Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 4th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This is the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. It is Tuesday, March 4, 2014. This meeting is televised. We are studying strengthening the protection of women in our immigration system.

You will note that item 1, committee business, which we normally do in camera, is the budget, so I directed the clerk to hold this in open session, unless there are some questions, in which case we will move in camera. This budget should be distributed to you.

Do I have a motion that this budget be adopted?

Mr. Shory, are there any questions or debate?

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Was the budget just presented to us?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

It should be before you.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Can I look at it before we vote on it?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We'll move in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ladies and gentlemen, we have some guests to help us with our study on the protection of women in the immigration system.

We have before us, from the Canada Border Services Agency, Lesley Soper, who will be speaking to us for about eight minutes. She is accompanied by Mr. Geoffrey Leckey, the director general of the enforcement and intelligence operations division.

With this group we also have, from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Superintendent Jean Cormier, the director of federal coordination centres.

Welcome to all of you.

Ms. Soper, you have the floor.

[Lesley Soper, Acting Director General, Enforcement and Intelligence Programs, Canada Border Services Agency]

Thank you and good afternoon, Mr. Chair, and honourable members of the committee.

I'd like to thank the committee for inviting the CBSA to participate in its study of how to strengthen the integrity of the spousal sponsorship program.

Superintendent Jean Cormier, a colleague of ours from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, has agreed to be present today to support our agency and to take any questions you may have that might fall within the RCMP's purview.

As the committee has heard, Citizenship and Immigration Canada is the lead department for the policies relating to, and management of, the spousal sponsorship program.

Through this program, Canadian citizens and permanent residents may sponsor close family members for Canadian immigration. In order for a family class application to be successful, both the sponsor in Canada and their sponsored family member must meet the immigration requirements under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

The CBSA's involvement in this program is quite limited and specific. Once an immigration officer has processed an individual's application and issued a visa, the individual will be deemed to have met the admissibility requirements to enter Canada. When the individual arrives at a port of entry, a border services officer will direct them for secondary examination to validate their documentation and land them as a permanent resident in Canada.

The only other involvement the agency has in the spousal sponsorship program is during an appeal. Should an application for spousal sponsorship be denied by Citizenship and Immigration Canada, the sponsor in Canada has the right to appeal the decision. Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the CBSA represents the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada before the Immigration and Refugee Board in such cases, and will work closely with the responsible immigration officer to obtain and review the case file and present the government's position on the case before the board.

Having outlined the role that the agency plays in the spousal sponsorship process, I would like to turn my remarks to the more challenging aspect of the committee's study, which relates to the potential vulnerability of sponsored spouses and partners.

One of the objectives of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is to facilitate family reunification. The spousal sponsorship process is open to abuse when individuals enter into non-bona fide marriages to facilitate entry into Canada.

Both Citizenship and Immigration Canada and the CBSA understand that to combat marriage fraud effectively, there is a need for joint anti-fraud measures to deter individuals who might otherwise use a marriage of convenience to circumvent Canada's immigration laws. A marriage of convenience is a marriage or common-law relationship whose primary purpose is not the reunification of a genuine couple.

The CBSA has various enforcement options under Canada's immigration laws to pursue suspected marriage of convenience cases. The agency may remove an individual from Canada if that person misrepresented himself or herself, or if it is found that the sponsored person did not comply with the condition of living in a legitimate relationship with their sponsor for a minimum of two years, as required under the new regulations.

The CBSA investigates cases of marriage of convenience, and subsequently criminal charges may be laid for misrepresentation. In such cases, the CBSA conducts a criminal investigation and recommends to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada that charges be laid in criminal court. The CBSA investigates and pursues criminal charges under IRPA, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, against a person who counsels an individual to misrepresent himself or herself.

The CBSA's criminal investigators focus on potential fraud cases in which both parties are wilfully attempting to circumvent and abuse the immigration system. In some cases, the sponsor may be given a financial benefit in exchange for the sponsorship, or there may be an organizer or facilitator involved in setting up fake marriages for the purposes of immigration.

The CBSA also investigates cases in which a foreign national spouse used their relationship with a Canadian solely for the purpose of gaining a permanent status in Canada. However, these types of cases are challenging to investigate due to the limited availability of documentary or independent evidence to support allegations of this nature.

The issue of victimization by an abusive sponsor, however, goes far beyond marriage fraud in the immigration context. While the CBSA is mandated to actively pursue enforcement action against any permanent resident or foreign national against whom a reportable criminal conviction is registered, the CBSA is not mandated criminally to investigate cases in which domestic violence may be suspected. Unlike the CBSA, the police have the authority to pursue charges under the Criminal Code of Canada with respect to domestic violence incidents. The police are trained to deal with victims of domestic violence and work in cooperation with social services at agencies and non-governmental agencies that focus on helping victims.

