Media Release – Legal Aid to refugees and immigrants to end Tuesday morning

The axe has fallen on legal aid for immigration and refugees in Ontario.

Just after 4 pm today, Legal Aid Ontario (LAO) announced by email to staff and stakeholders that, with limited exceptions, the program will be discontinued effective Tuesday morning.

The Province’s unilateral and abrupt end to this critical legal services funding will put people’s lives at risk. It will also throw the justice system into chaos.

This is a crisis. The effects of this decision will be immediate, catastrophic and irreversible.

Premier Doug Ford and Attorney General Caroline Mulroney should immediately reinstate funding for these critical services. We also call on Prime Minister Trudeau to speak with the Premier immediately and remind him of the Province’s responsibilities and that lives are at stake.

Media Inquiries

Erin Simpson
[email protected]
416-363-1696 ext. 103
647-406-1341

Media Release – Legal Aid to refugees and immigrants to end Tuesday morning Read More »

Petition: Reverse the Cuts to Ontario Legal Aid Funding

On April 11, with the release of the Budget, the Government of Ontario made a significant cut of approximately one third of all Legal aid funding. These cuts will jeopardize the rights of those who need legal representation the most.

URGENT! Sign your name now to the petition – let the Government of Ontario know that you care about funding to legal aid and are concerned about how it will impact the most disadvantaged and vulnerable people in our society, including refugees and immigrants in Ontario.

REVIEW AND SIGN: HERE

Many refugee claimants arrive in Canada with almost nothing. Many are dealing with the aftermath of extreme personal trauma and struggle with PTSD, depression or other mental health issues as a result of the events that caused them to leave their homes and countries of origin. Often with little to no English, and even less legal knowledge, they are required to file legal forms, collect evidence, and appear in a hearing to test their claim. They are not equipped to represent themselves in Canada’s refugee determination system, a highly specialized legal field. This is why Legal Aid funding is so essential to protect the rights of such a vulnerable population and to ensure that their full story is heard by a refugee decision-maker through providing access to legal representation.

Access to Legal Aid is also essential to low-income Ontarians who are facing legal proceedings, such as in criminal, family, mental health, poverty law and child protection cases. These Ontarians will also struggle to navigate these legally complex, high stakes proceedings alone without legal assistance or resources.

The impact of these cuts is huge. Vulnerable populations like refugees are left to represent themselves in a complex and already overburdened legal system, where a negative decision leads to deportation to countries where lives may be at risk. The cuts will lead to backlogs and delays throughout the justice system, causing chaos in the courts and costing taxpayers more, not less.

Contact your MPP and MP now:


Petition: Reverse the Cuts to Ontario Legal Aid Funding Read More »

Media Release – Refugee lawyers join legal advocates across the province to condemn cuts to Legal Aid Ontario

For Immediate Release – April 12, 2019

Media Release –  Refugee lawyers join legal advocates across the province to condemn cuts to Legal Aid Ontario

Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers (CARL) & Refugee Lawyers Association (RLA)

The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and the Refugee Lawyers Association are alarmed by Ontario’s decision to cut approximately a third of Legal Aid  Ontario’s funding, announced in yesterday’s budget. Refugee lawyers are joining the Law Society of Ontario, the Family Lawyers Association, the Ontario Bar Association, the Society of United Professionals, and a growing number of justice advocates in condemning the cuts.

Until now, Legal Aid has provided Ontario’s poorest (under $17,000 in annual income) with access to a lawyer when their fundamental rights and freedoms are at stake. These cuts jeopardize the rights of those who need legal representation the most: not only refugees, but also low-income Ontarians who rely on legal aid for a wide range of services, such as criminal, family, mental health, poverty law and child protection cases. They are also counter-productive and will lead to backlogs and delays throughout the justice system, as most people cannot navigate their cases alone. The cuts will cause chaos in the courts and at refugee tribunals and will cost taxpayers more, not less.

Refugees are one of the groups who need Legal Aid the most. Without adequate legal representation, many face life threatening consequences, including detention, torture, and possibly even death after deportation to the countries they fled. Refugee claimants often arrive in Canada with nothing and do not have the ability to represent themselves in Canada’s refugee determination system. They often don’t speak English and are traumatized, yet they are immediately faced with a complex legal system.

“At this time, refugee laws are growing increasingly restrictive in the face of multiple global humanitarian crises.  Refugee claimants must navigate a complex system while dealing with language barriers and extreme personal trauma,” says Aris Daghighian, a member of CARL’s National Executive.

“Ontario should not risk having our most marginalized denied access to justice, including immigrants and refugees. Charter rights are affected in refugee hearings.  Cutting legal aid will create needless suffering.  It will also add to significant backlogs throughout the justice system.” says Raoul Boulakia of the Refugee Lawyers Association executive.

