Evidence of meeting #29 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
When we look at the RAD application itself, section 110, it indicates that in an appeal on RAD, it's an appeal on a question of law, of fact, and mixed law and fact.
Would you agree with me that this is similar to what already exists in the Federal Court?
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
That's correct, yes.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
If we go on to the third procedural matter under the refugee appeal division, it indicates that it proceeds without a hearing. That would mean without the calling of evidence or presenting of witnesses, and that kind of fact?
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
It would simply be no witnesses, but all the facts and all the file is before the judge.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
But no new facts, no viva voce testimony.
Isn't that the same as the appeal grounds in the Federal Court: there's no calling or hearing of new witnesses for additional evidence?
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
That's correct, sir.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
Yes.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
In the RAD provisions that we have, it indicates that it proceeds on the basis of the record itself for what was heard before the lower-level board or tribunal.
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
That's correct.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
In the Federal Court, it has its hearing based on the record of the lower-level IRB decisions. Is that not true?
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
That's correct, sir.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
Yes.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Do you not see that the two processes are parallel to one another in the sense I've discussed?
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
Pretty much, yes.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
Whether or not it's a duplication, I'm not sure.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
You've agreed they're doing the same thing. In that sense, there would be a duplication of the same process.
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
Yes.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Would it not seem wiser and more cost-efficient to have one tribunal for the process, as opposed to two?
9:30 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
You're in a better position to answer that than I am.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
You're able to deal with issues of cost and how much the extra provision of costs would be for RAD. If you're duplicating the same process, would there not be an additional cost through that fact alone?
9:35 a.m.
Acting Chief Administrator, Office of the Chief Adminsitrator, Courts Administration Service, Federal Court of Canada
That's correct, yes.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
When the Federal Court looks at the record below, it would be doing the same thing as the refugee appeal division in looking at the record below. If they disagree with the decision, the Federal Court can send it back to the IRB for another hearing. If RAD comes to the same conclusion, they too can send it back to the IRB for a hearing.