CCR Resolutions Database

1. There are currently negotiations and policy discussions on adopting common security arrangements with the USA;
2. Canada has a tradition of supporting international law and fundamental human rights (and this tradition may be abandoned in the current context).

1. Violations of human rights are among the causes of refugee flows in the world;
2. Promotion of human rights is one of the few tools to prevent refugee flows;
3. Anti-terrorism legislation in several Western countries including Canada compromises the established emergency basis for limiting human rights in international human rights law;

1. Immigrants and refugees need and deserve complex social, community and employment services to facilitate effective settlement;
2. The CCR is deeply concerned about the human tragedy of those immigrants and refugees who do not settle successfully, some ending up trapped in low level employment for which they are far over qualified or on assistance;
3. There are very limited resources to which settlement clients can be referred to for services meaning that settlement services go well beyond simple information and referral;

Liberians in the Krisan Zansule camp in Ghana have not been supplied any humanitarian assistance (including food and medical care) by UNHCR since June 2000;

The CCR has adopted Resolution 12 of May 2001;

1. The CCR called in Resolution 20, November 1993 for an end to the detention of refugee children;
2. Minor refugee claimants continue to be detained in Canada;
3. In the case of trafficked minors the government justifies such detention on the grounds that detention protects minors from their traffickers and is in the best interests of children;
4. The CCR recognizes that in certain cases there is a need for the protection of minors but unequivocally opposes the detention of minors as detention is never in the best interests of children;

1. A significant number of people refused as Convention Refugees under the present Act may be returning to Canada to make second claims under C-11;
2. In the past, a high proportion of second claims has been accepted as Convention refugees by the IRB;
3. C-11 provides for a wider definition of persons needing protection, an appeal on the merits and an improved Pre-Removal Risk Assessment;
4. There is no article in C-11 dealing with persons refused under the present Act who may be returning to Canada to make a new claim under the enhanced protection provisions of this new Act;
5. Part 5 of C-11 (Article 201) stipulates that “the Regulations may provide for measures regarding the transition between the former Act and this Act, including measures regarding classes of persons who will be subject in whole or in part to this Act or the former Act....”

1. A number of resolutions, especially Res. 35, June 1994, have raised problems of accountability of immigration officials who abuse the rights of non-citizens in detention;
2. These problems persist;

1. 50% of federal funding for immigrant services in BC goes into the general coffers of the province and does not go to supporting direct services;
2. The BC-federal agreement on settlement services will be re-negotiated over the next year;

The National Housing and Homelessness Network is working to raise awareness of discrimination and human rights violations confronting newcomers and all Canadians seeking quality and affordable housing;

1. The government’s document “Building on a Strong Foundation” calls for closer working relationships with partners, and SAHs are key partners in the private sponsorship program;
2. Current timelines for the completion of concepts such as Private Partner Sponsorship and Corporate Sponsorship do not allow sufficient time for consultation, discussion and input with partners.

It has been recognized that the situation of separated refugee children in some provinces (notably Ontario where the largest number of such children arrive) is particularly critical due to the province’s general failure to provide appropriate child welfare services to separated refugee children, and due to the province’s breach of its international obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child in defining children to include only those under 16;

1. Literature has a great impact on public awareness;
2. There has been inadequate involvement of Canadian writers, poets and people of arts and letters in refugee issues;

1. The Gender Based Analysis Unit of CIC has completed a gender based analysis of C-11;
2. The analysis has identified areas of potential negative gender impacts;
3. Bill C-11 requires gender-based reporting to Parliament;

1. Victims of trafficking in Canada are in need of services including advocacy;
2. CCR member organizations are not necessarily sensitized and responsive to these needs;

1. CIC officials frequently acknowledge that the Department does not adequately collect and report statistical data on its programs;
2. There has been an increase in detentions since September 11, 2001, and accurate data has been impossible to obtain to date;
3. The CCR, the Centre for Refugee Studies, the Maytree Foundation and independent consultants hired by the Immigration Department have attempted repeatedly to obtain data from CIC on the population of refugees in limbo and have been unsuccessful;
4. Bill C-11 will shortly come into effect and will have a significant impact on detention, refugee determination and the landing process;
5. Collection and analysis of data are key components of good public policy and democratic accountability;

The CCR participated in the Durban World Conference against Racism (WCAR);

1. Large numbers of letters, e-mails and faxes have been received by CCR members alleging torture in Ethiopia by the government and its agencies;
2. Ethiopia is a signatory to the UN Convention against Torture;

1. The increasing number of separated refugee children in Canada has drawn attention to the protection gaps existing in Canada, in particular the inconsistent practices regarding care and guardianship of separated refugee children in different provinces;
2. Canada has obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child;