This cut to Legal Aid is irresponsible. One thing is clear. It will throw the justice system into chaos, resulting in rights violations and backlogs. Cutting refugee services risks increasing the undocumented population. This doesn’t help anyone.

We call on the Ontario Government to reverse this unilateral decision and to ensure that rights remain protected.  

Media Inquiries

Erin Simpson

[email protected]

416-363-1696 ext. 103

647-406-1341

Media Release – Refugee lawyers join legal advocates across the province to condemn cuts to Legal Aid Ontario Read More »

RLA Position on Disclosure Limitations

The Refugee Lawyers Association (RLA) is dismayed that the Immigration and Refugee Board may be limiting the disclosure of Refugee Claimants by imposing maximum page numbers for country documents. Furthermore, the RLA is concerned about Board Members being issued any directive to strictly enforce the ten-day deadline in respect of disclosure and other matters. The RLA strongly opposes these restrictions.

Page Number Restrictions

The Refugee Protection Division Rules, SOR/2012-256 (the “Rules”) do not impose limitations on the number of pages disclosed by Refugee Claimants. Such a limitation would be contrary to:

a. principles of natural justice;

b. section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”);

c. the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, RSC 2001, c 27 (the “IRPA”); and

d. Canada’s international law obligations.

The Supreme Court of Canada has held that “the rule of autonomy in administrative procedure and evidence, widely accepted in administrative law, has never had the effect of limiting the obligation on administrative tribunals to observe the requirements of natural justice”.1 Furthermore,

…the major decisions which formulated the principle of the independence of administrative evidence from technical rules have in the same breath made it clear that this independence must be exercised in accordance with the rules of fundamental justice. It is not sufficient for administrative tribunals to operate simply and effectively: they must attain this high ideal without sacrificing the fundamental rights of the parties.2

Thus, administrative tribunals are required to both observe principles of natural justice and to take into consideration the fundamental rights of the parties.

These fundamental rights include a fair procedure that is mandated by section 7 of the Charter, as recognized by the Supreme Court over thirty years ago.3 Furthermore, imposing arbitrary limitations on disclosure violates Canada’s international law obligations. In the decision of Huseen v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2015] F.C.J. No. 956, 2015 FC 845, Justice Diner emphasized that a restrictive interpretation of the Rules (in those circumstances, it was in respect of a reopening application), undermines Canada’s commitment to refugee protection.

In my view, the door should not slam shut on all those who fail to meet ordinary procedural requirements. Such a restrictive reading would undermine Canada’s commitment to its refugee system and underlying international obligations (section 3(2) of the Act). Indeed, one of the purposes of the Refuge Convention, to which Canada is a signatory, is to allow refugees the widest possible exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms (Febles v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2014 SCC 68 at para 27).

Country documents are required to fully present a Claimant’s case. The National Documentation Package (NDP) provided by the IRB is often outdated and/or incomplete. For example, after the attempted coup in Turkey on July 15, 2016, there was a delay of approximately six months before the NDP was updated to detail the persecution that ensued thereafter. Furthermore, even where the NDP for a country is updated every few months, it may be biased towards a position (depending on the sources replicated), and/or silent in respect of certain groups and beliefs within the country. As a result, the right to fairly present the objective basis of a Claimant’s fear must be prioritized over the Board’s interest in adjudicating refugee claims with “efficiency”.

Furthermore, it is unclear why Board Members are unable to efficiently review country document disclosure. Most refugee claims are funded by Legal Aid Ontario. The preparation of a refugee claim for a hearing (after the process of drafting the Basis of Claim), is limited to nine hours. Research (finding and reviewing country documents) is often undertaken by counsel within this nine hours, as is client preparation, review of personal documents, legal research, and correspondence. It is therefore unreasonable for the IRB to claim that the review of country conditions takes so long that maximum page numbers are required, when counsel are mandated to research and review the country documents within a very short period of time.

The Ten-Day Rule

Within several provisions of the Rules, there is a ten-day deadline for documentary disclosure, applications, the proffering of witnesses, and amendments to a Claimant’s Basis of Claim form. However, the Board Member has discretion to accept additional documents/applications/witnesses/changes after the ten day-deadline upon undertaking an analysis of factors and the context for the delay. This discretion is mandated due to the same issues set out above (natural justice, the Charter, the IRPA, and international law obligations).

Furthermore, this discretion is required by the Interpretation Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-21, which dictates the following at section 12 (the “Interpretation Act”):

Every enactment is deemed remedial, and shall be given such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as best ensures the attainment of its objects.

