Deportation After 17 Years!

Judge ends Harjit Singh tug-of-war (for now)

Harjit Singh, the man blamed for having toppled former Immigration Minister Judy Sgro two weeks ago, may very well be flying back to India at the time this paper goes to print.
On Tuesday, Federal Court Justice Michael Phelan considered Singh's allegations against the former minister "not credible" and rejected his request for an emergency stay of his deportation order.
Singh said that the order to remove him from Canada was politically motivated and accused Sgro of prompting this decision. In particular, in an affidavit signed three weeks ago, he said that the former minister promised him a visa in exchange for help during the last federal election. According to Singh, he delivered pizza from his Brampton store to Sgro's campaign headquarters in Toronto and provided her with some volunteers to help her campaign.
Sgro flatly denied those allegations and now is suing Singh and three others who supported his allegations.
Justice Phelan supported Sgro's views. In denying Singh's request, Phelan used harsh words. "The essence of Singh's case is that an experienced politician would risk her career, her reputation and legal sanctions to assist a person whom she does not know in exchange for free pizzas and a few election volunteers, and that the matter would forever remain secret," Phelan wrote.
According to the judge, Singh's allegations "lacked the ring of truth."
Singh arrived in Canada 17 years ago, in March 1988, as a tourist, and immediately applied for refugee status. In 1993 the requests made by Singh and his wife were turned down, and he made another application invoking humanitarian reasons.
A complicated and difficult tug-of-war started between Singh and the immigration department. According to some experts, the Canadian judicial system gives 42 opportunities to prove one's case. Apparently, Singh has already resorted to 34 of them, and has had his request for a permanent visa denied at least half a dozen times.
In fact, even if he is deported, his lawyers can still appeal the decision of the Federal Court.
In writing his decision, Phelan said the public interest would be harmed if Singh were allowed to stay in Canada any longer. "The integrity of the immigration system is sufficiently challenged already by the numerous delays in Singh's removal," Phelan stated in his 12-page ruling.
Furthermore, Canadian authorities have learned that Singh had some legal problems in India for allegedly attempting to smuggle a child out of the country and for passport forgery. He has always denied those accusations.


Immigration Chaos: Volpe's Mission Impossible (almost)
Will he be able to bring order and stability to this important sector? Some questions and advice for the new minister

Democracy may not come cheap, but that doesn't justify waste of money, time, and human resources.
The events surrounding the 17-year saga of Harjit Singh in Canada tell us a lot about what happens when a murky immigration policy, coupled with an idealistic judicial system, becomes open to abuse by people who have a lot of money to spend on legal fees.
How much did Mr. Singh spend on legal fees during this 17-year-long fight? Did he pay? I assume he did. But if he didn't, was he entitled to legal aid? If so, how much did his fight cost the system? If not, then is it fair that only people with monetary resources can take full advantage of our legal system, while poorer people, who are often refugees, cannot do so?
And that's not all. Even if Singh paid the price, how much money did the federal government spend over 17 years to dispute his claim? How many hours were needed, and how many bureaucrats had to deal with his file? How many cases, in total, do we have? I don't have the answers, but I've been hearing from informed sources that it's in the "billions" of dollars.
Yes, democracy and justice don't come cheap; true democracy and true justice, however, shouldn't work so slowly.
Judy Sgro, former Minister of Immigration, once told me that in one year alone Canada had almost 3,000 applications for refugee status from people arriving from Costa Rica. Only one was accepted.
So, how does our system work?
Someone arrives in Canada as a tourist. He or she then seeks refugee status. From that moment on, the new claimant is protected by our Charter of Rights. Bureaucrats and lawyers start debating. The claimant starts a new life in Canada. He or she often gets married. Then the inevitable happens: the claim is rejected.
At this point, a new phase in the process kicks in. The claimant appeals to stay on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. The argument goes like this: "How dare we kick out someone who has been working honestly in this country for so many years, who now has children who consider Canada their home?"
Some just give up and return to their native lands. Others fight on. We've all seen the cameras at airports immortalizing the departure of a good family, making us all feel like insensitive idiots.
Well, idiots perhaps.
We spend billions of dollars - yes, billions - on a system that doesn't work, that doesn't do justice to the applicants or to the Canadian citizens and taxpayers.
And the sad part is that Canada needs immigrants.
Now, if we need more people, and if many of the refugee claimants are already working and integrated into our system, why don't they apply for a regular landed immigrant visa instead of looking for expensive shortcuts around the system?
The unfortunate answer is that our system is a mess. First of all, there's mass confusion regarding the difference between refugees and landed immigrants. We don't have a policy that brings people who would help this country to prosper, grow and help pay the increasing costs of an aging population.
We all have a general idea about immigration. We use and abuse catch-phrases, i.e., "we must attract the best and the brightest," and "we want knowledge and education." Yet when knowledgable, educated people arrive in Canada, we don't know what to do with them, and we tell them to drive a taxi.
And they're are the lucky ones. Most of those who want to immigrate to Canada have to go through a points system that seems to be the brainchild of the producers of the TV game-show Jeopardy. I've been told that if a carpenter from Portugal wants to come to Canada with his family and he doesn't speak English or French, he loses so many points that his wife, in order to make up for the loss, must have a Nobel prize in literature.
Of course, if they really want to emigrate, they can choose destinations other than Canada. But, if they really want to immigrate to Canada in particular, they must become refugees.
So, Minister Volpe: How much money does the Department of Immigration spend processing refugee claims? How long does it take to process their claims? How much does it spend on landed immigrants? Do you have a plan to fix this mess? How many refugee claimants are in Canada?
Certainly, I don't have the answers; otherwise, I would have discussed them in my columns. But I can offer a small piece of advice: During the next electoral campaign, don't feed your volunteers pizza.
AP

Publication Date: 2005-02-06
Story Location: http://tandemnews.com/viewstory.php?storyid=4910