Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Feb. 22nd, 2021

[Roula Eatrides]

In terms of the process, the IRB only has jurisdiction to adjudicate refugee claims and appeals made within Canada. We determine those refugee claims that are first determined eligible by either the Canada Border Services Agency or the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship. Once they're determined to be eligible, once they're within Canada, they are referred to the IRB and we can start the refugee determination process.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you for that. I also have a follow-up question for you.

With regard to documents for Canadians and Canadian PRs in Hong Kong, and application processing fees being waived for those residents temporarily in Canada, do you find that there has been more expediency with this and facilitating of the process in the way that applications are being put through the system?

Has this been helpful to those seeking to come to Canada?

[Roula Eatrides]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

That's a good question, but in terms of the IRB, we only deal with refugee claims that are made within Canada, so that would be the responsibility of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

I would like to put this question to everybody else, to all our witnesses on the panel who didn't have a chance to answer. I'm very interested in hearing your comments. Thank you so much.

[Henry Chan]

On the question of whether it is more helpful or expeditious for the Hong Kong people, I think one thing is that a lot people who want to claim political asylum are under tremendous harassment in Hong Kong and cannot come to Canada because of travel restrictions.

One of the things I think a previous witness mentioned is to provide essential travel documents for them to travel to Canada to claim asylum, and another thing is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting. The time is up.

We will now move on to Madame Normandin.

Madame Normandin, you have six minutes. Please proceed.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

My first question is for Mr. Evans and Mr. Chan.

A number of witnesses have already spoken about the restrictive aspect of the immigration measures put in place, the fact that they only target students, for example, and not necessarily the average protester who may be an older, uneducated and non-bilingual person. They also talked about travel restrictions. It is known that the borders could at some point be closed to people from Hong Kong who would like to leave their country. Beyond that, there are also people in Hong Kong who may wish to stay and not abandon their families.

Last week, a witness mentioned that what is even more effective than immigration and refugee measures is making sure that there is no persecution in the first place.

I would like to hear from both of you about international relations measures that could be put in place to help people who wish to stay in Hong Kong.

[Prof. Paul Evans]

That's a fundamental question. While we are talking about how we are going to assist people from Hong Kong as they come to our shores, the other question is this: What do we do for the people of Hong Kong?

The idea that Hong Kong is on fire, that its system is collapsing, I think is misleading. It's a place of deep political turbulence, but the city itself is there.

The question then becomes how we are of most value. Our universities, rather than shutting down connections with Hong Kong, are going to have to try to find more ways to connect with them, to do things in Canada that can't be done in Hong Kong. Publication, self-censorship restrictions in Hong Kong...we don't need to perform that way. We can do something a little better.

I think the fundamental issue is about how we try to encourage democracy and human rights in Hong Kong, even recognizing that we have little immediate influence. We need to hope for and nourish the emergence of a moderate democratic middle that can navigate the limited space for political change that still exists in Hong Kong. There are more opportunities in Hong Kong still than in mainland China, and let's not lose those connections through some rash action that will have the PRC close the door even further.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Would you like to add something, Mr. Chan?

[Henry Chan]

I think initially we must take action to solve the political atmosphere that is becoming very clouded in Hong Kong, but there are only limited things that we can do. Therefore, opening a route to asylum or to work or to study is for those who are really under tremendous harassment or under hardship, so that they can come to Canada.

It's not an easy question to answer, because the political system in Hong Kong has been shifted. I think after the national security law, the fundamentals of the constitution, the Basic Law—the mini-constitution—have been shifted. Even, I think, the court of final appeal said that law cannot be interpreted by the Hong Kong courts.

So, there's very little that we can do, and I think offering an escape route for those who want to leave is very important.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

I would like to follow up on what you just said. Are there any measures that may be subject to retaliation by China? I'm thinking here of, for example, providing exit routes, recognizing the British passport, having NGOs on the ground to identify those who are more at risk, and recognizing, as we did today in the House, that what the Uighurs are experiencing right now is genocide. If so, what could this retaliation be?

Despite everything, is it worth continuing to take similar steps? Is there a benefit to doing it?

[Prof. Paul Evans]

Parliamentarians have had a busy China day already on genocide and Uighurs. I think we're at a moment when Hong Kong and Xinjiang come up as the examples of where we have deep concerns in Canada about human rights problems.

The two situations are somewhat different, and I think that as hard as the situation is in Hong Kong now, there is still room for visibility, for transparency around actions, and for us to work with Hong Kongers to try to strengthen human rights and elements of democracy. In Xinjiang that's an even more difficult case. Most people are going to stay in Hong Kong, and our future is with them in Hong Kong as much as it's going to be helping them when they're here in Canada.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Go ahead, Mr. Chan.

[Henry Chan]

On this it's very important that we notice that in Hong Kong, although there is a tremendous crackdown on rights and freedoms, it's still not as bad a situation as the—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting, Mr. Chan, but your time is up.

We will now move to Ms. Kwan.

Ms. Kwan, you have six minutes. Please go ahead.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

My first question is for Ms. Eatrides.

The IRB, between January 1, 2020, and February 19, 2021, finalized 28 asylum claims from residents of Hong Kong and has fewer than 20 claims still pending. Could you advise how many were rejected or refused?

[Roula Eatrides]

That's a good question. I would first caution, though, that some of those claims were from 2018 and 2019 as well. Every claim is unique and determined on its own merits.

We have been averaging around 85% in terms of positive determinations of our claims to date, but I would say we look at every single claim based on claim types. Not all claims from Hong Kong are around political opinion or democracy, but we are trending at over 80% positive.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm sorry, but could you give me a specific number as to how many for residents of Hong Kong were rejected for this period?

[Roula Eatrides]

Approximately 15% were negative out of the 28 claims.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I see. I'm sorry. I wasn't sure what percentage referred to what number. Thank you.

In terms of the IRB decisions, has the IRB received any instructions from the government with respect to humanitarian or compassionate considerations for the people of Hong Kong?

[Roula Eatrides]

The IRB is an independent decision-maker. When we look at our mandate, we have a research group that monitors, on a daily basis, developments with respect to country conditions. We are live to contextual issues, but we do operate independently from the department and the minister.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

No directives have come from the government. Is that correct?

[Roula Eatrides]

We're independent of the government. Our decision-makers are independent, and we have institutional independence. We have—

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

I'd like to bring up the situation of Tiananmen Square back in 1989. The government of the day issued a directive whereby it instructed that this information be taken into consideration, which was as follows:

...all persons who have in some way individually embarrassed their government—

That's referring to China.

—and in so doing having exposed themselves to severe sanctions should they return. ...In view of this, all requests for permanent residence are to be evaluated sympathetically and on an urgent basis.

That was the directive from the government of the day then. How would the IRB deal with such an instruction if it were given today to the IRB?

[Roula Eatrides]

I wouldn't comment on that. We haven't received any official communication, and I really don't want to comment or speculate on what that would look like.