1. In June 2000, CCR called for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and CIC to immediately implement the recommendations in the SIRC report concerning three complaints made by people suffering delays in landing for security reasons, and the responses to CCR by both the Solicitor General and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration noted that “decisions on admissibility rest with CIC”, not with CSIS;
2. The recommendations of SIRC appear to have had no effective role in modifying CSIS recommendations to CIC in this case;
3. Although one of these complainants has been responded to positively, the other two cases remain unresolved at the present time;
4. Bill C-36 greatly expands the ability of Canadian authorities to deem someone a “terrorist” and an organization a “terrorist organization;”

1. Refugee claimants are often not advised by CIC that they have the right to legal counsel at various points in the claimant process;
2. Failure to advise has caused harm to some claimants;

1. Security concerns now require more intensive examinations of travellers at borders;
2. Profiling based on identity has been used in the past;
3. Profiling based on identity is highly demeaning for those involved and discriminatory;
4. A serious public concern warrants the necessary costs and a broader sharing of the inconveniences;

1. Settlement agencies received a memo dated Nov. 2, 2001 indicating that “Enhanced Reliability” clearances on LINC, ISAP, RAP and Host staff will be a contract requirement as of 2002-2003, referring to this as a measure prompted by the events of September 11;
2. The memo is unclear about which staff will be subject to such requirements;
3. The memo implies that CIC is creating a vulnerable computer system after having assured settlement agencies that the system would be secure;
4. The CCR fails to see any connection between September 11 and credit checks on those handling valuables;
5. Agencies are liable for the actions of their staff and volunteers and thus have measures in place to assure their reliability;
6. Preliminary investigation indicates that no other federal department which manages contribution agreements, such as HRDC, Health Canada, CIDA, etc., are implementing similar measures;

1. In April 2001, as part of the larger Integration Initiative supported by the tripartite partners in resettlement, the International Conference on the Reception and Integration of Refugees was held in Sweden. The conference endorsed resettlement and integration as important planks in the international protection system and durable solutions. Among the outcomes of the Conference is a set of principles endorsed by all the participants that provides a platform for further initiatives to take place involving traditional and emerging resettlement countries.
2. One of the elements of the Initiative, the UNHCR Reception and Integration Handbook, will enunciate a framework for supporting people from refugee backgrounds in resettlement countries to rebuild their lives. This process is underway and continues to involve a Task Force made up of governmental and NGO representatives from many of the traditional and emerging resettlement countries, including Canada.
3. Other outcomes have begun in less structured ways such as through informal sharing of information, site visits and exchange of material resources. In Canada, these early activities include the facilitation of site visits and conference participation by representatives from Chile, one of the emerging resettlement countries in southern South America and the resulting commitments to ongoing relationships between Canadian NGOs and the Chilean resettlement partners.
4. As UNHCR does not inherently have the expertise in reception and integration issues, and as the financing of a focal point for the Integration Initiative concludes as of December 2001, the process for facilitating the continuation of the integration initiative, including the post-ICRIRR process, is vulnerable.
5. Canada took a lead role in the planning process leading up to the ICRIRR conference and has endorsed the overall Integration Initiative including becoming a member of the Reference Group for the Integration Initiative and supporting governmental participation in the Task Force responsible for developing the Reception and Integration Handbook. In recognition of this leadership role, UNHCR requested the Government of Canada to Chair the Reference Group and provide leadership in facilitating the post ICRIRR process. To date Canada has not responded to this request.
6. The ICRIRR Principles include commitment to tripartite processes and the participation of relevant partners concerned with the resettlement and integration of refugees. The UNHCR Working Group on Resettlement, currently a bilateral forum, through the Reference Group for the Integration Initiative, is tasked with providing follow-up to the ICRIRR process. Furthermore, the Working Group on Resettlement is also the principal body of UNHCR and its resettlement partners for dialogue on ongoing broader refugee resettlement policies and initiatives.
7. During the Annual Tripartite Consultations on Resettlement in Geneva (June 2001), participants expressed interest in including NGO representation on the UNHCR Working Group on Resettlement. Although there is receptivity to NGO presence at the Working Group this has yet to be defined and agreed upon by the existing UNHCR and governmental membership.
8. The Canadian Council for Refugees was actively engaged in the preparation for and participation in the ICRIRR Conference and endorsed the principles and the resolutions evolving from the Conference. Furthermore, the CCR is also considering how it may participate more actively in international fora.

1. The CCR has become increasingly involved in international activities and consultations with respect to refugee protection, resettlement and integration;
2. International forums and discussions impact Canada’s own policies and programs within the global context;