Without belabouring the points made by my colleague, I will say that the minister, when he rose to answer the question from the member for Spadina—Fort York on Monday, said the following:
Mr. Speaker, as the member well knows, these are not matters that we talk about publicly, much less on the floor of the House of Commons.
Unfortunately, the power that the Minister of Immigration has to stay deportation is given to him by Parliament, so we parliamentarians give him the power. It's in the IRPA. I did read the court decisions, and I think we should be mindful of the following things that were said by two different justices. This went to a court of appeal as well. There was a pre-removal risk assessment done on Mr. Haq's conduct and the potential that he could be harmed if he were to be deported. He failed each of those measures.
Paragraph 56 of the decision of the Provincial Court of British Columbia said the following:
Mr. Haq’s breach of his release order was a flagrant disregard of terms designed to prevent further offences and...he did so in the face of the authorities.
It went on to say, in paragraph 62, the following.
Mr. Haq has shown disdain for the rule of law and he has publicly encouraged others to break the law while publicly celebrating his arrest. His conduct speaks to an arrogance of ideals at the expense of the democratic process and pro-social dialogue.
The B.C. appeal court decision said he had failed to comply with the conditions of his study permit and that there were reasons of criminal inadmissibility.
Finally, the pre-removal risk assessment said that the court had determined that the likelihood of irreparable harm was not distinctly different from that in the PRRA—which was the pre-removal risk assessment from September 2022—and that there was no specific or meaningful objective evidence of risk. It went on to reference his spouse's medical condition, which I understand was perhaps a consideration.
The justice said there was insufficient evidence on the likelihood of harm to the spouse, though there would be negative health effects, while noting that the spouse still had full access to British Columbia health care.
The deportation was for April 22. It was stayed on April 19.
I believe this committee needs to get answers regarding why Mr. Haq received a stay of deportation whereas other candidates all across the country have not.
I have constituents asking me about the circumstances of this case, and I would like to have the minister here so he could answer those questions for my constituents.
Thank you.