Mandating that Board Members take a “stricter” approach to the ten-day requirement is contrary to the Interpretation Act. The IRPA, its regulations, and the Rules are remedial. The remedy is to provide safety for individuals who are fleeing persecution. The prejudice (if any) to the efficiency of the administration of justice in having a Board Member take a short break (if required) to review a few extra pages is far outweighed by the prejudice to a Claimant in not being able to fully present 3 his/her case. As such, the IRB’s direction amounts to an impermissible fettering of the discretion of Board Members.

Conclusion

The RLA understands that the IRB has a backlog of claims. However, the backlog does not justify new administrative policies that deprive an individual fleeing persecution of a fair hearing guaranteed by Canadian and international law. Efficiencies should be found elsewhere – in respect of issues that do not adversely impact the hearings of Claimants.

___________________________________________________________________

1 Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières v. Larocque, [1993] 1 SCR 471, 1993 CanLII 162 [pinpoints unavailable], online: http://canlii.ca/t/1fs4l

2 Ibid.

3 Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 177. 2

RLA Position on Disclosure Limitations Read More »

Educational and AGM – Nov. 30, 2017

CHANGE OF LOCATION:
CENTRE FOR SOCIAL INNOVATION, 192 SPADINA (QUEEN & SPADINA), ATRIUM ROOM, TORONTO, ONTARIO— WEST SIDE OF SPADINA

CPD ACCREDITATION

3.25 hours (substantive hours)

AGENDA

5pm – 5.45pm DISCUSSION OF MPSEP V. TRAN
Speaker: Justice Justice O’Reilly, Justice – Federal Court of Canada
Moderator: Leigh Salsberg

-Standard of Review
-Conditional Sentence Orders as “Terms of Imprisonment” under IRPA
-Retrospective application in the immigration context of amendments to criminal statutes
-Broader implications, next steps and strategies in cases affected by the decision

5.45 pm -6.30 pm INTERSECTIONS OF CRIMINAL AND IMMIGRATION LAW: WORKING WITH CRIMINAL DEFENCE COUNSEL

Speaker: Peter Edelmann, Edelmann & Co. Law Offices
Moderator: Leigh Salsberg

-Pre-conviction: strategies for plea resolution, agreements on charges, sentences, agreed statements of fact.
-Sentencing: R.v.Pham – taking into consideration of immigration consequences at sentencing, writing expert immigration opinions for a criminal court
-Post-conviction relief: conviction and sentence appeals, withdrawal of guilty pleas, pardons and record suspensions.
6.30pm – 6.50pm Light Dinner Will Be Served

6.50pm – 7.40pm EVERYTHING YOU WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT INADMISSIBILITY ON SECURITY GROUNDS, AND SECTION 34

Speaker : Ronald Poulton, Poulton Law office
Moderator : Leigh Salsberg

– Developments in definitions of membership, danger to security and terrorism
– Impact of SCC decision in Ezokola on complicity findings
– criminality and how to demonstrate rehabilitation at IAD

-Standard of review in Federal Court for Immigration Division decisions under s.34 of IRPA

7.40pm – 8.10pm Q&A SESSION

8.10pm – 8.30pm RLA ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

REGISTRATION FEES:

RLA Members – $50

Non-Members- $75

Students- $25

Articling Students- $25

https://rlaontario.wordpress.com/payment-page-rla-workshops-and-educationals/

CONFERENCE MATERIALS AND RECORDING
Presentation materials will be made available to all conference participants by email within the week leading up to the conference.

A recording of the conference will be made available online to all participants within a few weeks after the conference.

PAYMENT:
Please pay via Paypal on the RLA website. / Veuillez payer avec paypal sur le site
internet de la RLA. https://rlaontario.wordpress.com/payment-page-rla-workshops-and-educationals/

Payment by cheque is also accepted. Cheques can be mailed to / Le paiement par
chèque est aussi accepté. Les chèques peuvent être envoyés à:

Refugee Lawyers Association
c/o Lani Gozlan, Barrister & Solicitor
603-10 St. Mary Street
Toronto, ON
M4Y 1P9

If you require assistance with the fees, please contact Lani Gozlan at [email protected]
Si vous avez besoin d’aide avec les frais, veuillez contacter Lani Gozlan à [email protected]
If you are not a member of the RLA, you can sign up on the RLA Ontario website. Annual Membership costs are $75.00 for lawyers and observers and $25 for students.
http://sevres-babylone.com/rlamembershipapp2016.pdf

WEBCAST
—- More information to come

SPEAKERS:

THE HONOURABLE JAMES O’REILLY
Born on November 13, 1955 in St. Catharines, Ontario. Education at the University of Western Ontario, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University and University of Ottawa. Admitted to the Law Society of Upper Canada in 1985. Consultant to the Law Reform Commission of Canada from 1984-1988; Counsel at Department of Justice from 1988-1989; Sole practitioner from 1989-1997; Executive Legal Officer of the Supreme Court of Canada, 1997-2002; Associate Executive Director of the National Judicial Institute, 2002. Appointed Judge of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division and ex officio member of the Court of Appeal, December 12, 2002. Since July 2, 2003, the date of the coming into force of the Courts Administration Service Act, he is now Judge of the Federal Court.