Social service agencies provide shelter and other assistance to victims where needed. Many of their staff are trained to assist with domestic violence victims from immigrant communities.

Another area of concern relating to the potential vulnerability of sponsored spouses and partners is in situations of non-bona fide marriages that are used to cover human trafficking.

Trafficking in persons is a crime that involves the recruitment, transportation, or harbouring of persons for the purpose of exploitation, typically in the sex industry or for forced labour. It is an investigative responsibility of the RCMP. Trafficking in persons and related conduct are criminalized through specific offences in the Criminal Code of Canada and IRPA, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Trafficking in persons is not to be confused with human smuggling, which is the illegal movement of people across a border. Trafficked persons are always deprived of liberty when they arrive at their destination, whereas smuggled migrants would not be restricted in their movement and freedom after arrival.

Through field guidance and their enforcement training, CBSA officers receive information to assist in the identification and interception of individuals who are either suspected of human trafficking or who may be victims of such activity. Any time an officer encounters a situation in which human trafficking is suspected, they are required to separate the potential victim from the suspected human trafficker; to seize and hold any means of transportation, document, or other item if the officer believes, on reasonable grounds, that it was fraudulently or improperly obtained or used; and to take detailed notes and notify their supervising manager of the case as soon as possible so that the information may be reviewed and direction and support may be given.

A regional intelligence officer is the next point of internal contact. They will in turn coordinate further action with all the implicated CBSA partners, such as the police of jurisdiction and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

The RCMP will investigate to ascertain whether trafficking in person charges can be laid under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act or the Criminal Code of Canada against the alleged traffickers.

Citizenship and Immigration will conduct an interview on immigration options with the victim and may issue a temporary resident permit for up to 180 days when a preliminary assessment is made that the person may be a victim of human trafficking. The fee is waived for that permit.

A longer-term temporary resident permit or a subsequent permit can be issued if verification of the facts provides reasonable grounds to believe that the person is indeed a victim. Immigration officers will counsel the victim regarding the need to submit an application for a work permit should they wish to work and will provide victims with interim federal health documentation. The assistance is available for up to 180 days if the victim has no health insurance or is unable to pay for their own health care services.

Mr. Chair, despite its limited role in the spousal sponsorship program itself, the CBSA is very sensitive to the very real potential for individuals to be victimized by those that would circumvent the law.

To this end, the agency will remain vigilant in detecting and reporting potential cases of domestic violence as part of its core duties. It will also continue to support Citizenship and Immigration Canada's policy efforts to ensure that new immigrants are not trapped in violent relationships for fear of loss of their immigration status.

We would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you for your presentation, Ms. Soper.

Mr. Menegakis has some questions.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for appearing before us today. I also want to thank you for your service. We're all partners in this battle to try to keep those who would have illicit intentions from coming into Canada and abusing our immigration system.

My first question will be to you, the CBSA officials here with us today. Can you elaborate for us what the process is if a CBSA border agent detects or is made aware of a marriage fraud, a forced marriage, or even spousal sponsorship abuse?

[Geoffrey Leckey, Director General, Enforcement and Intelligence Operations Division, Canada Border Services Agency]

Under Canada's immigration laws, the CBSA has various enforcement options to pursue suspected cases of fraud, notably marriage of convenience cases. That can include the removal of the individual from Canada if that person misrepresented themselves or did not comply with the sponsorship conditions.

The CBSA also investigates and pursues criminal charges under IRPA in cases where both parties are knowing participants to a marriage fraud in order to gain entry to Canada, such as cases where the sponsor may be given a financial benefit in exchange for the sponsorship as well as cases where they may be an organizer or facilitator in setting up fake marriages for immigration purposes.

For statistical purposes, the CBSA spends about half of its criminal investigation funding on immigration investigations. Criminal investigations related to immigration offences tend to be complex, lengthy, resource-intensive, and difficult to obtain evidence on. For that reason, criminal investigations are not open for all referrals, particularly if an administrative procedure is available that may be equally appropriate, such as removal from Canada. We focus our criminal resources on serious contraventions of legislation, cases where the probability of obtaining the required evidence to pursue the investigation is likely and success of prosecution is assessed as high.

Again, here are some statistics. Since April 1, 2010 there have been 392 referrals of marriage convenience cases to our criminal investigations division. Of those, 67 cases have been opened, and 34 remain open. Seven charges have been laid, and three out of five that have gone to court have been concluded with a guilty finding. The other two remain before the courts.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to ask a question of you, Superintendent Jean Cormier. We know that honour killings have occurred in Canada, most recently of course, the Shafia trial comes to mind. What can you share about the Shafia case that would be relevant to our study here? Is the RCMP taking any special measures that are associated with honour killings in particular?

