Citizenship and Immigration committee  I don't think the creation of an international body right now is really viable. I think in principle it is the right way to go, but the UNHCR is not in a position to be that body. It is too politically compromised; its funding is completely dependent on donor states; and the Unit

Citizenship and Immigration committee  This has historically been a major problem in the U.S. I would say the current problems are somewhat similar, but in many cases they also relate to a range of individual arbitrariness because of a lack of administrative oversight and a lack of a real rule of law regime in the U.S

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I agree.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Part of this relates to the failure to acknowledge the duress exception in the material support bar under U.S. law, which I was describing before. So people who pay ransom for their relatives are considered to have materially supported terrorism. Part of it has to do with arbitra

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I have two comments, and one is very basic. Canada's current assessment that the United States is a safe country is based on a 2002 assessment. I will certainly say this to Canadians: you are obligated to make that assessment again if you are going to continue to be a party to th

Citizenship and Immigration committee  We have not seen a single result of that. I suggest that you look back at this morning's article and report from the U.S. religious freedom commission, expressing its overwhelming sense of frustration that it hadn't gotten a response to their recommendations.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  They've been severely undermined since 2001, so there's no effective administrative review in most cases.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  It's not available to most people.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  It's not a question of choosing to avail oneself of it. One doesn't have access to that protection if one doesn't have a lawyer. The federal courts are increasingly refusing to take on the job of administering the asylum system. As well they should be refusing, because it's not

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No, the most principled.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I would just say I agree with those concerns that CCR has expressed.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Canada clearly recognizes violence against women as a form of persecution and gender-based persecution as a ground for protection. U.S. law is up in the air at this point. That's what I would say. In fact, we have a case before the board now that may decide the parameters of this

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The crux of the issue I see before this committee now has to do with the U.S. obligations under the refugee convention. Unfortunately, U.S. compliance with the convention against torture has not been what it should be, and it has certainly deteriorated in the last couple of years

Citizenship and Immigration committee  First of all, I would want to qualify the different standards. Every country that is a signatory to the refugee convention is interpreting the same standards according to an international treaty that is binding. That has been increasingly evident in the jurisprudence of— Canada

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I'm sorry, what definition of family are you speaking of?