Citizenship and Immigration committee  I certainly think that if we aren't clear about who someone is, detaining them is a reasonable measure. The problem I have is the way it's written now allows detention on mere suspicion of inadmissibility. The way it was worded is that you have to have “reasonable grounds to beli

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes. I mean, I just don't think it serves the objective. If the objective is to make the system faster, then we have to do it in such a way that people are treated with procedural fairness so that they can't then later make postponement requests, or go to the Federal Court and sa

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes, because the right to natural justice means the right to a fair hearing. A fair hearing includes the right to have a proper amount of time to prepare yourself to present a full defence, as well as the right to competent counsel. You won't get competent counsel within those ti

Citizenship and Immigration committee  [Inaudible—Editor]

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I certainly don't agree with allowing people to go free before we know who they are, or if we have security concerns about them. That's 100% for sure. I think almost everyone would agree on that. The problem is that if there is no basis for a finding that they are a security ri

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No, but you're not using the correct definition of refugee. According to the convention, it's to escape any kind of persecution—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  —which can be cumulative as well. But no, running away for economic reasons certainly does not make a person a refugee. My only comment about the previous speaker is that he kind of lost his credibility with me when he said there's no discrimination against Roma in Hungary. Ever

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No, the fact that I didn't comment on it doesn't mean I agree with it. Mandatory detention for a long term is simply unconstitutional. I'm not going to talk about fairness. I'm not going to talk about bleeding heart issues. It's simply unconstitutional. The courts will not uphold

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No, I think in most cases, it will work against the applicants—not all the time, but most of the time. The reason is that if someone is going to prove a case, to do that within such an accelerated timeframe is unreasonable. I believe you're a lawyer by background. To expect someb

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Thank you. I'm an immigration and refugee lawyer. I've been practising exclusively in the area of immigration and refugee law for about 13 years. I'm a certified specialist in both immigration law and in refugee law. I'm one of only about a dozen people to hold both specialist

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes.