Refugees and the right to asylum
We are currently experiencing the largest refugee crisis since the Second World War, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Individuals and families are fleeing their home countries due to persecution based on their ethnicity, nationality, religion, political opinion or membership to a particular social group. So far, thousands have died trying to reach safety. Yet, many do not see this crisis as an issue that affects them and for which everyone must take action.
The right to asylum is protected in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). However, the UDHR does not immediately create a legal obligation on states to implement its articles. To impose stronger legal obligations, the rights contained in the UDHR need to be part of a treaty. A treaty is a formal agreement between at least two countries in which they commit themselves to implement the obligations that it contains. The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees is the treaty that builds on the right to asylum contained in the UDHR. The Convention is the key legal instrument that forms the basis of refugee protection around the world.
The Convention was a response to the Holocaust, intended to protect Europeans who became refugees prior to 1951. However, the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees removed the geographic and time parameters from the Convention. This means that states wanting to commit to protect all refugees must also sign and ratify, or accede to, the 1967 Protocol. As of January 2017, 145 states have committed to implement the Convention and 146 have committed to implement the Protocol in their territories. Canada became a party to both the Convention and the Protocol on June 4, 1969.
Article 33 of the 1951 Refugee Convention enshrines the principle of “non-refoulement,” the cornerstone of asylum and of international refugee law. The principle of non-refoulement means that no state can return (“refouler”) a refugee who has reached its borders to a place where their lives or freedom “would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.” Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984 also protects the principle of non-refoulement. Canada signed this Convention Against Torture in 1985 and acceded to it in 1987. As a result, Canada is also legally bound by this convention.
However, in a country like Canada, an international treaty that has been signed and ratified or acceded to by the government does not immediately become law. The Federal government must work together with the provinces and territories to pass a domestic law, or laws, in order to implement the international treaty and give it force of law in Canadian legislation. Several pieces of domestic legislation serve to implement Canada’s international obligations towards refugees into Canadian law. However, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 2001 is the cornerstone of refugee protection in this country. Section 115 of the Act enshrines the principle of non-refoulement into Canadian law.
In the Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1985) decision, the Supreme Court of Canada also recognized that the rights contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply to and protect asylum seekers, regardless of their migratory status. Not everyone making a claim in Canada will be recognized as a refugee. Nonetheless, all need to be heard to guarantee that the principle of non-refoulement is respected. Canada does not have the same legal obligations towards refugees outside its borders. In order to be protected by the principle of non-refoulement, a refugee must have reached a Canadian border or Canadian soil.
However, according to the Canada-United States (US) Safe Third Country Agreement (2004), a person is ineligible to make a refugee claim at the Canada-United States border because the US is considered a “Safe Third Country.” This means that refugees who have arrived in the United States must make their claim in the United States and not in Canada. Over the years, many have argued that the Safe Third Country Agreement must be removed in order to ensure that no refugee will be sent back to face persecution or torture. In light of the global refugee crisis and current immigration policies in the United States, the Safe Third Country Agreement is being debated across the country by human rights activists, refugee organizations, legal scholars and immigration lawyers.