Inland Protection

1. In June of 1996, in response to the U.S. INS detention of Canada-bound refugee claimants and the subsequent processing of said claimants for deportation, the CCR passed a resolution urging CIC to cease turning refugee claimants back to the U.S.;
2. INS detentions of Canada-bound refugee claimants have continued and, in fact, broadened in 1998 to include detentions in the Niagara Region, Blackpool and Minnesota;
3. INS has continued to detain certain refugee claimants, even after such claimants have received Canadian eligibility determinations, thereby denying these claimants the opportunity to pursue their refugee claims in Canada;
4. In an April 29, 1998 letter to the President of the CCR, the Acting Director General of the Enforcement Branch, CIC NHQ, stated, "...it is our policy that no person will be returned to the United States where there is reason to believe that they will be removed from the U.S. before the scheduled eligibility determination or would otherwise be unavailable because of detention. We are reviewing our procedures manual to ensure that this is clearly understood";
5. Despite the above-cited policy, CIC in the Niagara Region has continued to direct refugee claimants back to the United States to await eligibility determinations, which has resulted in the detention of a troubling number of people;
6. CIC's practice at certain border crossings of closing the border to refugee claimants on certain days of the week or at certain times of the year has also led to U.S. detentions of Canada-bound refugees awaiting Canadian processing;

1. Gay men and lesbians are recognized as a particular social group by the federal court;
2. Gay men and lesbians are protected from discrimination under section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;
3. Most Canadian provinces currently recognize gay and lesbian relationships as legally equal to heterosexual relationships;
4. The CCR has adopted a resolution on "Guidelines and Education on Sexual Orientation for the IRB" (Res 16, Nov 94);

1. Board members are under pressure to move quickly on cases at the expense of fairness, thus violating the fundamental right of refugee claimants to a fair and impartial hearing;
2. The Montreal IRB has started giving negative decisions with no credible basis in a systematic and abusive fashion;
3. There is a serious problem with Board members not treating fairly victims of torture and a general problem of insensitivity linked to a lack of proper training for Board members;

1. Article 28 of the 1951 Geneva Convention requires contracting states including Canada to issue travel documents to Convention Refugees;
2. The present Canadian practice is normally not to issue travel documents to Convention Refugees until they have been granted permanent resident status;
3. There are long periods between the recognition of refugee status and the issuance of landing status especially for those without identity documents;
4. Even Convention Refugees who are landed are routinely denied travel documents and told instead to obtain passports from the very governments they have fled;
5. Even after landing, there are prolonged periods of 3 months or more to finally obtain travel documents;
6. Inability to travel outside of Canada to visit family relatives and/or facilitate family reunification causes tremendous difficulties for refugees;

1. There are Convention Refugees, particularly Iranians, who have applied for landing and had CSIS interviews but have had their landing held up for years in the Security Reviews in case management;
2. They are unable to travel outside Canada, sponsor family or pursue post-secondary education;

1. Bill C-40 contains provisions which amend the Immigration Act to deem some persons facing extradition to have received a decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board and to be found not to be a Convention Refugee even though no hearing of the Immigration and Refugee Board was actually held;
2. These amendments to the Immigration Act deny refugee claimants their right to a hearing before the IRB and to make submissions to establish their claim to refugee status;
3. International human rights have been involved in extraditions and expulsions by Canada and have been the object of views by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, for example, in the cases of Ng, Khan, and Cox;
4. In the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Canada has accepted responsibility for measures necessary to ensure these international rights;

1. The CCR has prepared a position paper which was submitted to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration's consultations on Legislative Review;
2. The Minister has not committed to consultations on forthcoming draft legislation before tabling;

There have been numerous formal and informal complaints about the IRB procedures and members have not been treated seriously;

1. François Crépeau and France Houle have prepared a report entitled Compétence et Indépendance, dated 6 March 1998 which makes seven key recommendations on the IRB appointments process;
2. The report was endorsed by CCR's IRB workshop in Ottawa on 28 November 1998;

The CCR is concerned that refugee claims are being put into the abandonment - show cause stream at the IRB because claimants are being served by CIC with their eligibility and referral documents several days after the date of issuance of these documents;