Australian PM warns of strict penalties for returning extremists

Interesting that the Australian PM made no mention of revoking Australian citizenship. Just punishment in Australian jails, despite earlier signs the Australian government was considering revocation (George Brandis won’t say if Australians fighting in Syria will lose citizenship):

“If you fight with a terrorist group, if you seek to return to this country, as far as this government is concerned, you will be arrested, you will be prosecuted and you will be jailed for a very long time indeed,” Abbott told Parliament.

At least 60 Australians were fighting in Iraq and Syria with Islamic State and another al-Qaida offshoot, Jabhat al-Nursa, also known as the Nusra Front, the prime minister said.

He revealed that more than 60 Australian would-be fighters had had their passports cancelled on secret service advice to prevent them from flying to the Mideast.

Dozens of suspected fighters have already returned to Australia from the battlefields. Security agencies fear that they now pose a domestic terrorist threat.

Australian PM warns of strict penalties for returning extremists.

Unlike Canadian Minister Alexander, who declined to provide numbers on the number of Canadian passports cancelled, PM Abbott was open – 60 passports cancelled:

Outside the Commons, Alexander cited privacy and security concerns for his refusal to release numbers.

“It’s an administrative issue, it’s an operational issue,” he said in response to questions from reporters after question period.

“There are privacy considerations. We will not be saying how many have been revoked … but we have the power to do that.”

Despite a barrage of follow-up questions, Alexander held his ground and denied that he was “afraid” to give a number.

“We will uphold a longstanding practice, which is not to go into the details of operational national security matters,” he insisted.

“That’s absolutely reasonable.”

But Australia’s definition of “reasonable” in disclosing the numbers strikes me as more reasonable:

Revoking ISIS passports: Government refuses to disclose numbers

Plan to revoke passports raises concerns

Waldman is correct to highlight that this power could be applied arbitrarily but given that court safeguards exist, and given that there are some Canadians engaged in extremist activities in Syria and Iraq, it seems a prudent measure. See earlier Canadian government revoking passports of citizens trying to join extremist groups for background.

Not the same level as revoking citizenship:

Lorne Waldman, the head of the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, says he’s worried the government might use its powers arbitrarily.

Waldman likened the practice to Canada’s secretive no-fly list, which civil liberties groups have argued violates the right to due process.

In the case of passport revocation, Waldman says there are at least legal avenues available for people to appeal such a decision through the courts.

But he said there should be assurances that power is used fairly by Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander.

“The Passport Order gives the minister the right to deny passports if there were issues of national security,” Waldman said Sunday.

“Now, that’s pretty vague and pretty broad, and the minister is going to have to justify it in some way or another.”

Plan to revoke passports raises concerns

Canadian government revoking passports of citizens trying to join extremist groups

Sensible measure:

He [Alexander] would not disclose the number of passports Citizenship and Immigration Canada had revoked over the conflict but said there were “multiple cases.” The government says about 30 Canadians are with extremist groups in Syria and 130 are active elsewhere.

“Yes, I think it’s safe to say that there are cases of revocation of passports involving people who’ve gone to Syria and Iraq already,” Mr. Alexander said. “I just don’t want to get into the numbers, but multiple cases.”

The action means Canadian fighters in Syria and Iraq may effectively be stranded there. Their passports are no longer valid and therefore cannot be used to return to Canada. Nor could they be used to travel elsewhere.

…. Mr. Alexander said while they were few in number, he was troubled that Canadians had joined ISIS, which has been committing widespread atrocities in an attempt to impose its militant version of Islamic law on Syrians and Iraqis.

“We are not by any means the leading contributor of foreign fighters to Syria, even though the dozens that are there and the 130 that are abroad [with other extremist groups] is a disturbing number for all Canadians. But we want to ensure that Canada’s good name is not besmirched by these people any more than it already has been and that Canadians are protected.”