[Superintendent Jean Cormier, Director, Federal Coordination Centres, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

Yes, I can certainly speak to that. The 2009 Shafia case that happened in Kingston, Ontario, was certainly a tragedy and has given rise to a lot of awareness of honour killing in Canada. I believe that until that time it was something that was not as widely recognized. It gave rise to awareness that there was a lack of education in relation to those situations ongoing in Canada, ones that may not have been recognized. In terms of that case in particular, when we look at the history that goes with it, some of the girls had gone to authorities such as social services. They had been returned back to the family, not knowing exactly what to do.

In relation to that, the RCMP has an initiative currently on the go. We are developing training that will be rolled out. Right now it's in the pilot phase, but it will be rolled out to the greater law enforcement community in the near future through not only the RCMP but also through the Canadian Police Knowledge Network and through Holland College. It's going to be available online for everybody to get more awareness on the issue. This should also help with how to recognize it, what to do about it, and how to address it.

We also have other initiatives. The RCMP is participating in other initiatives such as the working group that is currently led by the Department of Justice that is studying the existing law to see where the gaps are in legislation, what could improve when we recognize it, and what can be done about it within the boundaries of the law. There are a number of items in motion currently that are dealing with that.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Does the CBSA or the RCMP monitor cases that would be potential forced marriage cases?

[Supt Jean Cormier]

Speaking for the RCMP, no. We would not monitor it, but it may come to our attention through other investigations.

[Geoffrey Leckey]

As for the CBSA, the CBSA is aware of the existence of forced marriages. We've produced an intelligence brief on forced marriages and it has been provided to our stakeholders within the CBSA and within CIC, such as visa officers who field the initial applications from couples abroad.

We have also identified a number of countries in which Canadians have been forced into marriage at a higher rate than in other countries. In other words, there are certain countries abroad where there's a higher propensity to see forced marriages, but I won't mention those countries at this point.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Menegakis.

Madame Blanchette-Lamothe.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank our witnesses for coming today. It is a pleasure to have you here.

First, I would like to come back to a few terms you used in your presentation and in your answers to the questions. You spoke about “marriages of convenience”. In your opinion, a marriage of convenience is necessarily fraudulent. Is that correct?

[Lesley Soper]

A marriage of convenience is really an immigration term that we use to describe persons who enter into relationships for the sole purposes of immigration. A marriage of convenience is specifically to talk about marriage entered into for the sole purposes of gaining permanent residency, and that it's not a real marriage. There are other ways to interpret that phrase, but how we use it in immigration is very specific.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you.

With respect to “arranged marriages“, do you think an arranged marriage is necessarily a marriage of convenience? If not, do arranged marriages have some legitimacy? Could you clarify the concept a little?

[Geoffrey Leckey]

An arranged marriage is not the same thing as a marriage of convenience. An arranged marriage can very well be a part of the culture in some foreign countries and be absolutely acceptable.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you.

In the offices of MPs, we often hear about the cases of people who have a lot of difficulty having their marriage recognized and ensuring that it is considered valid and genuine, particularly in the case of arranged marriages. Could you tell us about the tools you use to differentiate between a marriage of convenience and a legitimate or valid arranged marriage?

Sometimes it seems that there is confusion when sponsorship of a spouse is denied. So I would like to know what your guidelines are and what tools you use to determine beyond a shadow of a doubt that a marriage, arranged or not, is a marriage of convenience.

[Geoffrey Leckey]

An arranged marriage can be legitimate. The tools we use to distinguish between an arranged marriage, a legitimate marriage in general, and a marriage of convenience include the following techniques. If I may, I will switch to English.

We interview the applicants, interview them together, interview them individually, and corroborate details of their marital life to make sure that they coincide. We may conduct an inspection of the couple's dwelling. In certain rare instances, we may conduct surveillance to determine whether or not the couple are actually cohabiting as they claim to be. If necessary, interviews may be conducted with friends, family, and co-workers.

Additionally, applicants may be required to provide evidence of their relationship in the form of letters, emails, photographs, etc.

Those are the tools we would use to distinguish between the two types of marriage.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you.

Do you acknowledge that sometimes there may be cases where valid marriages that are not marriages of convenience are not recognized? Do you recognize this problem?

[Lesley Soper]

Yes, of course.

If I may, I will add that obviously the primary decision-maker on whether or not a sponsorship is legitimate is Citizenship and Immigration. They do their due diligence in assessing the bona fide qualities of that relationship. It only comes to us when there has been some indication that it's not a bona fide relationship, but in that also, the law is structured such that the couple is given the benefit of the doubt under the law. In fact, in sponsorship appeals before the Immigration and Refugee Board, they can bring new information to the table to talk about why their information should be considered legitimate and their marriage should be considered bona fide.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you.

I would like to ask a quick question about conditional permanent residence.

Last week, we spoke to CIC staff, and they did not seem to have an answer to this. Do you know how many people have been sent back to their country because of this conditional residence status? Do you have figures on how many people have had to return to their country and how many requested a status exemption because of some kind of abuse or violence?