Archive for category: Criminality

You are here: / Criminality

Success: Warning Letter

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Everyone makes mistakes. In some cases, we deal with situations where our client has made a serious mistake or many mistakes. In other cases, our client has made a minor mistake. In these types of situations, depending on the mistake and the consequences, it may go to an IRCC Officer or a CBSA Officer to review. These Officers have broad discretionary powers to take various types of action against the individual. In some cases, the entire family may be punished. In other cases, the individual may simply get a warning.

Today, we will share a case that involved a mistake by our client that occurred many years ago. She used a shady agent to apply for a Study Permit to Canada based on fraudulent financial documents. The shady agent did not tell her that he added these fraudulent documents to her application. She had no idea. She never got a copy of the package. She didn’t ask questions. She trusted the agent. And she got her Study Permit.

Based on the work of the shady agent, our client got the Study Permit and came to Canada. She finished her studies and she got her PGWP. She was successful with her studies and her career. She got married and had children. She was granted PR status. Everything was going smoothly and, even after many years, she had no idea that the actions of that shady agent may come back to bite.

CBSA caught the shady agent and reviewed all his past applications – going back years. They launched an investigation into many applications and contacted our client regarding her past Study Permit. During an interview with a CBSA Officer in July 2023, our client was served with an A44 Report based on allegations of misrepresentation. The Officer explained Section 40(1)(a) (Misrepretation) of IRPA:

Misrepresentation

40 (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible for misrepresentation

    • (a) for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of this Act;

As you can read from the above, Section 40(1)(a) (Misrepretation) of IRPA is extremely broad and it may include any mistakes made by a shady agent. The potential punishment for a person who has violated A40 of IRPA:

(2) The following provisions govern subsection (1):

  • (a) the permanent resident or the foreign national continues to be inadmissible for misrepresentation for a period of five years following, in the case of a determination outside Canada, a final determination of inadmissibility under subsection (1) or, in the case of a determination in Canada, the date the removal order is enforced

This means that our client was at risk of losing her PR status, being removed from Canada, being banned from Canada for 5 years and being separated from her family in Winnipeg. Very serious consequences.

She immediately came to CIL for help. Over a 3 month period, we were in contact with the CBSA Officer. We reviewed her documents. We researched the shady agent. We prepared her defence, with reference to relevant caselaw from Federal Court.

In the end, our client got a “warning letter”. You can see a redacted version of this document. This was the best possible result. Our client’s PR status is no longer at risk. She clearly regrets using a shady agent to do her Study Permit. She now knows that was a big mistake. The Officer accepted her explanation and he accepted that her regret is genuine. The agent has been punished.

I wish I could tell you that these cases are rare. They are not. I cannot even count the number of A44 Reports that we have dealt with over the years. Individuals may get a A44 Report for any of the IRPA sections for inadmissibility. Typically, we look at sections 33 through 43 of IRPA in these types of cases. The most common sections that we deal with are misrepresentation (A40), medical inadmissibility (A38), and criminal inadmissibility (A36). 

In every case, we want to give our client the best chance at a warning letter. If the Officer is not satisfied, then the case is referred to the tribunal for an Admissibility Hearing. They can then give testimony and call witnesses. This can take a lot of work and it can be costly – both in terms of money and stress. In certain cases, the individual may appeal to the IAD for an appeal. Finally, if the IAD is not available for an appeal, we may have to go to Federal Court to fight for our clients. 

CIL has handled all the situations noted above, many times. If you are dealing with this type of situation, give us a call and we will do our best to guide you through the process. 

Success: Deportation Order Cancelled

/in , , , /by

Canadian immigration laws are tough on criminals. A person who has been convicted of a criminal offence may face serious issues on the criminal side. In fact, CIL has an entire side of our practice for “crimmigration” – this is the area that covers criminal law and immigration law. The overlap is significant so that lawyers need to understand many aspects of both areas of practice to give their clients good legal advice.

Our client is a “long term” Permanent Resident of Canada and a citizen of Portugal. This means that he has spent significant time in Canada after he emigrated from Portugal. He has strong family connections to Winnipeg and he has built his life on this side of the Atlantic. He loves Winnipeg and we put together a strong package of more than 100 pages of documents on his behalf that covered the relevant legal tests.