RONALD POULTON
Ronald Poulton has worked for the United Nations in refugee protection, human rights investigations and as legal adviser to the UN peacekeeping operations in Tajikistan in Central Asia. He has appeared as counsel in some of the landmark immigration cases in constitutional, security & terrorism related matters, at all levels of court, including the Supreme Court of Canada. He has been a regular speaker at the Canadian Bar Association and other conferences, has taught immigration law and was called to testify before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Immigration and before the Inter American Commission on Human Rights. He is a board member of the Toronto Bail Program board of directors. He has written and published two books, the second of which – Pale Blue Hope – depicts his work in UN peacekeeping operations in Cambodia in 1992 and in Tajikistan in 1999. He continues to practice immigration law in Toronto.

PETER EDELMANN
Peter Edelmann has a practice focused primarily on litigation and appeals in the areas of immigration and refugee law, extradition and criminal defence. He appears before all levels of the federal and provincial courts as well as the various divisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board. He has been an active member of the national Immigration Section of the Canadian Bar Association for several years and sits on the litigation committees of both the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and the Canadian Council for Refugees. Peter regularly appears before Parliamentary committees and before the Supreme Court of Canada on issues related to criminality and national security in the immigration context. Peter is an instructor in the University of British Columbia Certificate in Immigration: Laws, Policies and Procedures (CILPP) program and co-hosts the Borderlines podcast (www.borderlines.ca).

Educational and AGM – Nov. 30, 2017 Read More »

RLA – Winter and Spring Educationals 2017

Since November’s AGM, where members heard from Raoul Boulakia on Test Case funding for challenging backlog/legacy cases, and Doyon Gold (Homewood Health, Member Assistance Program) and keynote speaker, Marley Mawhinney (Iyengar Yoga Centre) speaking about vicarious trauma and self-help and creating balance for refugee lawyers, the RLA held two members-only educational seminars in the winter and spring.

On February 28, 2017, Leigh Salsberg, Jacqueline Bonisteel, and Maureen Silcoff presentations on current issues around the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement.

Then, on May 10, 2017, the Honourable Justice Campbell, Richard Wazana, and Robert Blanshay spoke on emergency stays in Federal Court. Both Richard and Robert provided written materials for the attendees.

RLA – Winter and Spring Educationals 2017 Read More »

RLA Executive 2017

At the November 29, 2016 the following members were named to the executive:

Astrid Mrkich
Dilani Mohan
Eve Sehatzadeh
Giselle Salinas
Kemi Oduwole
Lani Gozlan
Marianne Lithwick
Pablo Irribarra
Raoul Boulakia
Tina Hlimi

RLA Executive 2017 Read More »

RLA Winter Educational

The Refugee Lawyers Association Winter Educational, held in Toronto on February 16, 2016, covered the importance of recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions in Kanthasamy and B10 on refugee law advocacy.

Refugee Lawyers Association Winter Educational: Raoul Boulakia explores the implication of recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions on inadmissibility cases
Raoul Boulakia explores the implication of recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions on inadmissibility cases

Refugee Lawyers Association: Aviva Basman and Barbara Jackman discuss the implications on refugee law practice, especially humanitarian and compassionate applications, of the Supreme Court's Kanthasamy decision.
Aviva Basman and Barbara Jackman discuss the implications on refugee law practice, especially humanitarian and compassionate applications, of the Supreme Court’s Kanthasamy decision.

RLA Winter Educational Read More »

RLA AGM November 17, 2015

The Refugee Lawyers Association held it’s 2015 AGM at the CSI Annex in Toronto on November 17th.  The meeting featured a panel discussion with Barbara Jackman, Jean Marie Vecina, and Swathi Sekhar, about the Ontario Court’s Habeas Corpus jurisdiction over immigration detention matters, as well as a presentation by Ratna Omdivar about Lifeline Syria and the citizen-led initiative to get groups of residents in the Toronto area to sponsor 1000 refugees over the ext two years.

Barbara Jackman, Swathi Sekhar and Jean Marie Vecina discuss Habeas Corpus and immigration detention, at the RLA AGM, photo by ©j.martin/sevres-babylone
Barbara Jackman, Swathi Sekhar and Jean Marie Vecina discuss Habeas Corpus and immigration detention

The RlA executive for the upcoming year includes

Raoul Boulakia
Lani Gozlan
Pantea Jafari
Jack Martin
Dilani Mohan
Luis Antonio Monroy
Leigh Salsberg
Preevanda Sapru
Eve Sehatsadeh

RLA AGM November 17, 2015 Read More »