Evidence of meeting #53 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was children.
A video is available from Parliament.
4 p.m.
NDP
Sadia Groguhé NDP Saint-Lambert, QC
Furthermore, there was some discussion about the possibility of applying further measures to prevent criminals from coming to Canada and our having to remove them.
Do these additional measures require broader international work than what we have now and, if so, how could we proceed?
4:05 p.m.
Counsel, REDRESS
Again, I think it's part of a bigger international policy aimed at ensuring accountability for international crimes. If you look at it from an immigration perspective, of course a state has an interest in ensuring that no one suspected of these crimes should come into the country.
From our perspective I think it should be even broader. If you have a no safe haven policy, that should apply to anyone, even from friendly countries, coming to Canada who is suspected of having engaged in such activities.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Sadia Groguhé NDP Saint-Lambert, QC
In July 2011, the Minister of Public Safety, Vic Toews, published a list of individuals accused of or complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity.
What do you think of that particular initiative?
4:05 p.m.
Counsel, REDRESS
From what I hear, and I'm talking here as an outsider, it has been very controversial. Again, I can only repeat that the basic principle is that if these suspects—and I understand they are suspects—cannot be extradited, then they should be prosecuted in Canada.
Again, I understand that we are talking about deportation measures, so I find that problematic.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Sadia Groguhé NDP Saint-Lambert, QC
Do you think the current provision in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act on inadmissibility makes it possible to effectively screen out people involved in war crimes? How should it be amended, if necessary?
4:05 p.m.
Counsel, REDRESS
I think that article 1F of the refugee convention is very clear on what should be done. I think that is well established as a matter of international law, but it should form part of a coherent policy.
What I hear is a desire to focus on prevention in the immigration context, but it should form part of a broader and more coherent policy. I think all components need to be considered fully.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Thank you.
Mr. Andrews, welcome to the committee. You have up to five minutes.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Andrews Liberal Avalon, NL
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'm filling in for our representative today, and unlike him I won't be using all my time. He could ride the clock for a full five or seven minutes without doubt.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Andrews Liberal Avalon, NL
Thank you very much, witnesses, for being here today. I have only one question.
Maybe you could elaborate a little on children going through the process.
I've been told of certain cases where children have been born here or have come here when they were very young. However, when they go through the immigration process and they are being deported they could have been here for a long period of time, and all they have known is Canada. I wonder what impact this has on those children. Is there any research or statistics on this? Could you elaborate on your comments regarding the impact on children?
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, I know that Mr. Andrews is filling in for his colleague, Mr. Lamoureux, but I just want to make sure that we all understand that we're here studying security.
He has asked a question and I want to make certain the committee is aware that whatever the answer may be, it won't appear in the study. I think it might be better if he uses his time to ask a question that might actually be relevant to the study.
That is just a side note.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
The clock has been stopped.
My recollection is that Ms. Jeanes did talk about the detention of children. I think it's a relevant question. Just to be clear, Ms. Jeanes, in her speech, made a comment about children in detention. Detention is about security. So I think Mr. Andrews is perfectly in order.
Go ahead.
4:05 p.m.
Program Coordinator, Action Réfugiés Montréal
It's a bit complex, because my presentation was focused more on refugee claimants: children who themselves are claimants, or children of adult claimants who are found in detention in Canada. The question about removals is somewhat of a different concept.
What's very important is to look at the impact of detention on children while they are here, the possibility of alternatives, and the link to a fair, due process. Being in detention can have a detrimental effect on a family's access to due process while they're in Canada.
I can't speak to the question of the impact of the removal on them and what happens when they go home, but I think there is a lot of information about the impact on parents and the impact on children of being in detention. I want to underline that alternatives seem to be appropriate when children are in detention.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Program Coordinator, Action Réfugiés Montréal
There is a lot of research available. As I said, I recently attended a conference where international research was presented by the International Detention Coalition and by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. There were examples from Canada, the U.S., and Australia.
They often involve guidelines for screening vulnerabilities very early on, either at the moment of arrest or as early as possible in the detention process, to see when alternatives are appropriate. The determination of the appropriate alternatives can be done by looking at where people are in the process, which has an impact on their likely compliance with the procedures, and at the available resources. For example, there are shelters, and in Montreal we have a team of social workers that follows claimants very closely.
Some of the research shows that a case management approach that accompanies people through the process increases compliance and increases the chances that people will appear throughout their refugee claim process.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Mr. Oette, I just want to be clear. In general, you're obviously opposed to war criminals leaving their country of origin to seek safe haven in a new country. What you're really seeking is some international consistency among all countries in terms of the treatment of war criminals. If they do try to get into a country and claim refugee status, or if in fact they have done that, and there isn't an extradition treaty between the two countries, there's no ability to get that person out of the country.
Is that a fairly clear analysis of what you believe?
4:10 p.m.
Counsel, REDRESS
That's correct. It's not only what I believe; it's actually what international law stipulates.
You have a situation in any country, be it here in the U.K. or in Canada, where for one reason or another you have hundreds, if not thousands, who are suspected of international crimes. That is a dilemma you face.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Thank you for that response.
It leads me to the next question. I had a chance to visit the Netherlands and meet with officials there. One of the interesting aspects of how they determine how people can actually stay in the Netherlands is that people have to have clear and concise documentation with them.
They indicated that in the Netherlands, any time people come into the country on a specific airline and no longer have their identification or their passports because they've either eaten them or have thrown them out, and they claim refugee status, those individuals aren't detained anywhere other than right at the airport itself. Once their identification is determined, if they do not qualify to apply for refugee status in the Netherlands, they're put on that same airline and flown back to their country of origin.
Do you have a similar process in Germany?
4:10 p.m.
Counsel, REDRESS
In Germany you have attempts to return refugees as well, but the problem with these procedures is the same. As soon as someone enters the territory, they benefit from non-refoulement, so if they are at risk of torture or persecution abroad, they shouldn't simply be sent back.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
If they are determined not to qualify for refugee status in a particular country, why would that prevent them from being returned to their country of origin?