The Credibility and Authoritativeness of Documentary Information in Determining Refugee Status: The Canadian Experience

This article reviews the origins of the Documentation, Information and Research Branch (the 'Documentation Center') of Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB), established in 1988 as a part of a major revision of the procedure for determination of refugee status. The Documentation Center conducts research to produce documents describing conditions in refugee-producing countries, and also disseminates information from outside. The information is available to decision-makers, IRB staff, counsel and claimants. Given the importance of decisions on refugee status, the article looks at the credibility and the authoritativeness of the information, by analyzing the structure of information used. It recalls the different types of information 'package' produced, such as a country profiles and the Question and Answer Series, the Weekly Madia Review, the 'Perspectives' series, Responses to Information Requests and Country files, and considers the trend towards standardization across the country. The research process is reviewed, as are the hiring criteria for researchers, the composition of the 'collection', how acquisitions are made, and the development of databases, particularly on country of origin (human rights material) and legal information, which are accessible on-line. The author examines how documentary information can be used by decision-makers to draw conclusions as to whether the claim has a credible basis or the claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution. Relevant caselaw is available to assess and weigh the claim. The experience of Amnesty International in similar work is cited for comparative purposes. A number of 'safeguards' are mentioned, which contribute to the goal of impartiality in research, or which otherwise enhance the credibility of the information, and the author suggests that guidelines might be drafted to explain and assist in the realization of these aims. Greater resources might also enable the Center to undertake the task of 'certifying' the authoritativeness of sources. The author concludes that, as a new institution in Canadian administrative law, the Documentation Center opens interesting avenues for the future. Beacause it ensures an acceptable degree of impartiality of its research and the documents it produces, it may be a useful model for others tribunals adjudicating in fields where evidence is either difficult to gather, or is otherwise complex.

Contextualizing discretion : micro-dynamics of Canada’s refugee determination system

À une époque où l'immigration internationale est de plus en plus difficile et sélective, le statut de réfugié constitue un bien public précieux qui permet à certains non-citoyens l'accès et l'appartenance au pays hôte. Reposant sur le jugement discrétionnaire du décideur, le statut de réfugié n’est accordé qu’aux demandeurs qui établissent une crainte bien fondée de persécution en cas de retour dans leur pays d'origine. Au Canada, le plus important tribunal administratif indépendant, la Commission de l'immigration et du statut de réfugié du Canada (CISR), est chargé d’entendre les demandeurs d'asile et de rendre des décisions de statut de réfugié. Cette thèse cherche à comprendre les disparités dans le taux d’octroi du statut de réfugié entre les décideurs de la CISR qui sont politiquement nommés. Au regard du manque de recherches empiriques sur la manière avec laquelle le Canada alloue les possibilités d’entrée et le statut juridique pour les non-citoyens, il était nécessaire de lever le voile sur le fonctionnement de l’administration sur cette question. En explorant la prise de décision relative aux réfugiés à partir d'une perspective de Street Level Bureaucracy Theory (SLBT) et une méthodologie ethnographique qui combine l'observation directe, les entretiens semi-structurés et l'analyse de documents, l'étude a d'abord cherché à comprendre si la variation dans le taux d’octroi du statut était le résultat de différences dans les pratiques et le raisonnement discrétionnaires du décideur et ensuite à retracer les facteurs organisationnels qui alimentent les différences. Dans la lignée des travaux de SLBT qui documentent la façon dont la situation de travail structure la discrétion et l’importance des perceptions individuelles dans la prise de décision, cette étude met en exergue les différences de fond parmi les décideurs concernant les routines de travail, la conception des demandeurs d’asile, et la meilleure façon de mener leur travail. L’analyse montre comment les décideurs appliquent différentes approches lors des audiences, allant de l’interrogatoire rigide à l’entrevue plus flexible. En dépit des contraintes organisationnelles qui pèsent sur les décideurs pour accroître la cohérence et l’efficacité, l’importance de l’évaluation de la crédibilité ainsi que l’invisibilité de l’espace de décision laissent suffisamment de marge pour l’exercice d’un pouvoir discrétionnaire. Même dans les environnements comme les tribunaux administratifs où la surabondance des règles limite fortement la discrétion, la prise de décision est loin d’être synonyme d’adhésion aux principes de neutralité et hiérarchie. La discrétion est plutôt imbriquée dans le contexte de routines d'interaction, de la situation de travail, de l’adhésion aux règles et du droit. Même dans les organisations qui institutionnalisent et uniformisent la formation et communiquent de façon claire leurs demandes aux décideurs, le caractère discrétionnaire de la décision est par la nature difficile, voire impossible, à contrôler et discipliner. Lorsqu'ils sont confrontés à l'ambiguïté des objectifs et aux exigences qui s’opposent à leur pouvoir discrétionnaire, les décideurs réinterprètent la définition de leur travail et banalisent leurs pratiques. Ils formulent une routine de rencontre qui est acceptable sur le plan organisationnel pour évaluer les demandeurs face à eux. Cette thèse montre comment les demandeurs, leurs témoignages et leurs preuves sont traités d’une manière inégale et comment ces traitements se répercutent sur la décision des réfugiés.

