By Peter Showler August 12, 2009, Ottawa Citizen

This is a problem in Canadian refugee law which encourages bogus claims — Prime Minister Stephen Harper

While apologizing to the president of Mexico, Prime Minister Harper has echoed what his Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, has been saying for some time. Canada’s refugee system is overwhelmed with bogus refugees who come to take advantage of a generous asylum system. These bogus refugees are queue jumpers who are sneaking into Canada through the asylum system. And nobody likes a queue–jumper, least of all Canadians. Here are two questions that Canadians might consider: 1. Who are these bogus refugees? 2. What exactly is the refugee law problem that encourages them to come to Canada?

Kenney is quite clear about who a bogus claimant is: anyone who is a failed refugee claimant. He cites Mexican claims as the example. Eighty-nine per cent were rejected in 2008. He has said they are all queue jumpers, economic migrants who are abusing the refugee system. But are they?

With the minister’s indulgence, I would define a bogus claimant as one who makes a false refugee claim knowing that he or she is not a refugee. That definition would undoubtedly cover some Mexican claimants who come to Canada with a phoney story about horrible events that never happened. It would even cover the Mexican migrant who has naively been misled by an unscrupulous travel agency to simply arrive in Canada. It would not however describe many of the failed Mexican claims.

Over the past six years, most Mexican claims have involved threats or brutal physical attacks related to narco-traffickers, violent domestic abuse and homophobia. Many of the claimants recount terrifying experiences including the murder of friends and relatives. Invariably the deciding issues in these cases have been the capacity of the Mexican government to protect its citizens as well as the possibility of living safely elsewhere in Mexico.

The objective evidence about state protection in Mexico has been inconsistent. Mexican legislation offers basic human rights protections but the corruption or incapacity of police and government officials sometimes results in a failure of protection. The decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) have been mixed and controversial but have usually concluded that sufficient state protection was available, and have refused the claim.

But is this a bogus refugee claim? There is little doubt that many refused Mexican claimants believed they were refugees and came to Canada seeking its protection. The distinction is important. In order to fix the problem, to remove the incentives for bogus refugees, we need to know who they are to ensure that we deter them and not genuine refugees who could be caught in the same net.

The prime minister was not specific in regard to the second question: What exactly is the problem that is drawing bogus refugees? Mr. Kenney has given us several answers. He has said that he does not believe that Mexican or Czech claimants are refugees. He has said that he cannot tolerate people simply arriving in Canada, saying the magic word “refugee” and getting a work permit and/or welfare benefits, thereby jumping the immigration queue. On other occasions, he has referred to fraudulent claimants being able to stay forever.

These are all separate issues with potentially separate solutions. Allowing refugee claimants to work or receive welfare is the most dubious problem. Fair treatment and reasonable assistance of refugees is a legal obligation under the UN Refugee Convention and the decent thing to do. Not all countries, including the United Kingdom, to its shame, have complied with those obligations. But if the concern is the attraction of bogus claimants, the solution is not harsh treatment of claimants but rapid processing of claims. If refugee claims can be decided, reviewed, and the refused claimants removed within 12 months, there is no incentive for fraudulent claimants to sell houses and uproot families for a brief period of employment in Canada.

When Kenney says that he does not believe that Czech Roma or Mexicans are refugees, and therefore they are presumably bogus refugees, he is contradicting both the IRB and the Federal Court which have both said that some Czechs and some Mexicans are refugees who are at risk of serious harm. These are issues of fact and law, not government policy. Kenney does not like the answers but he has not challenged any of the positive decisions on refugee claims by the IRB in court, which is the government’s right.

The real problem is delays in the claim process which are a principal factor in attracting fraudulent claimants who count on years of employment in a wealthy economy before being deported. The Conservative government was a principal cause of that delay, starving the IRB of members for two years, a partial cause of the current backlog of more than 60,000 claims. The longest delays lie in the back end of the system where refused claimants linger for years before government officials complete ineffectual risk reviews before removing claimants. These are delays that lie within the government’s control but are conveniently ignored.

Canada’s refugee system does need reform and fraudulent claims should not be encouraged. Fast and fair decisions are possible. Parliamentarians and Canadians should look carefully at the government’s proposed refugee reforms to see that they solve the real problems, not the bogus ones.

Peter Showler is director of the Refugee Forum at the Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa. He is a former chairman of the Immigration and Refugee Board and author of Refugee Sandwich, truthful fiction about Canada’s refugee system.

