The Canadian Bar Association (CBA) has raised significant concerns regarding Bill C-12, urging the Canadian Senate to halt the proposed immigration reforms. According to a public letter released by the CBA, the bill poses a threat to the procedural fairness of asylum seekers and could disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, including the LGBT+ community, survivors of gender-based violence, and children. This comes amid ongoing debates over Canada’s commitment to international human rights obligations, notably the 1951 UN Refugee Convention.
The CBA argues that the bill’s redirection of asylum seekers from the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) to a paper-based Pre Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) diminishes procedural safeguards and potentially increases litigation. Submitted claims would be restricted by stringent deadlines: within one year of entry or within 14 days if entering through non-designated ports along the Canada-U.S. border. The group contends that these restrictions could lead to unjust outcomes for claimants who are often fleeing dire circumstances and may not have immediate access to legal resources upon arrival.
A further point of contention lies in the bill’s provision granting the Governor in Council expansive powers to adjust immigration conditions for reasons deemed in the “public interest,” such as administrative errors or national security. Critics argue that this grants arbitrary power without sufficient checks, raising potential human rights concerns. This view echoes previous critiques by civil liberties organizations which have decried the measures for insufficient safeguards.
In its current form, Bill C-12 has completed its second reading in the Senate, with the Standing Senate Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs returning it without amendments. However, the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology recommended eliminating contentious provisions, notably those permitting the immigration minister to disseminate asylum seekers’ personal information across governmental departments.
The CBA’s opposition is bolstered by a historical perspective referencing the Supreme Court of Canada’s 1985 ruling, which underscored protections under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This entails that refugee claimants be given a fair opportunity to present their cases without being returned to environments where they may face persecution.
This appeal by the CBA echoes a broad spectrum of critiques, as seen with concerns that the bill’s impact might undermine Canada’s global reputation as a protector of refugee rights. The ongoing legislative debate underscores a crucial tension between immigration reform and adherence to established human rights commitments. For further insights into the CBA’s stance and detailed legislative implications, you can explore more here.