Лев Гунин - ГУЛаг Палестины

21st Century: New Directions for Immigration and Refugee Policy and

Legislation in January 1999;

Consultations on the White Paper with Canadians, provinces and territories,

non-government organizations, the legal community, special interest

groups, and the business sector throughout 1999;

Immigration commitments in the 1999 Throne Speech, Budget 2000 and

2001 Throne Speech; including the 2001 Throne Speech commitment to

re-introduce legislation to streamline and improve the immigration system.

Consultations leading up to the Standing Committee Report of March 22,

2000 entitled Refugee Protection and Border Security: Striking a Balance;

and

The introduction of the new Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Bill

C-31 Bill C- ) in 2000 and 2001.

General agreement on fundamentals

There is general agreement that Canada needs a new Act that is simpler, more

effective, and more easily understood. Canadians want to stop abuse of our

immigration and refugee system and protect Canada's borders.

They want a system that is fair, effective, and respectful of Canada's humanitarian

traditions and international commitments in a world of increasing migration

pressures.

They also agree that Canada needs immigrants to contribute to Canada's

economic growth and prosperity. The business community needs access to the

highly skilled global workforce. Canadians recognize that immigration is largely

responsible for Canada's rich and diverse culture, and is a key advantage in the

global economy.

Canadians want a system that reflects our traditions of family reunification and

family values, honours our history of compassion for refugees needing a safe

haven, and contains selection criteria for immigrants that will ensure that

newcomers contribute Canada's economic and social fabric.

Immigration has proved to be a successful economic, social and cultural strategy

for Canada in the past and will continue to be so in the future.

& 2001-03

Backgrounder # 4

Detention Provisions Clarified

Detention is one of the most serious measures a liberal society can impose on

individuals. It must be limited to cases where it is clearly warranted and does not

contravene Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

However, Canadians want to ensure that their safety and security is protected and

that that their borders remain safe.

Current grounds for detention remain unchanged

Under the current legislation, there are three main commonly used grounds for

detention:

1.Failure to establish identity;

2.Danger to the public; and

3.Unlikely to appear for future immigration proceedings or removal.

Detention process will be more effective and transparent

The criteria for detention decisions will be established in the new Regulations.

There will be a requirement to review detention decisions after 48 hours, with further

reviews scheduled after 7 days and each subsequent 30-day period.

Foreign criminals facing deportation orders will not be eligible for day parole, as

they are unlikely to respect conditions set out in temporary release programs.

Priority hearings for those in detention

To balance increased detention measures, the Immigration and Refugee Board

(IRB) will give priority to hearings for those being held in detention.

This streamlining should prevent refugee claimants from remaining in detention for

long periods of time. Every step in the process from the irregular arrival of a foreign

national in Canada to his or her removal following a negative decision will be fair

and faster.

Protection of unaccompanied minors

While the legislative package honours Canada's international commitments to

protect the best interests of the child, the security and safety of unprotected

minors arriving as part of a criminally organized smuggling or trafficking operation is

a major concern.

These children are vulnerable to exploitation and coercion by the traffickers; in

these cases, detention is truly a last resort and this is stipulated in the Act. The

Government of Canada will make every effort to make arrangements with provincial

social services to protect these children effectively, while seeking to ensure that

they are not deprived of education and other basic needs.

2001-03

Backgrounder # 5

A Fair, Faster, More Effective Refugee

Determination Process

Front-end security screening of all refugee claimants

In the current system, security and background checks are initiated only once an

individual has had a refugee claim accepted and has applied for permanent resident

status. In the new system, security screening will be initiated for all claimants at

the time the claim is submitted. Greater coordination between domestic and

international agencies will improve the timeliness of security information.

Faster referrals to the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB)

The legislation will speed up this process by clarifying grounds of eligibility and

automatically referring all eligible claims to the IRB within 3 working days.

Consolidated assessment of protection grounds at the IRB

Currently, assessment of the grounds for protection is handled in several stages,

one at the IRB and the others at Citizenship and Immigration (CIC). The new

system will consolidate these grounds in one risk assessment during a single

hearing process at the IRB. The grounds for assessment of risk are: Geneva

Convention on Refugees, risk of torture (Convention Against Torture), and risk to

life and/or cruel and unusual punishment. These grounds are not new; they are

merely being brought together from several current steps into one.

Use of single-member panels as the norm at the IRB

Currently, two-member panels hear refugee cases at the IRB, and in the majority of

cases the decisions are unanimous. The process will be made more efficient by

the use of single-member panels as the norm.

Greater use of Ministerial interventions

The Minister (by delegated authority to her officials) will have the right to intervene

at IRB hearings to present security information or other data pertinent to the case.

Greater coordination between domestic and international agencies will improve the

timeliness and accuracy of information.

Paper review on merit to be introduced

To ensure consistency in decision-making and fairness to all refugee claimants, a

paper review on merit may be conducted by a division of the IRB. This step is

intended to ensure fairness and reduce the number of protracted applications for

leave for judicial review by the Federal Court.

Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA)

In keeping with Canada's international commitment not to repatriate people who

would face risk upon return, the Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) will be

provided on the same consolidated protection grounds, and coordinated with CIC

removal priorities. Pursuant to the Geneva Convention, serious criminals, security

risks, and members of organized crime groups will be excluded from consideration

of refugee protection grounds. Their PRRA will be limited to risk of torture and cruel

and unusual punishment.

Linking the PRRA and the removal process will allow for expeditious -yet fair -

treatment of all removal cases. This will ensure that no one will be sent to a

situation of risk to life or cruel and unusual punishment in their country of

nationality.

Six month bar on repeat claims

If a person returns to Canada after removal, they will not be allowed to reapply for

refugee status for six months following removal. Prior to the six months, previously

refused claimants would continue to have the option of seeking protection at any

Canadian mission abroad. Persons who return to Canada after six months may

apply for a pre-removal risk assessment but they are not able to re-access the

refugee protection system of the IRB.

Criminals will be barred from the Refugee Protection System

The new Legislation clarifies inadmissibility criteria to ensure that serious

criminals, terrorists, human rights violators and security risks will be barred from

access to the refugee determination system and promptly removed from Canada.

Campaign Against Fraudulent Medical Research

P.O. Box 234

Lawson, New South Wales 2783

Australia

Phone: +61 (0)2-4758-6822

URL: www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr

Although the above materials are highly recommended by CAFMR, we do not necessarily share all the views expressed by the authors.

Note about copyright: Any of the above information may be downloaded, copied, printed or otherwise distributed without seeking permission from CAFMR. However, printed acknowledgement is required when this is done.

Bradley R. Smith

Revisionism by: CODOH, POB 439016, San Diego, CA 92143

The Revisionist Campus Project

David Irving's Reply to

Jeffrey Shallit's "Lies of Our

Times"

London,

[ ]

Dear Professor Shallit,

I am not a subscriber to the Internet, but over the last few

months I have heard repeatedly about scurrilous materials

which you have been posting on that medium; at least you

have had the courage to put your name to them as author,

although this lays you open to the kind of lawsuit which I have

started conducting--and winning--here in the British courts.

I have so far seen versions of your Shallit's Report, and of your

"Lies of Our Times." You appear to be interested in the Truth,

and that being so I am making these comments to assist you

in the search for that elusive quantitй.

It appears that your primary source is a handout or handouts

of the Wiener Library (Dr David Cesarini) and of the Board of

Deputies of British Jews, who have furnished the League of

Human Rights of the B'nai Brith Canada with two lengthy

secret reports which are the subject of dispute between me

and the Board under both the Data Protection Act 1984 (the

Board at first denied having any data on me), and the

Defamation Act 1952 (the Board's solicitor is negotiating with

me for permission to withdraw the reports in toto, in return for

an undertaking by me not to pursue the matter in the courts).

First, your "article" Lies of Our Times (forgive the quotation

marks, but as you call me an "historian" it seems justified).

David Irving

David John Cawdell Irving is a British "historian", born in

1938.

* Correct.

According to David Cesarani of the Wiener Library in London,

England, he attended Imperial College at the University of

London, but never graduated. He holds no academic degree

and no academic position at any university or college.

* Correct. The same can be said for Winston S.

Churchill, Thomas Babington Macaulay (The

History of England), and the Gibbon who wrote

The Decline Fall of the Roman Empire, etc.

Would you denigrate them as "historians" too?

He calls himself a "moderate fascist",

* Incorrect. Please produce the source of this

spurious and libellous allegation.

and claims, among other things that the gas chambers at

Auschwitz (in which an estimated 2-3 million people died)

were "built by the Poles after the war as a tourist attraction."

* Not quite correct. I stated (on April 21, 1990 and