Our client also has a history of addiction. Addiction has been recognized as a condition that may be considered a “disability” in Canada. According to the Canadian Human Rights Commission:

In Canada, people use different terms to describe struggles with alcohol or drugs. The terms substance dependence, addiction, or substance use disorder are often used interchangeably. The Canadian Human Rights Commission (Commission) uses the term “substance dependence” to refer to previous or existing addiction or dependence on alcohol or drugs. Substance dependence is considered a disability under the Canadian Human Rights Act.

For our client, his addiction led to criminal activities and he faced multiple convictions. He was facing deportation from Canada and CBSA was taking steps to separate him from his family and friends in Manitoba.

Our client contacted CIL after he was convicted and sentenced. He served his time in prison. He already paid a heavy price for his mistakes. He came to us for help so that he would not be deported back to Portugal.

After much work and negotiations with CBSA, CIL successfully stopped his deportation. We love winning our cases. We love helping our clients.

Our client got a “warning letter” from CBSA and they closed his file. This means that he will not be deported and he will be able to stay in Winnipeg with his family. The CBSA Officer accepted that he has been sufficiently punished by the Canadian criminal system. Deportation was canceled.

 

Thank you JHSM!

/in , /by

Alastair Clarke was appointed to the Board of Directors to the John Howard Society of Manitoba (JHSM) in 2015. The organization was quite different at that time. JHSM received significant funding from the NDP government that was in power in Manitoba at that time. The Executive Director seemed to be doing a good job with staff and the union. The finances were in good condition.

Over the past 8 years, Alastair has volunteered many (many!) hours to help the JHSM. Volunteering is key to keeping not-for-profit organizations on track. The Board of the JHSM is an exceptional group of professionals that provide oversight of management, focused on the best interests of the organization as a whole. Alastair’s 8 year term on the Board has come to an end. The Board held a nice celebration to thank Alastair and the Board for their service.

Jail for Immigration Lawyer

/in , , /by

On one hand, immigration lawyers must provide zealous representation. On the other hand, everyone must follow the law. Former immigration lawyer Balrah Singh Bhatti did not understand the second part. He has been charged and convicted of 17 criminal offences, including forgery. He has been suspended by the Law Society and, I expect, he will be disbarred.

In his decision, B.C. Provincial Court Judge Mark Jetté described the criminal acts committed by Mr Bhatti:

Counts 1 to 3 and 5 through 10 charge the Criminal Code forgery and uttering offences in ss. 366(1)(b) and 368(1)(b) respectively.  These offences were committed when Mr. Bhatti forged notes from his family physician at the time, asserting either that he or his client was not well and was unable to attend for a scheduled hearing before the IRB.  Mr. Bhatti then submitted these forged notes to the IRB in support of applications to adjourn a number of hearings which had been set down for several of his clients.

Clearly, the acts committed by Mr Bhatti are wrong and illegal. As an Officer of the Court, lawyers have a duty and responsibility to act in the best interests of the legal system as a whole while, at the same time, acting in the best interests of the client.

The Rules of Professional Conduct, set out the Law Society of Manitoba set out:

2.1-1 A lawyer has a duty to carry on the practice of law and discharge all responsibilities to clients, tribunals, the public and other members of the profession honourably and with integrity.

The above is described further:

Public confidence in the administration of justice and in the legal profession may be eroded by a lawyer’s irresponsible conduct. Accordingly, a lawyer’s conduct should reflect favourably on the legal profession, inspire the confidence, respect and trust of clients and of the community, and avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

Indeed, this type of case puts the whole system in question and undermines public confidence in the legal profession.

The Public Interest test

In this case, the judge considered the joint submissions to the Court and opted to follow the SCC precedent regarding the “public interest” test:

In Anthony-Cook, the Supreme Court of Canada considered and rejected a “fitness test” for joint submissions; the court came down in favour of a “public interest” test.  The public interest test requires that trial judges “should not depart from a joint submission unless the proposed sentence would bring the administration into disrepute, or is otherwise not in the public interest.”  A joint submission will bring the administration of justice into disrepute or be contrary to the public interest if, despite the public interest considerations that support imposing it, it is so “markedly out of line with the expectations of reasonable persons aware of the circumstances of the case that they would view it as a break down in the proper functioning of the criminal justice system.”  The court concluded that the public interest test, as distinct from the fitness test, “helps to keep trial judges focused on the unique considerations that apply when assessing the acceptability of a joint submission”, including the importance of promoting certainty in resolution discussions.