Canadian government revoking passports of citizens trying to join extremist groups

Venezuela: Move to Revoke Actress’s Citizenship – NYTimes.com

The dark side of revocation against freedom of speech:

The government said Wednesday that it would seek to revoke the citizenship of the actress Maria Conchita Alonso, left, a fervent critic of its socialist-inspired policies. Ms. Alonso was born in Cuba and moved to Venezuela as a child, becoming a naturalized citizen. She has lived for years in the United States. The Interior Ministry will take judicial action to revoke her citizenship, according to the Information Ministry website.

In May, Ms. Alonso said in an interview with the Voice of America, “I wish that the United States would invade with bullets to remove all those wretched communists from Venezuela.” Venezuela is mired in an economic crisis, with inflation of 63 percent a year and shortages of basic goods, problems for which the government frequently blames its opponents. Ms. Alonso competed in the Miss Venezuela pageant in 1975 and has appeared in many films, including “Predator 2.”

Venezuela: Move to Revoke Actress’s Citizenship – NYTimes.com.

‘Birth tourism’ crackdown gets frosty reception from B.C.

More on birth tourism and appears British Columbia, while softer in tone, shares Ontario’s concerns.

Minister Alexander is reverting to a more hardline script than his messaging in the February announcement of changes to the Citizenship Act and his comments to Chinese Canadian media about it “not being a priority:”

But federal Immigration Minister Chris Alexander said Monday that Ottawa is forging ahead.

“This is opportunism. It is people taking advantage of our system,” Alexander said.

“We will find a way to try to prevent it.”

B.C. Jobs Minister Shirley Bond told The Vancouver Sun in an email that her office has written to the federal government seeking greater “clarity” about the proposal, which was first floated in 2012 by former Immigration Minister Jason Kenney.

The B.C. letter was intended to “express concern about any financial and administrative costs that may result from this policy shift,” according to Bond, who added that she expects Ottawa to provide “adequate notice” of any changes.

The federal government is concerned about the phenomenon that has resulted in maternity clinics in Toronto and Vancouver telling Chinese nationals that birth in Canada could make the child eligible for Canadian education and heath care.

‘Birth tourism’ crackdown gets frosty reception from B.C..

Canadians fighting with Islamic State could lose citizenship | Toronto Star

Minister Alexander’s standard talking points on revocation:

Canadians with dual citizenship fighting with Islamic extremists in Iraq and Syria could have their citizenship revoked under newly passed legislation, Immigration Minister Chris Alexander says.

Alexander says revoking the citizenship of those convicted of terrorism offences — allowed now under new citizenship legislation that became law earlier this year — is an important tool to help stem the tide of foreign fighters flocking to join Islamic State also known as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

“We will do it in every case we can, in the case of dual nationals,” Alexander told reporters Monday.

“Terrorism, espionage, treason are the most serious acts of disloyalty that you can commit. Terrorism is incompatible with citizenship.”

Toronto lawyer Rocco Galati is challenging the legislation, saying Parliament does not have the constitutional power to strip a Canadian-born citizen of his or her citizenship.

But Alexander said that revocation would happen only with “clear safeguards,” such as a court conviction for terrorism.

“Only when we have that conviction will revocation become a possibility,” the immigration minister told reporters on Parliament Hill.

The inconvenient truth is the number of Canadian-born with single nationality (e.g., Damian Clairmont, André Poulin, the Gordon brothers, John Maguire) would not be subject to revocation (those still alive), thus different punishments for the same crime.

Another likely defeat for the Government when the first cases come before the courts.

Canadians fighting with Islamic State could lose citizenship | Toronto Star.

“Immigrant Vote” to Gain Strength in 2015 – New Canadian Media

Good interview with Prof. Triadafilopoulos of UofT on immigrant voting patterns and trends. Looking at this in context of my upcoming book on multiculturalism. Following two observations of interest:

6. Given your findings, what does your study suggest on the subject of immigration generally being a non-partisan issue in Canada?

It will likely remain the case. There’s no political pay-off for populist anti-immigrant rhetoric at the federal level.

Canada is unique among major immigration countries in the degree to which immigration policy is de-politicized, and immigration itself is enthusiastically embraced by federal political parties. Quebec’s provincial politics since 2007 may be a partial exception to this pattern, but this has not had a discernible impact on Quebec voices in federal policy debates over immigration.

7. Do you have any further thoughts on the “immigrant vote” in the 2011 federal elections you said it was inconclusive at the time of writing?

We have not done the necessary analysis to move beyond what we have.  We hope to do so soon.  The key point is that all parties in Canada support a relatively liberal immigration policy, as reflected in annual admissions.  There is also consensus on the utility of an official multiculturalism policy – our Conservative Party is rather different than similar parties in other countries.

“Immigrant Vote” to Gain Strength in 2015 – New Canadian Media – NCM.

India: Why archaic citizenship laws must go – The Hindu

On some of the apparent inconsistencies between Colonial and present-day India citizenship laws, and a call to repeal the former, particularly as they apply to the Indian diaspora (over 20 million):

Today, persons of Indian origin face problems due to marital disputes with spouses of foreign origin or nationality issues arising out of foreign domiciles. The desirable approach, therefore, would be to create appropriate forums or authorities within the legal system that would address such issues by granting opportunities for hearing and redressal. Accordingly, deportation or removal of a person to a foreign jurisdiction would be an abject surrender to a foreign dominion.

Having resolved to be a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic Republic, we in India are capable and competent of adjudicating our nationality issues to provide redressal for persons of Indian origin. Our post-independence laws provide the solutions which our vibrant judiciary interprets to protect fundamental freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution. Hence, pre-independence laws in conflict with rights today must be revoked.

Why archaic citizenship laws must go – The Hindu.

Citizenship act got it right | Editorial | Opinion | Toronto Sun

As usual, the Sun misrepresents the issue: it is mainly about where you are born. Those born Canadian extremists (e.g., Damian Clairmont, André Poulin, the Gordon brothers, John Maguire) would not be subject to revocation, given where they were born and lack of dual nationality.

Those who came to Canada as children, like Shirdon, would be subject to revocation, based upon dual citizenship, actual or potential. Some, again like Shirdon,  were part of the same Calgary cell.

Different punishment for the same crime.

Won’t stand up in court, which the Government’s track record on a number of crime and other issues highlights:

On Thursday morning a reporter asked the Liberal leader in a scrum if Canadians who go abroad to fight with terrorists should be stripped of their citizenship.

Here’s his response: “Canada has strong rules and penalties surrounding enforcing acts of terrorism. A two-tier citizenship system concerns me. The idea that some people because of behaviour, no matter how reprehensible, makes it conditional for anyone who gains Canadian citizenship without being born here. That is one of the principles that has made Canada great, that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian.”

First, let’s clarify a matter. It has nothing to do with where you’re born. It just matters that you’re a dual national.

But everyone should be upset with his closing line. Is Trudeau serious lumping everyone in together? Does he really think we can’t draw distinctions between people? What about Farah Mohamed Shirdon?

Citizenship act got it right | Editorial | Opinion | Toronto Sun.

Citizenship Act Coming Into Force Provisions

From CIC’s newsletter, details of which provisions have come into force:

Provisions from Bill C-24 that came into force immediately upon Royal Assent included:

  • fast-tracking citizenship applications for members of the Canadian Armed Forces;
  • improving clarity on the first generation limit on citizenship for those born abroad;
  • enabling children born abroad to serving Crown servants to pass citizenship on to their children born or adopted abroad;
  • and streamlined decision-making for issuing discretionary grants  under section 54.

Provisions in the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act that came into force on August 1, 2014, included:

  • the new decision-making model for citizenship applications;
  • various measures to improve efficiency of the application process;
  • and a new judicial review and appeals process.

Other provisions will come into force on a date to be determined by the Governor in Council

E-newsletter.