Evidence of meeting #8 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was language.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Thank you.
Now I'd like to ask Mr. Pagtakhan a question.
Mr. Pagtakhan, I looked at your testimony two years ago, and today I noticed that there were some changes in what you thought were priorities. I was somewhat surprised that you still believe that the revocation of citizenship should be allowed for all sorts of cases involving treason or acts of terrorism.
Am I correct that you are in favour of that?
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
For Canadian convictions on the grounds of terrorism or treason....
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Absolutely.
First of all, you are aware that there are several court challenges with respect to this specific issue. Do you have any comments on that?
Immigration Lawyer, As an Individual
The courts will make the decision that the courts will make. Parliament has the role, and I believe all the members have a role, of putting forward what they believe is the correct law. If the courts strike it down or uphold it, that's their rule, and that's their role in the process.
I have no issue with respect to people challenging laws in court. I think that's something that is proper in our democracy.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
No, but in terms of substance, do you think there is any merit to those challenges?
Immigration Lawyer, As an Individual
I've seen some of the arguments, and the arguments are good. Good lawyers make good arguments. Janet makes spectacular arguments. I don't agree with her on everything today, but she's very well spoken.
When you're in a situation where someone has been convicted in Canada beyond a reasonable doubt and they've already had all the protections under the charter, then for Parliament to say there should be a process that can revoke their citizenship, I think is proper.
If the Supreme Court disagrees with me, I think they're going to have a bigger say than me. But until the Supreme Court disagrees with me, this is my position. Actually, it might still be my position after they disagree with me as well.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Allow me to ask this question, because this was the subject of a lively debate with the previous witnesses as well.
Why is it that you feel that—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj
Thank you, Mr. Ehsassi, but the time is up.
I'd like to thank all the witnesses for appearing today.
Before we conclude our meeting, I have a quick reminder to all committee members that it is a constituency week next week, but Friday, April 29, at 5 p.m. is the last time for submissions to be sent in to the clerk of the committee.
Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.