From the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association:
Last Friday, part of Bill C-24 went into effect, officially creating a two-tier citizenship system. As a result of this new law, dual citizens and people who have immigrated to Canada can have their citizenship taken away while other Canadians cannot. The government’s press release last week tried to justify this discriminatory law by raising the threat of “jihadi terrorism,” but Bill C-24 could easily be used against non-terrorists—for example, a journalist who is convicted of a “terrorism offence” in another country for reporting on human rights violations by the government.
See:
https://bccla.org/2015/06/its-official-second-class-citizenship-goes-into-effect/
Thank you for posting this, Northern Shrike! I’m glad to see the Civil Liberties Association of at least one province is poised to take the government to court …. again! What about the other provinces? What are they doing about this? Maybe the first place this link should get sent is to all the other Civil Liberties Associations in the country.
Many thanks for posting this, and the link to the petition.
An excerpt from the petition says;
“I was shocked when we learned that the federal government is undermining Canadian citizenship as we know it – taking away the rights of millions of Canadians. Right now, the government is working to turn many Canadians into second-class citizens with fewer rights – just because they were born outside Canada or are dual citizens.
Why should my citizenship be worth less than other Canadians, just because my mom was born in a different country and I’m a dual citizen? Nobody should be a second-class Canadian, no matter where their family comes from.
Canada is all about diversity. Many Canadians were born in other countries or are citizens of other countries because of their family history – and all of us are 100% Canadian…..”…..
Quoted from https://www.change.org/p/hon-chris-alexander-pc-mp-canadian-government-stop-bill-c-24-don-t-turn-millions-of-us-into-second-class-canadian-citizens
What a travesty. For those who chose Canada as our home – now our oath to Canada means everything to us, but NOTHING to the government of Canada? I thought we had a mutual social contract. Apparently we swore allegiance to an AUTOCRACY (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocracy ) not a democracy? The Harper Cons are gutting the very idea of citizenship. Discriminating against millions in order to punish some few they have in their sights.
And for those children born in Canada but who inherited another citizenship via a parent – how can they be held responsible – now recast as lesser citizens than those born in Canada as Canadian only? And those who naturalized and gave up their former home?
Given the many Canadians who were born duals, or naturalized or inherited a second citizenship or had one foisted on them, this should help to maximize and mobilize Canadians against the Harper Cons and bring down this travesty of a government in the next election.
What arrogance bordering on criminality – that a few in power can abuse the public trust and pass a law deeming the citizenship of those they are sworn to serve as suspect and relegating them to lifelong second class status.
This is an excerpt from the government press machine – yet another of the usual piece of facile self justifying propaganda bs;
“…Also officially in force as of today is a new, more streamlined citizenship revocation process. This new process will help ensure Canada and Canadians are protected, and that revocation decisions can be made quickly, decisively and fairly.
Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) officials will be implementing these new measures immediately and will prioritize cases that have been tried and convicted here in Canada on at least one of the grave crimes listed above….”…
And how much would you bet that a Freedom of Information request for the release of actual numbers of those cases would get you only a redacted document after a huge delay – or NO actual document at all.
Harper will never be able to justify this treatment of the millions now relegated to a second class Canadian citizenship. Exactly how many ” …cases that have been tried and convicted here in Canada on at least one of the grave crimes listed above…” have there even been?
And yet, a prominent Canadian with wealth and connections was able to insult Canada, voluntarily renounced his Canadian citizenship, and yet was allowed back into Canada straight from a US prison, and he didn’t even have permanent resident status. He even had an escort into Canada.
“…..Conrad Black is once again part of an elite club: a foreign national who has secured a permit to live in Canada even before finishing jail time abroad.
As The Globe and Mail first reported this week, a request from Lord Black, the former media baron, for a one-year temporary resident permit was approved by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration in March even while he was still jailed in Florida for fraud and obstruction of justice.
Canadian immigration lawyers on Wednesday said it’s extraordinarily rare for the federal government to grant the right to reside here to convicted felons while they’re still in prison….”
.”Citizenship and Immigration was unable to say how many temporary resident permits it has awarded to foreigners still living in a cell block..”…..
