Very well argued submissions to the Supreme Court of Canada regarding Luis Alberto Hernandez Febles v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration concerning exclusion from refugee protection on the basis of serious non-political crimes. The CCR, among others, is arguing that Canada has been broadening this exclusion clause that is part of the Convention refugee definition, with the result that refugees are wrongly denied protection, on the basis of crimes that are not very serious.

The video of the hearing can be watched here: http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/info/webcast-webdiffusion-eng.aspx?cas=35215

Supreme Court’s summary of the case at http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/info/sum-som-eng.aspx?cas=35215. The arguments of the CCR (and other interveners) are available here: http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/info/fac-mem-eng.aspx?cas=35215.

The Governmentâ€™s Rhetoric About Bogus Refugees is Bogus

2014-02-01Blogsmmillard

Nice blog on cuts to refugee health care by Alex Neve (Amnesty International Canada). Particularly like the section about using the term “bogus”:

Since it has no real meaning, what does the Minister mean when he uses it? Refugee claimants the government doesnâ€™t like? Coming from countries the Minister wishes they wouldnâ€™t leave? Whose claims get rejected? Rejected on what basis? Because they werenâ€™t believed? Because their problems, though genuine, donâ€™t fit the legal technicalities of the refugee definition? Because a decision-maker was not prepared to agree that human rights problems are real and serious in their country? Because they are a war criminal and thus, while having a valid fear of persecution, are not eligible for refugee status? Because conditions back home have changed since they left? Or because they couldnâ€™t come up with enough documents to prove their story?

http://newcsj.squarespace.com/blog/2014/1/30/the-governments-rhetoric-about-bogus-refugees-is-bogus.html