Bringing protection home : healing the schism between international obligations and national safeguards created by extraterritorial processing

Extraterritorial processing schemes are designed to prevent and deter access to statutory and judicial safeguards in the country responsible for the interception and transfer of asylum seekers to a third country. In line with this objective, they incorporate interdiction, transfer and processing practices and standards that are deliberately isolated from the national legal and institutional protections within either the intercepting state or the third country where processing occurs. Australia's recent disbandment of its extraterritorial processing centres in third countries highlights the fact that extraterritorial processing schemes have proven unworkable as a matter of international law, as they negate the national safeguards fundamental to the satisfaction of a state's protection obligations.

The role of legislative, executive and judicial mechanisms in ensuring a fair and effective asylum process

A good faith reading of core international protection obligations requires that states employ appropriate legislative, administrative and judicial mechanisms to ensure the enjoyment of a fair and effective asylum process. Restrictive asylum policies instead seek to ‘denationalize’ the asylum process by eroding access to national statutory, judicial and executive safeguards that ensure a full and fair hearing of an asylum claim. From a broader perspective, the argument in this thesis recognizes hat international human rights depend on domestic institutions for their effective implementation, and that a rights-based international legal order requires that power is limited, whether that power is expressed as an instance of the sovereign right of states in international law or as the authority of governments under domestic constitutions.

New Approaches, Alternative Avenues and Means of Access to Asylum Procedures for Persons Seeking International Protection. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 77/ January 2015

This study examines the workings of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), in order to assess the need and potential for new approaches to ensure access to protection for people seeking it in the EU, including joint processing and distribution of asylum seekers. Rather than advocating the addition of further complexity and coercion to the CEAS, the study proposes a focus on front-line reception and streamlined refugee status determination, in order to mitigate the asylum challenges facing Member States, and vindicate the rights of asylum seekers and refugees according to the EU acquis and international legal standards. Joint processing could contribute to front-line reception and processing capacity, but is no substitute for proper investment in national systems. The Dublin system as currently configured leads inexorably to increasing coercion and detention, and must thus be reconfigured to remove coercion as a principle and ensure consistency with human rights and other fundamental values of the EU.

A Comparative Analysis of Regulations on Involuntary Loss of Nationality in the European Union. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, 75/December 2014

This study examines the workings of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), in order to assess the need and potential for new approaches to ensure access to protection for people seeking it in the EU, including joint processing and distribution of asylum seekers. Rather than advocating the addition of further complexity and coercion to the CEAS, the study proposes a focus on front-line reception and streamlined refugee status determination, in order to mitigate the asylum challenges facing Member States, and vindicate the rights of asylum seekers and refugees according to the EU acquis and international legal standards. Joint processing could contribute to front-line reception and processing capacity, but is no substitute for proper investment in national systems. The Dublin system as currently configured leads inexorably to increasing coercion and detention, and must thus be reconfigured to remove coercion as a principle and ensure consistency with human rights and other fundamental values of the EU.

Lost and found : improving ascertainment of refugee-background Australians in population datasets

Humanitarian entrants remain invisible in existing populations datasets, and this has significant implications for health care and health policy. We suggest adding 'year of arrival' to population datasets; enabling the combination of 'country of birth' and 'year of arrival' to be used as a proxy for refugee status.

