Another problem with the bill is that women and LGBT people—we're going to call them that—from so-called safe countries also face prejudices before the board to the extent that their country is considered safe.
For us, this situation is unacceptable, and we repeat that refugee status must be based on a rigorous assessment of the person's individual situation rather than a general assessment of the country that person comes from. Subclause 11(2) of the bill would also require an interview within eight days after the asylum claim is filed and a hearing within 60 days.
To be able to testify and confide without fear for their safety or that of their family, claimants need to know the people who hear them, but also to know the system in which they have landed, their rights, the laws and the implementation of those laws.
In the case of sexual violence or of violence suffered as a result of sexual orientation or gender identity, a state of post-traumatic shock or shame may prevent people from speaking freely to their lawyers or to other key people in the asylum process. From that perspective, we consider a hearing within 60 days absolutely unrealistic.
We also feel that two months are much too short a time frame not only to gather together relevant documents to support an asylum claim, but also to find—