The bogus refugee myth

By Peter Showler

This is a problem in Canadian refugee law which encourages bogus claims.

— Prime Minister Stephen Harper

While apologizing to the president of Mexico, Prime Minister Harper has echoed what his Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, has been saying for some time. Canada’s refugee system is overwhelmed with bogus refugees who come to take advantage of a generous asylum system. These bogus refugees are queue jumpers who are sneaking into Canada through the asylum system. And nobody likes a queue–jumper, least of all Canadians.

Here are two questions that Canadians might consider:

1. Who are these bogus refugees?

2. What exactly is the refugee law problem that encourages them to come to Canada?

Kenney is quite clear about who a bogus claimant is: anyone who is a failed refugee claimant. He cites Mexican claims as the example. Eighty-nine per cent were rejected in 2008. He has said they are all queue jumpers, economic migrants who are abusing the refugee system. But are they?

With the minister’s indulgence, I would define a bogus claimant as one who makes a false refugee claim knowing that he or she is not a refugee. That definition would undoubtedly cover some Mexican claimants who come to Canada with a phoney story about horrible events that never happened. It would even cover the Mexican migrant who has naively been misled by an unscrupulous travel agency to simply arrive in Canada. It would not however describe many of the failed Mexican claims.

Over the past six years, most Mexican claims have involved threats or brutal physical attacks related to narco-traffickers, violent domestic abuse and homophobia. Many of the claimants recount terrifying experiences including the murder of friends and relatives. Invariably the deciding issues in these cases have been the capacity of the Mexican government to protect its citizens as well as the possibility of living safely elsewhere in Mexico.

The objective evidence about state protection in Mexico has been inconsistent. Mexican legislation offers basic human rights protections but the corruption or incapacity of police and government officials sometimes results in a failure of protection. The decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) have been mixed and controversial but have usually concluded that sufficient state protection was available, and have refused the claim.

But is this a bogus refugee claim? There is little doubt that many refused Mexican claimants believed they were refugees and came to Canada seeking its protection. The distinction is important. In order to fix the problem, to remove the incentives for bogus refugees, we need to know who they are to ensure that we deter them and not genuine refugees who could be caught in the same net.

The prime minister was not specific in regard to the second question: What exactly is the problem that is drawing bogus refugees? Mr. Kenney has given us several answers. He has said that he does not believe that Mexican or Czech claimants are refugees. He has said that he cannot tolerate people simply arriving in Canada, saying the magic word “refugee” and getting a work permit and/or welfare benefits, thereby jumping the immigration queue. On other occasions, he has referred to fraudulent claimants being able to stay forever.

These are all separate issues with potentially separate solutions. Allowing refugee claimants to work or receive welfare is the most dubious problem. Fair treatment and reasonable assistance of refugees is a legal obligation under the UN Refugee Convention and the decent thing to do. Not all countries, including the United Kingdom, to its shame, have complied with those obligations. But if the concern is the attraction of bogus claimants, the solution is not harsh treatment of claimants but rapid processing of claims. If refugee claims can be decided, reviewed, and the refused claimants removed within 12 months, there is no incentive for fraudulent claimants to sell houses and uproot families for a brief period of employment in Canada.

When Kenney says that he does not believe that Czech Roma or Mexicans are refugees, and therefore they are presumably bogus refugees, he is contradicting both the IRB and the Federal Court which have both said that some Czechs and some Mexicans are refugees who are at risk of serious harm. These are issues of fact and law, not government policy. Kenney does not like the answers but he has not challenged any of the positive decisions on refugee claims by the IRB in court, which is the government’s right.

The real problem is delays in the claim process which are a principal factor in attracting fraudulent claimants who count on years of employment in a wealthy economy before being deported. The Conservative government was a principal cause of that delay, starving the IRB of members for two years, a partial cause of the current backlog of more than 60,000 claims. The longest delays lie in the back end of the system where refused claimants linger for years before government officials complete ineffectual risk reviews before removing claimants. These are delays that lie within the government’s control but are conveniently ignored.

Canada’s refugee system does need reform and fraudulent claims should not be encouraged. Fast and fair decisions are possible. Parliamentarians and Canadians should look carefully at the government’s proposed refugee reforms to see that they solve the real problems, not the bogus ones.

Peter Showler is director of the Refugee Forum at the Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa. He is a former chairman of the Immigration and Refugee Board and author of Refugee Sandwich, truthful fiction about Canada’s refugee system.