See;
‘Just how special is Lord Black’s residency permit?’
STEVEN CHASE
OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, May 02, 2012 10:21PM EDT
Last updated Monday, Jun. 18, 2012 10:35AM EDT
from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/just-how-special-is-lord-blacks-residency-permit/article4105216/
Sorry for those affected. This must really hurt.
So a dictator in any country in the world can decide who keeps Canadian citizenship?
This is outrageous. Among those affected would be persons born in Canada of one or two US parents, who are eligible for US citizenship even if they’ve never asked for it or acted on it. Not to mention those born in the US of Canadian parents and who have never lived in the US as adults nor claimed nor acted on US citizenship.
It also potentially applies to millions of other naturalized Canadian citizens from other countries than the US, as well as children born in Canada to those citizens.
Sign the petition. Also, write to your MP (regardless of political party) and demand they make this an issue in the coming election. This is quite clearly a violation of Section 15 of the Charter, and the absence of any judicial oversight or appeal process (as far as I know) also violates at least one of the other sections of the Charter.
Again, the Tory majority has rammed through legislation almost certain to be overturned by the Supreme Court, at considerable expense to any plaintiff bringing a suit and to all Canadian taxpayers who will be paying the salaries of the government lawyers and civil servants supporting the government case (likely, in the case of at least some of the Justice lawyers, against their own better professional judgment). This is profoundly contrary to the spirit and letter of Canadian law and democracy to date, and yet another reason to vote ABC.
If you are a member of or recent donor to any of the federal political parties, I urge you to write to the party leader and demand he or she raise this issue in the election debates, as well as the party’s candidate in your riding. It is important that ALL naturalized Canadians, no matter their origins, be informed and understand the threat that this legislation could pose to them if abused by ANY governing party, whether that of Stephen Harper or of anyone else.
It is imperative that we in Canada rid ourselves of this horrible government in the next election.
Canada’s motto used to be “peace, order, and good government.” Nothing IMO done by the Harperoids since 2011, nor much done when they were in the minority, can reasonably be described as “good government.” Canada needs and deserves better than this.
It’s not at all clear to me whether the wording of the legislation would permit revocation of Canadian citizenship held by those persons who renounced or relinquished their US citizenship. That would probably hinge on the interpretation, under this legislation by some government official and not by a judge in open court with plaintiff rights of defense and cross-examination, of the phrase “eligible for another citizenship.” Theoretically any CLN holder has the right to appeal to the US State Department for a reversal of their loss of nationality, to a Board of Appeal. Does that make them “eligible” for US citizenship and thereby under Bill C-24 at risk of having their Canadian citizenship revoked if the government thinks it has cause under this legislation or any unilateral government interpretation of the terms of the legislation?
If anyone doubted the so-called conservative government of Stephen Harper is dangerous to natural or constitutional law in Canada, doubt no more. They are fatally dangerous to our democracy and our rule of law.
EveryJew is eligible for Israeli citizenship; every grandchild of an Irish citizen born in Ireland … Poland, Italy are much the same and there many others
The Government of Canada says it changed the process, quoting from http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=832299 below:
Citizenship could be revoked if:
A person obtained, retained or resumed citizenship by false representation, fraud or by knowingly concealing material circumstances.
And could be revoked from dual citizens if the person:
-served as member of an armed force or organized armed group engaged in an armed conflict with Canada;
-was convicted of treason, high treason, spying offences and sentenced to imprisonment for life; or
-was convicted of a terrorism offence or an equivalent foreign terrorism conviction and sentenced to five years or more imprisonment.
Note: Revocation on these grounds would only apply to persons with dual citizenship, to comply with Canada’s obligations under the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.
Under the old, three-year process:
Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) Minister indicates intent to revoke citizenship.
Federal Court (FC) finds that citizenship was obtained fraudulently or applicant chooses not to go to FC.
Governor in Council decides whether to revoke citizenship.
Under the new, less costly, more efficient process:
The vast majority of cases (those related to residence fraud, concealing criminal inadmissibility or identity fraud) are decided by the CIC Minister. More exceptional cases, such as those involving war crimes and crimes against humanity as well as cases regarding security, human or international rights violations and organized criminality, would instead be decided by the FC.
Back to me: Note that a CIC minister will be deciding the “vast majority of cases”–anything related to “identity fraud”. Wouldn’t this make all dual citizens vulnerable to losing our Canadian citizenship if our identities are stolen and misrepresented?! Notice that the reason the non-duals are immune from this extreme measure is because of the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.
A Canadian with a CLN is not a dual citizen. He or she would be treated the same as a born-in-Canada Canadian, right? After all, stripping this person of Canadian citizenship, under whatever pretext they might like to dream up, would make him or her stateless.
I wouldn’t put it past Harper to have had Bill C-24 written just to get Omar Khadr (born in Canada but has Egyptian citizenship via his father). Harper’s hatred of Omar is boundless. Mine of Harper is too now.
http://drdawgsblawg.ca/2014/02/the-harper-governments-deport-omar-khadr-bill.shtml
To quote my daughter: ” Anyone who has ever been on the wrong side of bureaucratic boondoggle of any sort should be breaking out in cold sweats and nightmares at this point.”
@Embee re: ” I wouldn’t put it past Harper to have had Bill C-24 written just to get Omar Khadr (born in Canada but has Egyptian citizenship via his father). ”
That thought crossed my mind also.
The Australian Government is thinking the same way.
Tony Abbott move to deprive Australians of citizenship suggests a dangerous authoritarian mindset:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/tony-abbott-move-to-deprive-australians-of-citizenship-suggests-a-dangerous-authoritarian-mindset-20150612-ghl4pq.html
Legal questions over citizenship laws:
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2015/06/13/citizenship-plans-based-on–mistaken-advice-.html
Citizenship plan ‘overwhelmingly supported’, says Tony Abbott:
http://www.afr.com/news/politics/citizenship-plan-overwhelmingly-supported-says-tony-abbott-20150531-ghdh8m
It is worth reading the several documents produced by BCCLA on this topic. Links are embedded in the text.
The Broadbent Institute, a social democratic think tank based in Ottawa, has published a paper by Patti Tamara Lenard on this topic. She quotes Audrey Macklin:
“From antiquity to the late 20th century, denationalisation was a tool used by states to rid themselves of political dissidents, convicted criminals and ethnic, religious or racial minorities. The latest target of denationalisation is the convicted terrorist, or the suspected terrorist, or the potential terrorist, or maybe the associate of a terrorist. He is virtually always Muslim and male.”
See http://www.broadbentinstitute.ca/pattitamaralenard/conservative_law_creates_second_class_citizens
She is right; we are not the primary target. Nonetheless it is deeply discouraging to learn after spending my entire adult life in Canada, and thirty-five years as a Canadian citizen, that my citizenship is conditional. A conviction for civil disobedience in blocking an oil pipeline, for instance, might get one stripped of Canadian citizenship and deported. (The rhetoric of the Harper government includes “environmental terrorism”.)
Hannah Arendt made the observation that the right to citizenship is the right to have rights. With Canadian citizenship now conditional for those of us who are naturalised, many other rights are conditional as well. This bill reinforces the import of the Canada-US IGA on FATCA implementation.
Three points: “Tax evasion” is increasingly assimilated to “money laundering” and money laundering to terrorism: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=money+laundering+as+terrorism&ia=about
The new UK-US extradition treaty was ostensibly negotiated to facilitate the extradition of terrorists. In fact it has been used mostly to extradite to the USA those accused of financial crimes, whether or not the alleged crime could, or would, be prosecuted in the UK.
It used to be that (since the end of the Nazi era and the implementation of Allied Kommandatura Law No. 1 revoking the Nuremberg Laws) it was mainly the USSR and China that expelled (or forced into exile) their own citizens and abrogated their citizenship. More and more “democratic” States are now doing the same. (Of course the USA has done this, but tacitly: most notably Tomoya Kawakita and Yaser Esam Hamdi.)
