|
Although many assume that Canada has one of the best
asylum systems in the world, no country emulates Canadian policy.
The explanation for this is that, while striving to protect those
who are fleeing persecution, other countries also strongly
emphasize deterring abuse and the control of illegal immigration.
The Canadian system, as currently structured, does not accomplish
these objectives and is therefore out of step with an emerging
harmonization of asylum determination policies and practises in
the developed world.
In the area of reception conditions, Canada allows most refugee
applicants to seek employment. This is not the case in any of the
other major destination countries for asylum seekers in the
developed world. In the area of refugee determination, Canada is
out of step with international norms in terms of eligibility,
structure, and output. Because Canada does not currently employ a
"safe third country" or "manifestly unfounded" review process to
deter abuse, anyone from any country is granted a full review of
their refugee claim in a process that is relatively slow and
backlogged. In recruitment and structure of accountability,
questions must be raised about the capacity of Canada's existing
decision-making process to effectively balance Canada's
international obligations with a sovereign interest in migration
control.
In terms of output, Canada's refugee determination system strays
far from international norms and Canada is the easiest country in
the developed world in which to secure Convention Refugee status.
Canada is also the easiest country in the world for a Convention
Refugee to gain permanent residence and citizenship. Even failed
refugee applicants have a significant possibility of securing
permanent residence and citizenship through various immigration
categories. At the end of the process, relative to other
countries, Canada's effort to remove failed refugee applicants
appears to have been given a low priority.
Taken together, Canada's policies and practises with respect to
refugees seeking asylum attract migratory flows. This is because,
in comparison to policies found in other developed countries,
Canada's asylum policy constitutes a relatively effective means
of migrating to Canada from a range of countries not all of which
are in the developing world or normally viewed as producing
refugees. For the minority that cannot secure permanent residence
status in the extended asylum review process, it offers the
possibility of a lengthy stay in Canada with a relatively
generous package of social benefits. It is concluded that in
comparison to asylum policies found in other countries, Canadian
asylum policy, taken together with the many additional
naturalization possibilities available to failed refugee
applicants, may be characterized as a self-selected immigration
program. But, this is a program that has not been evaluated for
its intrinsic worth or cost effectiveness. It is a system whose
only defence against total collapse derives from visa controls
and transit screening. At the same time, this is a system that
constitutes a veritable bonanza for transnational people
smugglers.
To respond to the imperatives of the global people-smuggling
industry, to control costs and advance Canada's sovereign
interest in migration control, Canada should move to harmonize
its asylum policies with those of other developed nations. Such
an initiative would require fundamental reform of existing
reception and determination policies and require the development
of an effective removal program for unlawful
entrants.
|