Resolution number
12
Whereas
- IRPA Regulation 117(9)(d) provides for a lifetime exclusion from sponsoring a family member, with no discretion to consider an explanation, however compelling, or to impose a lesser period of exclusion;
- Ina significant number of cases, there has been no intention to misrepresent and, in other cases, there are mitigating circumstances that may constitute justification;
- The application of this article is having an extremely detrimental impact on many innocent children, in violation of Canada’s obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child to take into account the “best interests of the child” concerned in any decision of a public body;
- IRPA provides for a general inadmissibility of two years in cases of misrepresentation and officers have considerable discretion as to whether even that inadmissibility should be imposed;
Therefore be it resolved
That the CCR call for IRPA Reg. 117(9)(d) to be rescinded. Officers should be required to consider all the facts of the case, including intention and any mitigating circumstances, in deciding whether to impose an exclusion, which should in no case exceed the two years provided for generally under IRPA.
Subject
Working Group
Inland Protection