Bill C-12, also known as the Strengthening Canada's Immigration System and Borders Act, is under scrutiny as it progresses through Parliament. Immigration Minister Lena Diab maintains the proposed changes will streamline the refugee claim process, making it more efficient and accessible for applicants. However, several organizations and refugee advocates are voicing strong opposition, arguing that the bill could create a two-tiered system that disadvantages certain refugee claimants.
The core of the debate revolves around new ineligibility provisions within Bill C-12. One provision prevents individuals from accessing an oral hearing before the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) if they make a refugee claim more than one year after arriving in Canada. Another provision affects those entering Canada from the U. S. between official ports of entry, making them ineligible for refugee protection if they file their claim 14 or more days after arrival. Critics argue these timelines are arbitrary and fail to account for the complex circumstances refugees often face.
Opponents of Bill C-12 suggest that these changes contradict the principle of non-refoulement, potentially leading to the return of individuals to countries where they could face persecution or danger. Concerns are particularly high for survivors of gender-based violence, LGBTQIA+ individuals, unaccompanied minors, and those with mental health issues, whose situations may delay their claims. The Canadian Council for Refugees has been a vocal opponent, highlighting the potential for the bill to undermine Charter-protected rights and Canada's international legal obligations.
While Bill C-12 offers a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) for those deemed ineligible under the new provisions, critics argue this process is inadequate compared to a full hearing before the IRB. The debate continues as Bill C-12 moves forward, raising important questions about fairness, accessibility, and Canada's commitment to protecting vulnerable refugees.
