Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 50 Comments

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/

50 thoughts on “It’s official – second class citizenship goes into effect”

  1. There are over 4500 comments to the article at the CBC, and most are CON negative. Is this a good sign for October? I hope so. My comment is buried among the rest, but I am feeling the ‘will of the people’ here, or maybe just thinking wishfully. Encouraging others to add to the anti-Harper comments….

    WK wrote:
    Canadians need to insist that ‘the will of the people’ reflect our so-called democratic Canadian society, otherwise we are our own worst enemies. Harper and Company are the antithesis to the ‘will of the people’: Bill C51(‘anti-terrorist’ – yeah right), Bill C-24(strengthening CDN citizenship – yeah right, more like threatening those with potential dual citizenship), FATCA(what’s that? hidden in Bill C-31 omnibus budget that makes Cdns with US ties 2nd class), TPP(big business wins, citizens lose), AIIB non-support(why are we NOT joining a move towards the exodus of the US dollar?), etc.

    Vote strategically this October if you have hope for the future of your children and grandchildren. Choose the candidate in your riding most likely to defeat the Conservative candidate, whether that be Liberal or NDP. If your riding is balanced between the Liberals and NDP, vote for the party candidate which is ahead in the national polls.

    Heave Steve. Let the Liberals know(should they win as they are as ruled by bankers and corporations as the CONS) that their days are numbered too if they think they do not work for us.

  2. Like WhiteKat, I posted something on Harper’s use of our tax dollars for Tory campaign polling, which like WhiteKat’s comments got buried in the avalanche of mainly anti-Harper posts. I’m copying it here, because though it’s off-topic for this thread and this website, I think it’s worth passing on. Here goes:

    As are many other Canadians, I am angered and disgusted at the hypocritical use by Harper and his party of my tax dollars to conduct opinion polls for their partisan purposes, data that will either never be shared with the public who paid for it and who provided it, or, if ever shared, won’t be shared until after the election is over. For the Prime Minister and the party who rightly criticized the Liberals for the sponsorship scandal to turn around and do something like this, is yet one more reason to vote ABC.

    Because of this abuse of my tax dollars, I have decided that for the rest of this election campaign, I will not provide any information to any opinion pollster, or anyone whom I think might be an opinion pollster masquerading as something else, on any political topic. I will provide my opinions on various things, by email or in person, to the candidate for whom I intend to vote in my riding (who is NOT a Conservative), and to the candidate’s party leader. I will not provide opinions to door-to-door canvassers, no matter who they say they represent, unless accompanied by that candidate.

    I urge everyone who is not a Tory supporter to do likewise. The result will be to distort these opinion polls in favour of the (generally now marginalized and unpopular) opinions of the Tory base, encouraging the Tories to pander even more to their base in the coming months, leading I hope to their further marginalization and to a very nasty surprise for them on election day.

    You are under no obligation to reply to any pollster or questioner, other than in a court of law or during the national census. Just don’t cooperate with pollsters, and the whole exercise becomes a misleading waste of money. Sabotage the polls and sabotage Harper. Share your opinions only in person to whomever you intend to support on voting day, and to those friends and neighbours whom you wish to influence.

    Ask your friends and neighbours to do likewise.

  4. On the brighter side, do you think we could convince the Government of Canada to use this new found power to extradite Roy Berg from Canada? He and his ilk inflict much terror on Canadians who have unfortunate birth places.

  5. @PierreD, I doubt it. Roy Berg plays right in to the image of us that the CDN gov’t continues to promote (so as to be able to get away with throwing us under the bus), i.e. that we are ‘Americans living in Canada’ who therefore are required to abide by American law.

  6. Sadly, if Americans were not so hated, Canadians(not just Canadians with clinging US nationality) would get offended by the term ‘American in Canada.’ Try referring to someone as ‘Chinese in Canada’ on a Canadian blog or article anywhere, or in a discussion among a group of people, and you will get beat on. But rarely does anyone bat an eyelash, when we are referred to as ‘Americans in Canada’.

    This discriminatory attitude has got to change if we are going to get support from our fellow Canadians for being FATCA’d. And even if we win the FATCA lawsuit, what is the USA going to ask for next? Our RRSPs to help fund their wars? Our children to help fight their wars? Would Canadians even care since we are ‘Americans in Canada’?

  7. “Canadians Held Hostage by the US in Canada Who Are Left to Pay Their Own Ransom”

    I’m writing some letters to Conservatives, explaining why, after decades of Reform and Conservative voting, I cannot stomach voting Conservative this year. (Yes, I’ve finally made up my mind.). I will include the above name as an alternative to their “Americans in Canada”.

    C-31 and C-51 have left me feeling insecure and unprotected by my government in the only country I have ever known.

  9. This issue affects all Canadians. It is miscategorized as “Issues regarding US persons abroad.”

    To the best of my understanding, I am eligible to apply for Japanese citizenship. I am not a permanent resident here but I don’t have to be; Japanese law does not require permanent residence to apply for citizenship.

    As far as Canada is concerned, it does not matter that I have no wish to apply for Japanese citizenship. What matters is that I am probably eligible for it.

    This status makes me eligible for being rendered stateless by the Government of Canada, right?

  10. Don’t overlook the plea bargaining issue. It’s a lot easier to get somebody to plead guilty, whether they are or not, if you threaten to banish them from Canada, and nobody will object that the government is doing this, because after all you pled guilty.

  11. @WhiteKat, thank you for using “clinging US nationality.”

    Terms are so important and we need to use terms like that. Us Nationality = gum on shoe.

    I have become militant in regard to nationality. For kicks I have gone into High Street Banks solely so that I can start to open an account…and when they ask place of birth…..I explain thats racist. I then ask, “Would you like to know my sexual preference?”

    We must not let these people become comfortable with their actions.

  12. Detailed post on Australia’s equivalent, the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Allegiance to Australia) Bill 2015
    http://ignorantiajuris.com/2015/06/24/bill-to-strip-citizenship-from-vandals-and-terrorists/

    Under a proposed new section 35A of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, a dual national “ceases to be an Australian citizen” if and when they are convicted of specified Commonwealth crimes, described as “terrorist offences and certain other offences”. UNSW professor George Williams says the list of offences is too broad, and “appears to cover low-level offences that have only a very minor connection to terrorism”.

    Williams points out that damaging Commonwealth property is on the list. This offence is unconnected to terrorism or sedition, and the offender doesn’t even need to know the damaged property belongs to the Commonwealth. If a dual national committed a minor act of vandalism — such as scratching a plaque on the banks of Canberra’s Lake Burley Griffin — their Australian citizenship would be forfeit.

  13. I can just imagine. I am not a dual citizen now, and never was Australian, but imagine if I were a dual Australian and Canadian.

    And imagine I got a shoelace stuck in the escalator going up to the Canadian embassy in Tokyo.

    That would be enough for both Australia and Canada to strip me of citizenships, right?

  15. The BC Civil Liberties Association is doing an excellent job of trying to raise public awareness of the dangers from and outrages of Bill C-24.

    I urge everyone to sign this on-line petition they’ve started to Chris Alexander, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Probably a waste of time; when has Harper or any of his cabinet ministers listened to anyone other than their spin doctors and their “base” (now declined to 28% of Canadians according to latest Global News national poll, putting the Liberals at 29% and the NDP at 35% with a clear shot at a minority government given seat-distribution models they used, 11 seats more than the Tories and 44 more than the Liberals).

    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

    See also
    https://bccla.org/2015/06/nine-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-changes-to-canadian-citizenship/

  16. … also I suggest emailing, phoning or speaking with (in person) whichever federal candidate in your riding has in your opinion the best shot at defeating the Tory candidate in your writing, and also that candidate’s party leader, on this issue. Mention that BCCLA has launched a court challenge to Bill C-24, yet another example of undemocratic, illegal and badly-written laws by Harper that result in plaintiffs (and all taxpayers through funding of government legal bills) having to pay to fight against legislation that should never have seen the light of day in the first place, if Department of Justice lawyers had been allowed to do their jobs as they did them before Harper ordered them to pass on any legislation that has more than a 5% chance of surviving a court challenge (sic!).

  17. For poll junkies, check out that Global News survey here
    http://globalnews.ca/news/2075610/prime-minister-tom-mulcair-new-seat-projections-poll-show-ndp-surging-across-canada/

    Article says the seat projections were produced “using a blended, weighted sample of over 8,000 respondents to Ipsos, Angus Reid, and Ekos polls conducted between May 27 and June 23.”

    Ipsos, Angus Reid, and Ekos are all among the best and most reputable national polling organizations in Canada. The margin of error for a national sample of 8000 is around 2%, for the 19-times-out-of-20 confidence level, though that only applies at the national and not at the provincial level. So Tory and Liberal support is a statistical tie, but the NDP is (or was during that time frame) statistically reliable.

  18. Thanks, Schubert.

    I signed the petition some time ago and hope everyone else at Brock from Canada has or will do the same. This morning I sent the same information as I provided for a Letter to the Editor of the Calgary Herald, which has not appeared: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/06/24/help-me-keep-my-april-5-promise-revisited-we-will-never-forget-the-iga-betrayal-by-the-cons/comment-page-1/#comment-6237604

    Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2015 3:50 PM
    To: Letters@calgaryherald.com
    Subject: Letter to the Editor

    Alex Neve, Secretary General, Amnesty International Canada spoke about C-51 and ‘the Insecurity of Human Rights’ last night, June 24, 2015 at Calgary Public Library, Central branch. What a great presentation (and turn-out for the short notice). Wish there had been more time, including more time for discussion. I was able to get Mr. Neve’s business card and gave him this page that I put together to hand him:

    Bills C-31 (2014), C-51 (2015) and C-24 (2015) — their connecting relationship and new Two-Tiered Canadian Citizenship

    It’s been an interesting progression for three of the Conservative laws rammed through the Canadian Parliament without full due consideration of what legal and other experts had to say. (Neither the Information Commissioner nor the Privacy Commissioner testified to committees considering Bill C-24.)

    · Bill C-31* (2014), the first Canadian legislation to make approximately one million Canadians who are deemed US Citizens (plus their Canadian spouses, plus their Canadian-born children, plus their Canadian business partners who will be US taxable because they have a US business partner taint — all deemed *US Persons*), SECOND-CLASS Canadian citizens. They have been defined by the Conservative government *US citizens who happen to reside in Canada* (whether also Canadian citizens, even those born in Canada who have never lived or received any benefit from the US)…

    *The Government of Canada has signed a ‘FATCA IGA’ (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act Intergovernmental Agreement) with the United States to help that foreign country acquire assets of those Canadians it alone deems to be ‘U.S. persons’. FATCA is the enforcement tool for the imposition of that peculiar and punitive U.S. style ‘place of birth’ taxation on the world. …the Canadian legislation that implements the FATCA IGA said to violate the Canadian Constitution, Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the principles of Canadian sovereignty and democracy and the fundamental rights of all Canadians. Nathan Cullen (NDP), Official Opposition Critic for Finance, was not heeded when he said about Bill C-31 / implementation of the US FATCA IGA …

    Why the government wouldn’t vote to clarify that the Charter of Rights, the Bill of Rights, the Human Rights Act, the Privacy Act, the Official Languages Act, and the Access to Information Act will supersede anything we sign in this tax treaty is beyond me. If it’s redundant, then so be it. Let’s have a redundant aspect of a legislative bill. I’m stunned that something so obvious can’t be accepted into law.