@NorthernShrike, re: “With Canadian citizenship now conditional for those of us who are naturalised, many other rights are conditional as well. ”
It is also conditional for those of us who were born dual or who have the possibility of claiming another citizenship.
@WhiteKat mentioned “… or who have the possibility of claiming another citizenship”
The UK and Swiss courts (and doubtless those of other countries) have already ruled, in immigration cases, on who has, or is entitled to, a particular foreign nationality without reference to the authorities of that country. Typically this relates to someone who, but for making an administrative demarche, might obtain that nationality for him/herself or for an infant.
The result may be to make someone stateless since (unlike the typical deportation case where the relevant ministry seeks travel documentation from the other country’s embassy or consulate) these disputes simply relate to the grant or denial of citizenship. There are countless thousands of deportable individuals around the world whose purported country of nationality will not have them back. Some linger in prison; in the Zadvydas case the US Supreme Court said that such a person can’t be kept in prison indefinitely.
Although perhaps that will change with the invention of civil custody, now mainly used for sex offenders but perhaps a concept relevant to undeportable terrorists as well.
Inchoate nationality has been discussed in the literature. Sometimes it doesn’t work: Meyer Lansky never was able to claim aliya and despite (as I recall) the offer of $2 million no other country would have him either. He returned to Florida, USA and arrest. And for $1 million in legal fees, they say, his lawyers got him off.
@WhiteCat
Right you are.
From reading a few more articles, I observe a) this is occurring or is contemplated in other western countries, and b) the motivation is above all stripping citizenship from Islamic terrorists.
It is unlikely the Canadian legislation will stand up to judicial review.
@NorthernShrike,
re: ” the motivation is above all stripping citizenship from Islamic terrorists. ”
And the motivation behind Bill C-51 is to protect Canada from ‘terrorists’?
And the motivation behind FATCA is to catch ‘US tax cheats’?
Maybe I am paranoid, but I suspect the agenda behind most of the moves towards freedom suppressing legislation, runs much deeper.
On the same Conservative / Harper government note: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/06/14/tories-use-final-chance-b_n_7581054.html
and more wasted Canadian tax dollars: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-government-cranks-up-polling-in-run-up-to-election-1.3109766
@Calgary411, all
Picked up this blog somewhere (either here of elsewhere) that you can subscribe to which has weekly updates every few weeks on articles in the Canadian press, called “Harper Watch”. Most recent top featured article? None other than from Tim Harper:
“Conservatives choose retaliation over redress when it comes to aboriginals”:
“OTTAWA—It is the default position of the Stephen Harper government.
If you encounter dissent, you demonize. If you are crossed, you take the low road and fight back. Seek enemies. They keep supporters energized and help you raise money.
Now it’s been caught and has retreated to another well-known default position — ignore.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/06/11/conservatives-choose-retaliation-over-redress-when-it-comes-to-aboriginals-tim-harper.html
Many will remember Tim Harper’s article here concerning FATCA:
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/05/26/toronto-star-fatca-story/comment-page-1/#comments
To subscribe to “Harper Watch”:
https://harperwatch.wordpress.com/2015/06/13/harper-watch-may-17-to-june-12-2015/
Thanks, bubblebustin!
(Poor Tim Harper has to share the same last name — though I’m sure his parents are good people!)
From the Star article:
With Bills C-31, C-24, C-51, *dual citizens* ARE now all at risk if whatever government of the day desires as there is now a dotted line from *protestor* to *terrorist* on this country’s organizational chart. The thought of another Harper term of government ties my stomach into knots. Canadians need to show the this government the door and again value integrity and ethics for this country so we are not further marginalized and mocked in the larger world arena.
Idealism?: Canada can be a leader instead of the follower it has become.
Also from your “Harper Watch” link — Winnipeg Free Press – Harper doesn’t let law get in the way
Calgary411 and Bubblebustin, you may find this article (and the 4000+ comments) interesting:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-government-cranks-up-polling-in-run-up-to-election-1.3109766
ooops….Calgary411 already linked to that article.
Much better commenters on that article than the last one I commented on, the CNS one (or at least they agree with my views). So many times, the comments are better than the actual abbreviated media piece (and, as we realize, often too NOT).