CTV News | Federal court strikes down refugee agreement

Canada -   

Federal court strikes down refugee agreement

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV News: Roger Smith on the ruling's implications
CTV Newsnet: Marshall Drukarsh, immigration lawyer

Font-size:      Share  Print  Comments(23)

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Fri. Nov. 30 2007 10:20 AM ET

The United States is not a safe country for refugees, the Federal Court said Thursday as it ruled that Canada will no longer have the right to turn back asylum seekers at the border.

In the surprise judgment, the court found that Safe Third Country Agreement breaches the rights of asylum seekers under the United Nation Refugee Convention or the Convention Against Torture.

The three-year-old agreement denies refugees who have landed first in the U.S. the right to later seek protection in Canada, and vice versa. It has allowed Canada to automatically send refugee claimants at the border back to the United States. There, they are usually either detained or deported.

Activists have long complained that the agreement is unfair and unconstitutional because it requires refugee claims in Canada and the U.S. to be processed in the country where asylum seekers first land.

The court agreed that the agreement discriminates against refugees based on their method of arrival in Canada.

Citing the example of Maher Arar, Justice Michael Phelan also noted that the U.S. has not been compliant with the Refugee Convention or CAT (Convention Against Torture).

"... The United States' policies and practices do not meet the conditions set down for authorizing Canada to enter into a STCA," Phelan wrote in his 126-page decision.

"The U.S. does not meet the Refugee Convention requirements nor the [UN] Convention Against Torture prohibition (the Maher Arar case being one example). Further, the STCA does not comply with the relevant provisions of the Charter."

Arar was the Canadian who was stopped by U.S. officials in 2002 at a New York airport and sent to the Middle East to be interrogated as an alleged al Qaeda suspect.

Thursday's Federal Court ruling will essentially nullify the Safe Third Country Agreement, with a final court order expected early next year.

It is also likely to result in Canada having to process thousands more refugee claimants each year.

But for now, the STCA remains in effect, says a spokesperson with Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

The court has given both parties until Jan. 14 to make and respond to submissions for an appeal.

Please Add Comments( )

Pat_pending
said
0 0

I think that what may be needed is an amendment to the agreement specifying that refugee claimants coming from the US be returned to the US on condition that they not be deported to a country where they may face torture. This might be a workable solution/compromise that would meet constitutional requirements.


Marcel
said
0 0

Let the courts make the decisions to let every criminal into Canada -- WOW-- has Canada gone to far with giving non-Canadians a place to hide. Who pays for this cost?


Pamela
said
0 0

If all the refugess are allowed to stay and they don't have a specific trade does that mean that Canadian taxpayers will have to accommodate, train, provide ESL for them.

How about all the citizens of this country that were born, educated and parents paid taxes that cannot get jobs as they lack skills. Trades are not given free to Canadian born citizens or we wouldn't have such high welfare cases.

Teddy
said
0 0

This is incredulous. Judges again telling us what is law and what isn't. In this case, it's common sense. Arar was a one-off, and who knows what they know besides that.

Rebecca
said
0 0

Finally, someone in our government is standing up to torture.


James Cyr
said
0 0

One more example of the destruction of Canada led by the Federal courts. This country does not need thousands more refugees seeking asylum here, most of which may end up on the welfare roles. Another disgraceful decision by the Federal Court.


Andy
said
0 0

I am sick and tired of living in a country that is the dumping ground for the world's rejects. The refugee system is useless to all except those who abuse it: the rejects who can't come here legitimately. The damned Liberals have used it far too long to enroll new voters for their decrepit party. How much do you want to bet the judge is a Liberal? What is the rest of the world doing? Reducing the amount of illegal immigration. Get rid of this broken refugee system, Canada has taken in far more losers than the rest of the world.


Shawn Katz
said
0 0

A refugee is one having fled their country of origin often to escape severe deprivation or hardship (and at times war, famine, genocide, dictatorships, etc.)
If we in Canada are to stake a claim to being a civilized and humane nation, we must accept them with open arms.


BILL MCKORMICK
said
0 0

Great, more unelected judges in a democracy telling our elected officials what to do. How about we have an open and public process to appoint judges, see how many back out when some personal past problem or belief surfaces.


LM
said
0 0

Our courts are way out of line. Our judges seem to be totally out of touch with reality. Citing a case of a terrorist as reason to allow more criminals into our country is absurd!! Our courts are turning Canada into an unsafe country to be.