    · to Bill C-51 (2015) which could deem any of us who dare speak out or gather in protest in this country a threat to Canada. One example — if a Canadian citizen, who is also deemed a US citizen (see above) with the secondary US citizenship one the US deems superior to their Canadian, should now oppose Canada protecting its banks before protection of its own citizens and residents, could that person be perceived a threat to Canada and the Canadian economy by speaking out and opposing the actions of Canadian financial institutions (deemed by the US *foreign financial institutions*)? A threat to local Canadian financial institutions who will be sanctioned by the US if they do not comply in collecting and turning over Canadian private financial information on specific *US Persons* to Canada Revenue Agency who will in turn send on to the US IRS? A bonus, with this Bill, Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has been given permission to share our income tax filings with 13 additional government agencies – and, because of FATCA, CRA will have far more information about *U.S. Persons* than they will about other Canadians.

    · and now Bill C-24, adding the remainder of those from many countries around the world who chose to become Canadian citizens by naturalization, as well as their children who were born in Canada – to those *US Persons* whose Canadian citizenship is now CONDITIONAL and SECOND-CLASS. It paves a road where under some circumstances (like invoking some of Bill C-51, Canadians with another nationality (and those who are eligible to obtain another nationality) *could have* their Canadian citizenship revoked . Their Canadian citizenships are not the same as any others’ Canadian citizenships. They are now not afforded the same due-process and rights provided by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to any other Canadian citizen. This new law *could have the effect and power* of silencing some voices of *dual citizens* or persons who could claim a second nationality. Now a segment of this country’s citizens may exist in the shadow of other Canadians. Is this what we want for Canada – a second-class of Canadian citizenship?

    Constitutional lawyer, Rocco Galati, has reported he is preparing a court challenge for Bill C-24 and is interested in heading a court challenge for Bill C-51 ( http://pressfortruth.ca/top-stories/rocco-galati-preparing-court-challenge-against-bill-c-24/).

    On August 4th, a summary trial will be heard at Federal Court in Vancouver for the FATCA IGA lawsuit filed on behalf of two *Accidental American / non-meaningful American* Canadian plaintiffs (born on US soil to Canadian parents but who returned with their parents as young children to live in Canada). They come forward for all those deemed *US Persons in Canada*. Litigator, Joseph Arvay, another Canadian constitutional lawyer, leads this expensive effort against legislation passed with omnibus Bill C-31(2014) ( http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/ ).
     

    Remember, Stephen Harper said “You won’t recognize Canada when I’m through.”

    ***************

    Mr. Neve did not know about US FATCA law in Canada.

    Alex Neve: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Neve





    http://voices-voix.ca/sites/voices-voix.ca/files/dismantlingdemocracy_voicesvoix.pdf, then read the document.

    because…

    We should be working together.

  19. Calgary. Letters to the editor have to be brief. If not, they are Op-Eds. Lengthy letters will not be published.

  21. I guess so, Duke of Devon. How do you make these issues brief sound bytes with no, or very little, pertinent information?

  22. “How do you make these issues brief sound bytes with no, or very little, pertinent information?”

    Some newspapers allow letters to the editor to present issues and summaries while referring to web sites for further details.

    But this needs mainstream publication rather than referring to a web site. Please make it an op-ed.

  24. On CBC Calgary morning news, but this is the only place I found it on the internet:
    UN Human Rights Committee slams Canada for record on women / aboriginal women and numerous other matters, ranging from refugees to Bill C-51, the new anti-terror law

    The UN’s first report card on Canada in 10 years was released Thursday, and measues whether the country has met its human rights obligations.

    At least 26 human rights organizations, including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Amnesty International Canada and Human Rights Watch, submitted their own separate reports to the 18-member independent committee on the various issues.

    Overall, the report took exception to Canada’s failure to set up a way to implement some of the committee’s recommendations.

    “It should take all necessary measures to establish mechanisms and appropriate procedures to give full effect to the committee’s views so as to guarantee an effective remedy when there has been a violation of the covenant,” the report said.

    (says – More to come)

    **************

    UN Report On Canada’s Human Rights Record A ‘Wake-Up Call’

    The report, published Thursday, is the first substantive review of the country’s human rights record under Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government.

    **************
    July 23, 2015: “Canada: Amnesty International urges all levels of government to implement Human Rights Committee recommendations”

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: