- PRRA is not a substitute for an appeal on the merits of the case;
- The PRRA process is dysfunctional and demonstrates a lack of respect for international human rights norms and for the Suresh decision of the Supreme Court of Canada;
- There is inconsistent application by PRRA decision-makers in the consideration of what constitutes sufficient evidence and expert evidence.
- There are insufficient guidelines for PRRA decision-makers with respect to how they are to evaluate evidence.
Therefore be it resolved
That the CCR:
- Call on CIC to develop guidelines on what constitutes “sufficient” evidence for the purposes of PRRA decision-makers.
- Call on CIC to develop guidelines on what constitutes expert evidence or testimony for PRRA decision-makers.
- Propose that CIC form a consultative committee with CCR, other NGOs and lawyers to analyze and make recommendations on the PRRA system.
- Ask the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration to study the overall effectiveness of the PRRA process in light of Canada’s international human rights obligations.