Ernie
said
0 0

This is a good decision. Based on fact. The US disregards international laws.


Keith
said
0 0

If the U.S. dosn't want them then why let them into Canada. If they wanted to come to Canada to begin with then why go to a country where you know you are not welcome. Is there some reason they think that crossing a border is an easier way into Canada than an airport.


John
said
0 0

So we're not allowed to screen refugees to see if they're lying? God forbid if we check that they're harboring hate or convicted of a felony in their country, because we love harboring felons in our country?

proud canandian
said
0 0

I want to comment on some of the comments made about immigrants and welfare. My parents came to this country to avoid a war. Not only have they kept up with their culture, but they educated me and integrated well with rest of the canadian culture. This country can and should allow individuals to enter and should be given the opportunities no different from those who came during the holocaust or during the Vietnam War.

Ian Nichol
said
0 0

Strange...I thought that Canada was run by Parliament. Apparently, it is run by unelected judges in concert with United Nations appointees, some of which are from the very countries that refugee claimants are apparently seeking asylum.


Cecil
said
0 0

It is time for the Notwithstanding Clause to be used. This is totally unacceptable.
The elected government has a right to determine who can enter and who cannot enter the country.
Now we have an UNELECTED judge overruling the ELECTED parliament on a matter of public policy, that could have implications for national security.



Doug
said
0 0

Taxpayers had better hope this court does not have the last word on this issue.It is surely going to lead to a tremendous burden on our pocketbooks.Given the backups,and time required to process refugee claims,we are going to be paying huge taxes to support these people.Money,I think,that could be better spent on the poor and elderly who are already citizens.
This is bad news for Canada.While I am in favour of generous levels of immigration of all kinds,this,if allowed to stand,will take away any kind of control over who,and how many.Most likely, it will also swell the ranks of welfare recipients and add to the portion of the population we define as "poor".Non skilled refugees,even if finally accepted,will become a burden to taxpayers.And those who are rejected will have spent 12-18 months living on our welfare system.As a civilized country,we should be doing our share to help people like this.But rules and limitations are needed to maintain order and fairness.
I like Pat_pending's idea,but I doubt the USA would agree to such an arrangement.


A. Auger
said
0 0

Since when do unelected judges have the right to overturn rules made by our elected officials. Enough! We have enough poor and uneducated in Canada let's look after them, before opening our doors wide to queue jumpers. Sorry, but charity begins at home, or perhaps our judges could accommodate them in their homes and pay for their keep etc. out of their own pockets.


Justin
said
0 0

The UN Convention on Refugees requires, that an asylum seeker apply in the first "safe" country they reach.

The US is a signatory, and thus a place of application for those arrving from Central and South America, for example.

The US cannot be simply used as point of transit and conduit to Canada, and that is the purpose of the agreement between Canada and the US.

Should someone arrive on our shores, or land at one our airports, coming directly from their point of persecution, it's our duty under the convention to offer sanctuary.

This decision should, and, I venture, will be appealed.


Lart from Above
said
0 0

A detention centre in Canada for refugee claimants would be a very desirable option for real refugees, while it would discourage bogus claims. If false claimants knew that coming to Canada would result in detention and then return to their country of origin, the volume of false claims would diminish, allowing the system to process genuine refugee claims in a timely way, which means the size (and cost) of a detention centre could be small.


Robert B
said
0 0

Another unelected selfserviant offical striking down a law made by the elected government, is this country run by elected officials or not? If we're not, why have elections??????
The elected government should overrule the courts decision!!!!


Trev
said
0 0

Ship them back to their country!


Damian
said
0 0

What this means, in essence, is that everyone on the planet, no matter where they are or how they come here, has a CHARTER protected right to be a refugee in Canada.

In the 23 years since I've emigrated to here, Canada has been turned into the world's Salvation Army shelter whose main slogan is "we turn away no one, no matter what." It's pathetic, and makes me sick. It makes the whole immigration process which I and my parents had to go through a joke - we should have just showed up and screamed "refugee!!"





Share with your social Network:

 

Advertisement

Contest

User Tools

About the tools

Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.

Share it with your network of friends

Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.

Share this article with Facebook

Share this article with Digg

Share this article with Newsvine

Share this article with delicious

Share this article.
Send Email

Share this article with Twitter

Share this article with StumbleUpon

Share this article with Reddit

Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz