Canada with her widowed mother and two younger sisters as refugees—she and her siblings “would be held accountable” if her mother told Canadian immigration officials her children were born in Afghanistan and not Iran.

Under the current system, Ms. Monsef could get a letter from a Citizenship and Immigration Canada official stating that her Canadian citizenship was being revoked based on misrepresentation, and she would have 60 days to respond to the same official who sent the letter. Ms. Monsef could then seek leave to appeal to the Federal Court for a judicial review, but only after she lost her citizenship.

Even then, the court only grants leave on about 15 per cent of citizenship revocation cases, according to Toronto-based immigration and refugee lawyer Lorne Waldman, who is representing the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers in a constitutional challenge to the citizenship revocation regime in C-24 that was filed with the Federal Court last Monday.

He explained that if someone was found to have lied when applying to become a permanent resident and later became a Canadian citizen, that individual could lose both status and face automatic deportation.

What is known about Ms. Monsef’s case “is an example of that scenario,” said Mr. Waldman, who is in court next month on a similar case involving two people who came to Canada as children and whose citizenship is imperilled because of their father’s alleged misrepresentation on his permanent resident application.

Mr. Waldman said he doesn’t believe Ms. Monsef will be stripped of her Canadian citizenship. If the misrepresentation in her case involves where she was born rather than her citizenship at birth “it is not likely that would be relevant” in raising questions about the minister’s status in Canada, said Mr. Waldman.

http://www.hilltimes.com/2016/10/03/monsef-case-brings-calls-strengthen-appeal-rights-facing-citizenship-revokation/82379?ct=t(RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN)&goal=0_8edecd9364-032584e435-90755301&mc_cid=032584e435&mc_eid=685e94e554

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

Will changes to the Citizenship Act affect the naturalization rate? – Policy Options

2016/10/01 Leave a comment

My piece in IRPP’s Perspectives on the need for the Senate to consider the decline in the naturalization rate in its review of Bill C-6’s changes to the Citizenship Act.

Source: Will changes to the Citizenship Act affect naturalization rate? – Policy Options

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

Senate could get rid of law threatening to strip Maryam Monsef’s citizenship

2016/09/29 Leave a comment

Needed: the removal of the previous procedural protections for citizenship fraud and misrepresentation without any effective replacement was over-reach:

The Senate could come to the rescue of Canadians who are being stripped of their citizenship without a hearing.

Independent Sen. Ratna Omidvar, who is sponsoring another citizenship-related bill in the upper house, says she’s hopeful the Senate will amend the bill to do away with a law that allows the government to revoke the citizenship of anyone deemed to have misrepresented themselves.

It’s a law that could potentially ensnare Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef, who revealed last week that she was born in Iran, not Afghanistan as she’d always believed.

The law, part of a citizenship bill passed by the previous Conservative government, was denounced by the Liberals when they were in opposition but lawyers say they’ve been aggressively enforcing it since forming government.

The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers on Monday launched a constitutional challenge of the law, which they argue violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Liberal government chose not to deal with the issue in Bill C-6, which repeals other aspects of the Conservatives’ citizenship regime, including a provision empowering the government to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals who are convicted of high treason or terrorism.

During study of C-6 at a House of Commons committee, the NDP attempted to amend the bill to repeal the power to revoke citizenship without a hearing. But that was ruled by the committee chair to be outside the scope of the bill.

Omidvar, who moved the second reading of C-6 on Tuesday in the upper chamber, said Senate procedural rules are different and she’s hopeful the upper house will be able to do what the Commons could not.

“I would like to see this question addressed,” said Omidvar, a longtime advocate for immigrant and refugee rights.

“I think it’s a very important question because, as BCCLA has pointed out, even if you get a traffic ticket, you get a hearing or an appeal and here your citizenship is being revoked and you have no avenue for a hearing and appeal.”

Omidvar said she’s spoken about the matter with Immigration Minister John McCallum and “he’s open to an amendment” from the Senate.

“He understands that this was an oversight.”

Source: Senate could get rid of law threatening to strip Maryam Monsef’s citizenship | Toronto Star

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

Italy’s ‘Cultural Allowance’ For Teens Aims To Educate, Counter Extremism : NPR

2016/09/29 Leave a comment

Interesting approach.

One of the best initiatives of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship gives every new Canadian a one-year pass that provides free access to over 1,000 cultural and historical sites.:

Few things inspire more loathing in the hearts of high school students than the words “extra homework.” But as Florence Mattei hands out a pamphlet to her homeroom class at the Southlands School in Rome, she tells them they may want to give this assignment a chance.

“Who would like to read what it’s about?” she asks the room full of 18-year-olds.

A senior named Alessio translates from Italian into English: “For the people born in 1998 there is a 500-euro bonus that you can spend on cultural things, such as going to the cinema, visiting museums and this kind of stuff.”

He stares at the page in disbelief. But it’s true. Starting this month, Italy is offering its 18-year-old residents the equivalent of $563 to spend on culture, from concert tickets, books and museum admission to other qualifying events.

To get the money, they need to register online and download an app.

“Do we want to try?” says the teacher. “Yeah? So get your phone.”

Youth unemployment in Italy is nearly 40 percent in a country that’s been struggling economically for years. So the free cash is a welcome surprise for teens like Daniele Montagna, who knows where he is going to spend his first.

“On the concert of JB — Justin Bieber!” he rejoices.

And he can. The program doesn’t distinguish between pop culture and highbrow culture.

 Combating extremism

The Italian government is hoping the program will educate kids born in Italy as well as integrate a growing population of foreign residents, dissuading alienated youths from following radical Islam.

Prime Minister Matteo Renzi first announced the so-called Culture Bonus last November after the Paris massacre, when Islamist terrorists killed 130 people inside a theater and outside on the streets.

“They destroy statues, we protect them,” he said in a speech at the time. “They burn books, we’re the country of libraries; they envision terror, we respond with culture.”

But some question whether exposing young Muslims to, say, Lady Gaga will really endear them to Western culture.

“There is a chance that Lady Gaga is exactly what’s going to make somebody angry,” says Barak Mendelsohn, a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia and an expert in combating extremism. “That doesn’t mean that they buy into your values. We’ve seen radicals trying to take advantage of the welfare state, funding themselves while building bombs.”

He points to the Paris attackers. French authorities estimate they collected more than 50,000 euros in unemployment benefits — even while at least one of them had a job.

“They don’t have any ideological obstacle in taking money from Western countries,” Mendelsohn adds.

Source: Italy’s ‘Cultural Allowance’ For Teens Aims To Educate, Counter Extremism : Parallels : NPR

Filed under Citizenship, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Monsef’s place of birth shouldn’t have ‘serious consequences’ – De Kerckhove, Glavin

2016/09/28 Leave a comment

Former Canadian Ambassador Ferry de Kerckhove injects needed knowledge about the region and refugees:

Many people have expressed sympathy for Maryam Monsef, the federal Minister for Democratic Institutions, since the disclosure that she was born in Iran, rather than in Afghanistan. But there have been criticisms – which I simply can’t fathom – from MPs such as Tony Clement and Michelle Rempel, who talked about “serious consequences” if the minister’s birthplace had not been accurately represented on her refugee and citizenship applications.

Do these people have any idea what region we are talking about? Does Ms. Rempel have any understanding of how volatile, porous and border-inconsequential the region was, where even dates of birth, when registered, between Muslim and Christian countries don’t match up? Does she, and those who chime in with her, realize that many Afghans sought refuge in Iran during both the Soviet occupation and the subsequent civil war culminating in the rise of the vicious Taliban regime?

 The Afghan city of Herat (where Ms. Monsef’s parents married and where she believed she was born) and the Iranian city of Mashad (where she was actually born) are historically and geographically close. So Afghans would travel back and forth to Iran in times of duress; although they might have not been warmly welcomed, they were at least in a safer environment than in Afghanistan.

Source: Monsef’s place of birth shouldn’t have ‘serious consequences’ – The Globe and Mail

Terry Glavin makes similar points in What you need to know about Maryam Monsef – Macleans.ca The MP’s birthplace does not matter. Her mother made a brace choice, sparing her daughters from a brutal and ruthless past macleans.ca      

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Maryam Monsef case highlights ‘absurdity’ of Canadian law, refugee lawyers say

2016/09/28 Leave a comment

The Minister did commit during parliamentary committee hearings last spring to address the lack of due process for citizenship revocation in cases of fraud or misrepresentation. This court challenge likely reflects frustration that no action has been taken to date:

Maryam Monsef could be stripped of her citizenship without a hearing under a law the Liberals denounced while in opposition but which they’ve been enforcing aggressively since taking power, civil liberties and refugee lawyers say.

The democratic institutions minister revealed last week that she was born in Iran, not Afghanistan as she’d long believed. She said her mother, who fled Afghanistan with her daughters when Monsef was 11, didn’t think it mattered where the minister was born since she was still legally considered an Afghan citizen.

Monsef has said she will have to correct her birthplace information on her passport.

If Monsef’s birthplace was misrepresented on her citizenship application as well, that would be grounds for revocation of citizenship, regardless of whether it was an innocent mistake or the fault of her mother, said immigration lawyer Lorne Waldman.

Misrepresentation could lead to deportation

And if the misrepresentation was on her permanent residence and refugee applications, she could even be deported, said Waldman, part of a group that launched a constitutional challenge of the law Monday.

The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association argue that the law, known as Bill C-24, is procedurally unfair and a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Josh Paterson, the BCCLA’s executive director, said Monsef’s case demonstrates the absurdity of the law, which was passed by the previous Conservative government.

“The minister’s situation … is exactly the kind of situation that many other Canadians are facing right now because of this unjust process,” Paterson told a news conference.

“When we get a parking ticket, we have a right to a court hearing … You leave your garbage in the wrong place and you get a ticket, you have the right to a hearing and yet for citizens to lose their entitlement to membership in Canada based on allegations of something they may or may not have said 20 years ago, they have no hearing? It just doesn’t make any sense.”

Law to be enforced

When he was in opposition, John McCallum denounced the law as “dictatorial” and since becoming immigration minister, he’s promised to amend it to create an appeal process, Paterson said.

Nevertheless, repeated requests that the government stop enforcing the law until it can be changed have been ignored. As recently as two weeks ago, Paterson said Justice Department lawyers informed his group that the law would continue to be enforced.

Source: Maryam Monsef case highlights ‘absurdity’ of Canadian law, refugee lawyers say – Politics – CBC News

Filed under Citizenship, Revocation Tagged with , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →