Inland Protection
| Author | Sasha Baglay/Martin Jones |
| Pages | 273-313 |
273
CHA PTER 8
INLAND PROTECTION
A. INTRODUC TION
The overwhelming majority of refugees in t he world are located outside
of Canada. As we have seen in Chapter 7, some of those individuals
can receive Canada’s protection through resettlement. In addit ion to
resettlement, the second avenue of gaining protection is th rough an in-
land refugee determination system designed for those who have made
it to Canada and applied for protection from within the country. Such
claimants a re subject to a complicated process of examination, which
consist s of two main stages: (1) the determination of their eligibility for
a hearing before the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) of the Immigra-
tion and Refugee Board (IRB), and (2) the determination of the substan-
tive merit of their claims. This process is not designed to deter mine
whether an individual is generally in need of protection; rather, it is
designed to determine whether she falls within the lim ited grounds on
which Canada promise s to offer protection, namely, risk of persecution,
risk to life, and risk of torture. Canada does not accept all indiv iduals
who claim to have fear on one of these grounds. R ather, after a process
of examination and deliberation, Canadian authorities ultimately pro-
vide protection to less than half of individuals who seek protection in
Canada.1
1 The calculation of t he exact acceptance rate is qu ite complex, as it must combine
the various acc eptance rates at the var ious levels of decision maki ng. During the
REFUGEE L AW274
In the past decade, the Canadian government has adopted policies
that make it more difficult for refugee claim ants to successfully travel to
Canada and ha s also introduced various mea sures that are expected to
deter them from choosing Canada a s a destination to claim asylum. The
annual number of claim s referred to the RPD has fluctuated, but since
2013, the number has been at its lowest in a decade: under 17,000 (for a
detailed yearly breakdown, see Appendix D, Table 1).2 In addition, the
2012 changes to the refugee determination system (particularly shorter
hearing timel ines) are likely to make it more difficult to succeed even
for those who managed to overcome barriers to entry.
This chapter first examines the barriers and deterrents on access to
refugee protection in Canada and then d iscusses the details of the refu-
gee determination process for inla nd claimants.
B. ACCESS TO INLA ND PROTECTION
The Convention Relating to the Status of Ref ugees imposes an explicit
obligation on states parties not to expel a refugee to a country where
he might be subject to persecution, and to guarantee certain rights to
refugees in state part y territory. However, there is no corresponding
explicit obligation to admit potential refugee cl aimants who are outside
a state party’s terr itory. Due to this gap in the Re fugee Conven tion, states
have tried to limit t heir protection obligations by erecting barrier s on
refugee claimants’ access to their territories.
1) I nte rd i ct ion
The term “interdiction” refers to a variety of state measures designed
to prevent non-citizens, including asylum seekers, from entering state
territory. These measures encompas s, but are not limited to, the use of
carrier sanctions, the imposition of visa requirements, and the inter-
ception of incoming vess els. Canada i s not alone in pursuing interdic-
tion. Both the United States and Australia pioneered such practice in
relation to refugee claimant s in the 1980s and 1990s. Interdiction is now
practised by the European Union and most developed nations.
past decade, on aver age, only slightly over 40 percent of ref ugee claims were ac-
cepted by the RPD [acces s-to-information reque st to the RPD, on file with authors].
The acceptance rate s at other levels of decision maki ng (including through the
pre-removal risk a ssessment process) add much les s than 10 percent to this tota l.
2 Access-to-i nformation request to the IR B No A-2014-04527 [on file with authors].
Inland P rotection 275
Most of Canada’s interdiction measures, except for visa requirements,
are coordinated by the Can ada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and are
carried out at both Canadian ports of entry a nd overseas departure
points. The CBSA employs the “multiple borders strategy,” which “strives
to ‘push the border out’ so that people posing a ri sk to Canada’s secur-
ity and prosperity are identi fied as far away from the actual border as
possible, ideally before a person depart s their country of origin.”3 As
the image below shows, a border is viewed “. . . not as a geo-political
line but rather a continuum of checkpoints along a route of travel from
the country of origin to Canada . . . .”4
Figure 8.1: Multiple Borders Strateg y
Source: Canad a Border Services Agenc y, Admissibil ity Screening and Support ing
Intelligence Act ivities — Evaluation Study (2009).
As part of this strategy, the CBSA’s liaison officers abroad engage
in risk a ssessment, interdict ion, informat ion collection, and training,
working together with transportation carriers and foreign immigration
and law enforcement authorities. In addition, special agreements on
advance passenger information and other types of data sharing can
assist CBSA officers i n pre-departure screening. For example, in 2003,
Canada and the United St ates signed a Statement of Mutual Under-
standi ng on Inform ation Sharing,5 which also includes an annex on
3 Canada Border Se rvices Agency, “Admissibility S creening and Supporting Int el-
ligence Activit ies — Evaluation Study” (2009).
4 Statement of Mutual Underst anding on Information Sh aring, online: ww w.cic.
gc.ca/english/department/laws-policy/smu/smu-ins-dos.asp.
5 See text of SMU, online: w ww.cic.gc.ca/engli sh/department/ laws-policy/smu/
smu-ins-dos.asp.
C
o
u
n
t
r
y
o
f
O
r
i
g
i
n
V
i
s
a
S
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g
A
i
r
l
i
n
e
C
h
e
c
k
-i
n
P
o
i
n
t
o
f
I
n
i
t
i
a
l
E
m
b
a
r
k
a
t
i
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
A
r
e
a
s
P
o
i
n
t
o
f
F
i
n
a
l
E
m
b
a
r
k
a
t
i
o
n
A
r
r
i
v
a
l
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
s
/
S
e
a
p
o
r
t
s
Inland
L
a
n
d
B
o
r
d
e
r
To continue reading
Request your trial