Inland Protection

• Author: Sasha Baglay/Martin Jones
• Pages: 273-313

273

CHAPTER 8

INLAND PROTECTION

A. INTRODUCTION

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 addition to

resettlement, the second avenue of gaining protection is through 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 are subject to a complicated process of examination, which

consists 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 determine

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 individuals

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 has also introduced various measures that are expected to

deter them from choosing Canada a s a destination to claim asylum. The

annual number of claims 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 timelines) 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 discusses the details of the refu-

gee determination process for inland claimants.

B. ACCESS TO INLAND PROTECTION

The Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 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 party 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 their protection obligations by erecting barriers on

refugee claimants’ access to their territories.

1) Interdiction

The term “interdiction” refers to a variety of state measures designed

to prevent non-citizens, including asylum seekers, from entering state

territory. These measures encompass, but are not limited to, the use of

carrier sanctions, the imposition of visa requirements, and the inter-

ception of incoming vessels. Canada is 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 rotection275

Most of Canada’s interdiction measures, except for visa requirements,

are coordinated by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and are

carried out at both Canadian ports of entry and overseas departure

points. The CBSA employs the “multiple borders strategy,” which “strives

to ‘push the border out’ so that people posing a risk to Canada’s secur-

ity and prosperity are identif‌ied as far away from the actual border as

possible, ideally before a person departs 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 assessment, interdiction, information 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 in pre-departure screening. For example, in 2003,

Canada and the United States signed a Statement of Mutual Under-

standing on Information 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