Sentencing by the Criminal Court

As reported by CBC News:

In mid-June 2021, Dahak entered guilty pleas and received a conditional sentence of two years less a day with conditions that included house arrest for the first eight months, a curfew for the next eight months and 100 community work hours. He was also fined $14,000.

As a practitioner, this news is deeply troubling. I have never met Mr Bhatti nor any members of his family or his business. From the documents, it appears that he was motivated to try to help his clients; however, he was completely misguided. He committed numerous criminal acts during the course of his practice and it does not appear as though he did so for personal gain. In the end, he will suffer for his crimes. His family will suffer and his former clients will suffer.

Regarding his former clients:

The CBSA said in 2020 that most of the claimants from Bhatti and Dahak’s offences were found not to be refugees and were removed from Canada.

Therefore, it seems that, despite the fraudulent documents, he did not even help those people.

 

Success: Deferral Request

/in , , , , /by

One of our key services is to stop or delay removals from Canada. Receiving a removal order (departure order/ exclusion order/ deportation order) may be extremely stressful for the individual and their family. Over the past +15 years, we have been helping individuals deal with this situation to help explain the situation to the CBSA Officer and, if necessary, to advocate on behalf of our clients at Federal Court. Recently, we were successful with a Deferral Request and our client’s removal order was canceled.Deferral Request

In this case, our client is well-established in Winnipeg; however, he has multiple criminal convictions and he was ordered to leave Canada. He has the support of his Canadian wife and they have Canadian children. He expressed genuine regret for his past mistakes and he demonstrated clear evidence of rehabilitation. CBSA has been trying to remove him from Canada, pursuant to section 48 of IRPA:

 

Enforcement of Removal Orders

Enforceable removal order

  • 48 (1) A removal order is enforceable if it has come into force and is not stayed.

  • Effect

    (2) If a removal order is enforceable, the foreign national against whom it was made must leave Canada immediately and the order must be enforced as soon as possible.

On behalf of our client, we produced a package of +190 pages of supporting documents, legal submissions and objective evidence to the CBSA Officer. To be frank, this was a difficult case. When we met this individual and reviewed his criminality issues, I advised the client that we had a low chance at a successful result. This legal opinion was based, in part, on changes made by the Conservative government back in 2012 included in the “Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act”. Our current Liberal government has not reversed these laws. Throughout the process, however, we were able to put together a very strong package and I am extremely proud of the work done by the team.

As you know from the title of this post, our Deferral Request was granted by CBSA and our client’s removal date has been canceled. To be clear, the Officer did not cancel the removal order itself and the criminality issues have not been expunged. We will continue to work on behalf of this individual to obtain his TRP and Work Permit. The removal order continues to be enforceable and we will likely be dealing with CBSA on behalf of this client again in the future.

For now, our client has been granted permission to stay in Canada with his family for one (1) year and he is not at risk of being removed. We will be working with this family to seek long-term options to keep this family in Canada. Again, the key to getting this decision was significant work done on the part of the team at CIL. In my view, the +190 pages of evidence provided to the Officer clearly showed this individual’s situation warrants exceptional circumstances.

We love helping our clients and working to keep families together.

    Success: Justice for Minors

    /in , , , /by

    I want to share a story that started in 2011 that has (finally) come to conclusion. This is a story about housing law, criminal law, public interest law and poverty law. Unlike almost everything else in this space, this case has nothing to do with immigration. This is a case of a Canadian family who needed legal help. I helped the family while I was working as Staff Lawyer at Unison Health and Community Services (“Unison”) in Toronto in 2011. During this time, this family needed significant support. After I moved to Winnipeg, another lawyer took over the case and helped this family actually collect the $$$.

    Here is a summary of what happened from my Supervisor and Legal Director:

    In 2011, we opened a file for clients who were being evicted for arrears of rent. Alastair Clarke was assigned to the file and represented the clients. As he found out more about the case, he found out that the clients and their 3 daughters were renting from the client’s parents, in the parents’ home. Alastair also found out details about the tenancy in that, the male landlord (grandfather) was assaulting the teenaged daughters. Alastair helped the clients file a tenant application against both landlords (grandparents) seeking compensation from them. I should also mention that around the same time, the grandfather was criminally charged and ultimately convicted for the assaults (and was jailed). To add to the ordeal of a hearing, during the course of the hearing process, the clients were offered money by the grandmother to withdraw the application. They did not. After approximately a year, and several appearances, the clients were successful, and obtained an Order for $25,000 which is the maximum allowable at the Landlord and Tenant Board (and rarely awarded)!
    Often I tell clients, that winning a court case is only half the battle, and that collecting on any type of judgement is the other half. The grandparents did not pay as ordered. Therefore, we (Joanna Mullen who was filling in for Alastair at that time) looked into ways to help them collect on this judgement. In the end, she helped the clients file a writ against the grandparents’ home. This was in 2012.
     
