{"id":14931,"date":"2026-03-05T05:40:36","date_gmt":"2026-03-05T10:40:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cila.co\/?p=14931"},"modified":"2026-03-05T05:42:53","modified_gmt":"2026-03-05T10:42:53","slug":"canadas-new-border-bill-is-trading-fairness-for-speed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cila.co\/fr\/canadas-new-border-bill-is-trading-fairness-for-speed\/","title":{"rendered":"Canada\u2019s New Border Bill is Trading Fairness for Speed"},"content":{"rendered":"

Authored by the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Border security is essential to the\u00a0safety of Canadians and\u00a0integrity of our immigration system. It has taken on even greater importance amid ongoing developments in the Canada-U.S. trading relationship.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

However, the federal government\u2019s Bill C-12 should raise major concerns among all Canadians.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Canada has a reputation for treating immigrants and refugees fairly.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0Over\u00a040 years ago,\u00a0the Supreme Court ruled\u00a0that\u00a0refugee claimants\u00a0deserve\u00a0a chance to\u00a0make their case\u00a0in person before being sent away.\u00a0Likewise,\u00a0courts have\u00a0also ruled that would-be immigrants, workers,\u00a0visitors\u00a0and students\u00a0are entitled to procedural fairness in the processing of their applications.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But a new piece of legislation, Bill C-12, is threatening to change that. While the\u00a0federal\u00a0government says\u00a0it\u2019s\u00a0just trying to make the system faster and more secure, many\u00a0Canadians\u00a0are worried we are cutting corners on human rights\u00a0and the Constitution.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Right\u00a0now, refugee claimants\u00a0usually get an in-person\u00a0hearing at the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB)\u00a0where they can\u00a0explain their claim\u00a0directly to\u00a0a\u00a0decisionmaker.\u00a0Bill C-12 threatens to change that for many people.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Instead of an in-person\u00a0hearing,\u00a0refugees who have waited more than a year to claim\u00a0asylum\u00a0or those who have entered Canada from the U.S. by irregular means\u00a0(due to concerns they will not be treated fairly and humanely by the Trump administration)\u202fwould\u00a0have\u00a0their claim assessed on paper by an immigration officer. No talking, no explaining, and\u00a0very little\u00a0chance to appeal if the\u00a0officer\u00a0gets\u00a0it wrong, which would risk putting\u00a0their lives\u00a0in danger.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The bill also adds a strict “one-year rule\u201d\u00a0for asylum claims.\u00a0If\u00a0you have\u00a0been in Canada for more than a year and then try to apply for refugee status,\u00a0you are\u00a0out of luck\u2014no in-person hearing, just\u00a0the on-paper risk assessment by someone who\u00a0has\u00a0never met you, seen you or heard you speak.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This sounds\u00a0like\u00a0simple\u00a0common sense, but life\u00a0isn’t\u00a0always simple. What if your home country was safe when you left, but a war started while you were here? Or what if you were too traumatized or scared to speak up right away? Under\u00a0Bill C-12, it\u00a0wouldn’t\u00a0matter.\u00a0You would not get\u00a0an in-person hearing\u00a0and you would have limited appeal rights.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In addition,\u00a0Bill C-12\u00a0changes the law retroactively. Imagine\u00a0a referee changing the rules of the game after the puck has dropped. The bill\u00a0would\u00a0allow the federal government to have\u00a0the power to cancel immigration\u00a0documents\u00a0or stop applications whenever they\u00a0deem\u00a0it to be\u00a0in the “public interest.”<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The problem?\u00a0Bill C-12\u00a0doesn’t\u00a0actually define\u00a0what “public interest” means, opening the door to arbitrary actions by the government. Students and skilled workers could see their permits cancelled without explanation. Would-be immigrants could be told their applications have been cancelled after they have spent years waiting in line\u00a0legally.\u00a0This would\u00a0hurt the credibility of the immigration system\u00a0and\u00a0also\u00a0unfairly penalize applicants who are following the rules.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Not only is the bill itself undemocratic, but so too is the process to enact it.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Ottawa is charging forward with the bill despite\u00a0over 300 civil society groups expressing opposition. Recently, the Senate\u2019s Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology (SOCI)\u00a0published\u00a0a report calling for removal of the\u00a0bill\u2019s\u00a0most controversial immigration and asylum\u00a0proposals.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Yet,\u00a0in spite of\u00a0the Committee\u00a0citing concerns\u00a0regarding\u00a0human rights, privacy, and executive overreach<\/span>,<\/span><\/b>\u00a0Ottawa is close to\u00a0implementing\u00a0the bill into law without amendments.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Why should Canadian citizens care about this?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

We should care because our legal system is like a shield. If we let the government poke holes in that shield for one group of people, the whole shield becomes weaker for everyone.\u00a0This becomes a slippery slope whereby the federal government\u00a0could feel\u00a0emboldened to also infringe on civil liberties and constitutional rights through other means.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

We cannot allow the government to trade fairness for convenience. If we stop giving people their “day in court” and start making life-and-death decisions based\u00a0on paperwork alone, we\u00a0aren’t\u00a0just changing a law\u2014we are losing the very fairness that makes Canada what it is.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Improving the integrity of Canada\u2019s immigration system is\u00a0necessary\u2014but it must be done in a way that upholds the rule of law, procedural fairness, and the safeguards that protect vulnerable people.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Authored by the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association<\/p>","protected":false},"author":115,"featured_media":13633,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[593],"tags":[275,224,95,681,740,526,299,24,177,92,698,231,741],"class_list":["post-14931","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-positions","tag-asylum","tag-cbsa","tag-cimm","tag-constitution","tag-fairness","tag-federal-court-of-canada","tag-irb","tag-ircc","tag-parliament","tag-refugees","tag-rule-of-law","tag-soci","tag-supreme-court"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t