Skip to main content

PRRA

Gender-based claims and the PRRA

Resolution number
23
Whereas
  1. Gender claims can take time to emerge , especially if the agent of persecution is a family member or the principal applicant, and the woman's claim was not heard;
  2. The PRRA could be one remedy for a gender-based claim that was not previously heard;
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR call upon CIC:

  1. To accept at the PRRA level, claims based on gender, including severed claims, as "new evidence" to be considered.
  2. To designate specific gender experts as PRRA officers in each region.
  3. To ensure that all PRRA officers receive ongoing gender based training including relevant case examples.
Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
Gender
PRRA

Palestinian refugee claims before the IRB and PRRA

Resolution number
21
Whereas
  1. There is demonstrable confusion within IRB and PRRA regarding the status of stateless Palestinian refugees, and the conditions they have fled.
  2. This lack of understanding has led to inconsistent and ill-informed decision-making.
Therefore be it resolved

That CCR, together with other organizations and coalitions working for the rights of Palestinian refugees, raise with the IRB and with PRRA officials the need for better and more consistent information regarding the legal status of Palestinian refugees and the rights violations they face.

Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
IRB
Statelessness
PRRA

PRRA and international law

Resolution number
16
Whereas
  1. PRRA is not a substitute for an appeal on the merits of the case;
  2. 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;
  3. There is inconsistent application by PRRA decision-makers in the consideration of what constitutes sufficient evidence and expert evidence.
  4. There are insufficient guidelines for PRRA decision-makers with respect to how they are to evaluate evidence.
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR:

  1. Call on CIC to develop guidelines on what constitutes “sufficient” evidence for the purposes of PRRA decision-makers.
  2. Call on CIC to develop guidelines on what constitutes expert evidence or testimony for PRRA decision-makers.
  3. Propose that CIC form a consultative committee with CCR, other NGOs and lawyers to analyze and make recommendations on the PRRA system.
  4. 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.
Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
PRRA
Subscribe to PRRA