    Recently, we were contacted by the lawyer for the grandparents who had just sold the home. In order for the sale to be completed, the writ had to be first satisfied (paid out).
     
    Today, I had the privilege of handing a certified cheque in the amount of $24,752 to the clients ($25,000 less some arrears owing)!!! When I handed them the cheque, the expressed their gratitude to both Alastair and Joanna and Unison, and stated that this would hopefully bring a bit of closure to the matter. I asked how the daughters were doing, and was told that while the healing process is ongoing, 1 daughter is finishing college, and 1 is engaged.
     
    Congratulations to both Alastair and Joanna for their hard work on the file!!
    As you can read from the above, this was a very sensitive situation and the girls were living with a sexual predator. The grandfather in the family was sexually molesting his granddaughters and taking advantage of the housing situation. It was a messy and stressful experience. At various times, the family wanted to just get out of the rental housing situation and move on. It takes courage and strength to pursue these cases to the end.
    I want to recognize the work of Joanna Mullen who continues to work in the Ontario clinic system. She also shared her thoughts on this case:
    Thanks to everyone for their kind words and congratulations. I also worked with the daughters on applications to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, which were successful. Even though it was several years ago now, the resiliency of those girls in the face of such horrific violations has remained with me. I am happy to hear that they are doing well and that we were able to deliver compensation after so much time had passed.
    The reason I am sharing this story is to highlight the services from the legal clinic system in Ontario. Unison, in particular, should be the model for services. Residents can go to Unison to medical services, employment services, housing support, counseling services, youth programming, pre-natal classes, exercise classes (yoga), disability services and, of course, legal services. I would tell my colleagues that we were providing medical services because many of our clients had medical issues and we were working closely with doctors and nurses. Poverty law often covers many different issues and it makes things go so much easier when service providers can work together.
    Another reason for sharing this story is to focus on justice. The adage that the wheels of justice move slowly is evident. This case has been going through various administrative tribunals and criminal courts for more than 10 years. This family has gone through significant stress. In the end, however, I hope they feel satisfied with the results and I am thrilled that the girls are doing well.

    WOTEC Scam

    /in , , /by

    Warning: please contact our office directly by phone (204-599-6966) or email. There are criminals who use an address in Ontario at “WOTEC Group”who are fraudulently using our name and firm details to solicit clients. We have no connection with WOTEC and they are using our identity without permission or consent. This is a scam. Do not be a victim.

    Scam

    There are two (2) Google reviews from individuals who have no contact with our firm. We believe they gave money to WOTEC and they received bad service. They believe their negative experience was related to my team in Winnipeg and that is simply not true. They are victims of the WOTEC scam.

    We cannot reveal the names of the individuals who came forward and gave us these documents but we thank them. They correctly realized they are the victims of this scam and their money may be gone.

    We have contacted the RCMP, the Winnipeg Police Service, the Peel Regional Police and the CBSA Criminal Investigations Unit. Thankfully, we have good and respectful relationships with law enforcement and we support their investigation. We must also have patience while they conduct their investigations.

    We have received a full contract from clients who contacted our office believing that we represent them. They insisted, of course, they had spoken with Alastair Clarke and they gave us money via WhatsApp. Please note we follow Law Society of Manitoba Rules and do NOT accept payment via WhatsApp. They realized they were the victims of a scam.

    We may not be the only victims. I have also notified my colleagues from across Canada to let them know about this scam. They may be using the details of other reputable immigration law firms in Canada to solicit clients and take advantage of victims.

    You can see the attached contact is signed by “Daniel Jim”. Please be advised he has no connection with our firm and we have had no contact with this person. He may be fictional. Please avoid any contact.

    We have tried to contact WOTEC and we are considering legal action. To date, they have not replied.

     

    CBC The National: Extradition

    /in , , , /by

    Alastair Clarke was recently interviewed by CBC News regarding the potential criminal charges against Peter Nygard. At this point, Mr. Nygard’s son has concerns that his father may leave Canada to escape justice which would force the Government of Canada to make an extradition request. Extradition is a complex area of law; however, based on his studies in International Law at Queen’s Law (Bader International Study Centre @ Herstmonceux Castle) and his professional experience dealing with the intersection of Criminal Law, Immigration Law & extradition law, Alastair was able to provide insight on the potential legal issues.

    Please note: this case has been unfolding quickly and the information is only current as of today, 18 SEPT 2020. As noted by CBC Reporter Caroline Barghout, based on an exclusive interview with Peter Nygard’s son:

    The son says he’s speaking out now because he’s afraid if he stays quiet, his father’s accusers — including his two brothers — may never get justice.

    “My No. 1 goal is for him not to escape,” he said.

    He says Nygard spends summers in Falcon Lake in southeastern Manitoba, and would normally head to one of his properties in California or the Bahamas by the third week of September. But with his father under a cloud of sex allegations, the son thinks his father will instead set his sights on a jurisdiction that won’t extradite him if charges are ever authorized.

    “He believes that he’s above the law — the law does not apply to him,” said the son, adding he bases that on his father’s past actions.extradition

    This point leads directly to the possibility of an extradition request made by the Canadian government, if criminal charges are laid and the accused flees the country.

    Winnipeg immigration lawyer Alastair Clarke says unfortunately, the more money a person has, the easier it can be to evade the law.

    “It’s entirely possible that in this case … Mr. Nygard may find a country who is sympathetic to his, let’s say, his net worth, to his financial capacity,” said Clarke.

    “And so he could find possibly a safe haven, which would be, in my view, quite unfortunate.”

    He says if a country doesn’t have an extradition treaty with Canada, there may not be anything the government can do to get a person back, even if charges are laid.

    Canada doesn’t track, or keep a record of, people who leave the country, he said. Only entries are monitored.

    “If we had the resources in place, that would, in my view, uphold the Canadian rule of law and make sure that alleged criminals are not simply using their private chartered jets, for example — flying to places where we don’t have extradition treaties and escaping the law,” said Clarke. 

    Indeed, extradition can be very messy as we have seen in both the Meng Wanzhou case and the Carlos Ghosn case. These are both ongoing legal matters that involve Canada, the United States, China, Japan, Lebanon and France. A friend of Alastair Clarke, lawyer Richard Kurland has spoken on the complexity of these cases, as reported by CBC News:

    The fight may be over the technicalities of legal privilege — the right to shield sensitive communications and documentation — but observers of the case say the outcome could prove crucial in Meng’s battle against extradition to the United States.

    “This disclosure of who said what to who is critical,” said Richard Kurland, a Vancouver immigration lawyer who has followed the proceedings closely.

    “The line here is how much information ought to be revealed in order for the defence to know the case they have to meet and mount their defence, counterbalanced against the right of the state to conduct clandestine service. That’s quite a difficult balance in a case like this.”

    For more information, please watch CBC The National on youtube. This story starts at 22:40 of the episode.

    Currently, Peter Nygard is in Manitoba and there are no criminal charges. The above is purely speculation. This is an ongoing matter and, as with the other cases above, we will be following this case closely to see if extradition becomes a necessary recourse.

    Success: Crim Rehab

    /in , , , /by

    After years of work, including multiple Temporary Resident Permits (TRPs), we successfully applied for Criminal Rehabilitation (Crim Rehab) for our client who had multiple criminal convictions in his past. These applications are never easy and the Officer at the border has significant discretionary decision making power at the POE. We did not want to have to wait for this client to be eligible for “deemed rehabilitation” as he has strong connections to Canada. Alastair is an expert in crimimmigration – the intersection between criminal justice and immigration.

    Justice is at the core of our legal system and criminality may have a strong impact on immigration. This means that individuals who are convicted and have served their sentences may not be inadmissible to Canada and they may be allowed to enter if they are successful with a “rehabilitation” application according to immigration laws and regulations. In this case, we were retained by a foreign national with five (5) criminal convictions from different incidents in his past. These convictions, and a series of other events, led to a separation of family and hardship; however, after a boatload of work and strong supporting documentation,Crim Rehab we were successful with our Criminal Rehabilitation application (Crim rehab), submitted at the Canadian Port of Entry. We were able to review the application with a Superintendent prior to our client traveling to the border for a non-binding preliminary assessment. Our client got a positive decision from the Officer after only 4 hours.

    In many cases, past criminal convictions are the result of bad decisions made in youth that were affected by alcohol and/or peer pressure. The Supreme Court of Canada has considered similar situations and they have provided instructions to Officers on how to make these decisions. This case was one of those cases. Our client was completely upfront about exactly what happened and how it affected his life. He demonstrated significant changes in his behaviour and he showed genuine remorse.

    Our client was thoroughly prepared by our office. As with all our cases, be prepared, be prepared, be prepared! We spent hours on this application, gave him a mock interview and prepared a strong package of evidence. At the border, he passed multiple interviews and the Officers went through our package very carefully.

    In the end, our client’s application was granted and he no longer needs to worry about inadmissibility to Canada. He is now with his family members in Canada, subject to the Quarantine Act and he is taking COVID-19 seriously. It has been a pleasure to work with this family and it has been very emotional. For our office, it is very important that we build a perfect application and make sure 100% of the potential issues are covered. I will say that the Officer even said to our client that our application was the best Criminal Rehabilitation application he had reviewed. Thank you Officer! Good decision!

     

    WFP: Audit of Deportation Orders

    /in , , , , , , /by

    The widely reported report by the Canadian Auditor General describes the significant backlog and delays in the removal process for individuals who have enforceable removal orders, including deportation orders. These removals are carried out by CBSA Officers and we have many clients who are affected by these orders. We are in contact, almost daily, with CBSA Officers on behalf of our clients to ensure our clients fully cooperate with law enforcement and Canadian regulations. At the same time, we advise our clients on their legal rights.Deportation

    The report focuses on failed refugee claimants who have deportation orders. Let me make a brief comment on this group. It is important to note that even when the refugee claimant’s risk may not rise to the level of risk per sections 96 or 97 of IRPA, they may still face significant risk or hardship and/or persecution. The fact is that the legal bar to refugee status is a high legal test and claimants must go through a rigorous adjudicative process, including examination and cross-examination of testimony. Another key fact is there is a shortage of competent legal counsel and claimants may be poorly prepared for their hearing.

    Winnipeg Free Press reporter Eva Wasney published an article on the Auditor General’s report that discussed the challenges faced by CBSA:

    Winnipeg immigration lawyer Alastair Clarke said some of the criticisms in the report are valid, but the audit is a an “oversimplification” of the removal process because it doesn’t include specific case examples.

    “My concern is that the public reads this report, they don’t understand the details, the individuals who are behind these numbers, and this type of report causes undue or exaggerated anxiety in the public,” Clarke said. “The individuals who are under enforceable removal orders in the serious criminality category are generally only a small fraction of individuals in that entire pool.”

    Of the more than 34,000 cases in the agency’s wanted inventory, 2,800 were criminal.

    Indeed, to a certain extent, this report provides a limited perspective on the current state of removals and it fails to provide a nuanced approach to a complex procedure. I have spoken many times on this topic. Canadian laws require CBSA Officers to adhere to procedural fairness and, in our experience, CBSA Officers in Manitoba are vigilant in following Canadian laws and regulations.

    In addition, I strongly agree with my friend and advocate Dr. Lori Wilkinson who has been doing significant research at the University of Manitoba’s Immigration Research West group:

    While Wilkinson said she is glad to see the immigration removal audit, she is worried that the report could have a negative impact on people who are in Canada legally.

    “There could be backlashes against immigrants,” she said. “Lots of people make the leap that if the deportation system isn’t working, then the immigration system must not be working.”

    This is absolutely correct. In my view, IRCC Officers and CBSA Officers are working hard to ensure integrity in the system and they take deportation orders seriously.

    On the flip side, let us be reminded of deportations that have been rushed and have led to disastrous results. One example that comes to mind is the case of Lucia Vega Jimenez from 2014. She was a failed refugee claimant from Mexico with an enforceable removal order as described in the Auditor General’s report. While she was on the verge of being deported, she took her own life in Vancouver. Advocates point to the serious risks to her life. On its face, I believe anyone can understand that if she was so afraid to go back to Mexico she would take her own life to prevent deportation, she had genuine fear.

    In my view, it is important to consider the people behind these numbers. Every case is different, and I can tell you from many years of experience, immigration is messy. As correctly noted by the report, CBSA Officers focus their resources on serious criminals and ensuring the safety of the Canadian public. This is exactly how the system is designed to work.