A six-year descriptive analysis of hospitalisations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions among people born in refugee-source countries

Background: Hospitalisation for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSHs) has become a recognised tool to measure access to primary care. Timely and effective outpatient care is highly relevant to refugee populations given the past exposure to torture and trauma, and poor access to adequate health care in their countries of origin and during flight. Little is known about ACSHs among resettled refugee populations. With the aim of examining the hypothesis that people from refugee backgrounds have higher ACSHs than people born in the country of hospitalisation, this study analysed a six-year state-wide hospital discharge dataset to estimate ACSH rates for residents born in refugee-source countries and compared them with the Australia-born population. Methods: Hospital discharge data between 1 July 1998 and 30 June 2004 from the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset were used to assess ACSH rates among residents born in eight refugee-source countries, and compare them with the Australia-born average. Rate ratios and 95% confidence levels were used to illustrate these comparisons. Four categories of ambulatory care sensitive conditions were measured: total, acute, chronic and vaccine-preventable. Country of birth was used as a proxy indicator of refugee status. Results: When compared with the Australia-born population, hospitalisations for total and acute ambulatory care sensitive conditions were lower among refugee-born persons over the six-year period. Chronic and vaccine-preventable ACSHs were largely similar between the two population groups. Conclusion: Contrary to our hypothesis, preventable hospitalisation rates among people born in refugee-source countries were no higher than Australia-born population averages. More research is needed to elucidate whether low rates of preventable hospitalisation indicate better health status, appropriate health habits, timely and effective care-seeking behaviour and outpatient care, or overall low levels of health care-seeking due to other more pressing needs during the initial period of resettlement. It is important to unpack dimensions of health status and health care access in refugee populations through ad-hoc surveys as the refugee population is not a homogenous group despite sharing a common experience of forced displacement and violence-related trauma.

Legitimising Rejection : International Refugee Law in Southeast Asia

The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees are the two primary international legal instruments that states use to process asylum seekers' claim to refugee status. However, in Southeast Asia only two states have acceded to these instruments. This is seemingly paradoxical for a region that has been host to a large number of asylum seekers who, as a result, are forced to live as ‘illegal migrants’. This book examines the region's continued rejection of international refugee law through extensive archival analysis and argues that this rejection was shaped by the region’s response to its largest refugee crisis in the post-1945 era: the Indochinese refugee crisis from 1975 to 1996. The result is a seminal study into Southeast Asian's relationship with international refugee law and the impact that this has had on states surrounding the region, the UNHCR and the asylum seekers themselves.

Enforcing precariousness: a comparative analysis of the limitations placed on the legal status of refugees

This thesis focuses on the manner in which the EU, the UK, and Canada respond to and engage with the refugee’s movement from a temporary to a more permanent legal status in the state. It is noted that this transition is increasingly problematized. A trend is noted in response to this among the jurisdictions examined, to exceptionalise refugee status through acts of legal categorisation and separation. These categorisations represent an attempt to re-assert control over refugees who arrived to the state in a spontaneous manner. I argue that this categorisation and fragmentation of refugee status is another means of managing life in the state and ultimately excluding refugees within the state. Refugees therefore experience a contradictory response to their presence. While they are continually reminded of the temporary nature of their legal status in the state, they are still required to demonstrate a willingness to integrate in to the host society. Their behaviour in the state is something that is once again recalled by the decision makers who determine whether they should ultimately be able to access citizenship status. In this thesis, I argue that in order to navigate a route to citizenship, the refugee must respond to the constant re-framing and re-contextualisation of her status in the state of asylum. As the thesis observes, this raises broader questions about the nature of citizenship and belonging

Teachers Without Borders: Exploring Experiences, Transitions, and Identities of Refugee Women Teachers from Yugoslavia

Prior to September 11 2011, Canada was recognized as a leading advocate of international refugee protection and the third largest settlement country in the world. University educated refugees were admitted to the country in part on the basis of their education, but once in Canada their credentials were often ignored. The purpose of this study was to explore, through a transnational feminist lens, immigrant and settlement experiences of refugee female teachers from Yugoslavia who immigrated to Canada during and after the Yugoslav wars; to document the ways in which socially constructed categories such as gender, race, and refugee status have influenced their post-exile experiences and identities; and to identify the government's role in creating conditions where the women were either able or unable to continue in their profession. In this study, I employed both a transnational feminist methodology and narrative inquiry. The analysis process included an emphasis on the storying stories model, poetic transcription, and concentric storying. The women’s voices are represented in various forms throughout the document including individual and collective narratives. Each narrative contributed to a detailed picture of immigration and settlement processes as women spoke of continuing their education, knowing or learning the official language, and contributing to Canadian society and the economy. The findings challenge the image of a victimized and submissive refugee woman, and bring to the centre of discourse the image of the refugee woman as a skilled professional who often remains un- or underemployed in her new country. The dissertation makes an important contribution to an underdeveloped area in the research literature, and has the potential to inform immigration, settlement, and teacher education policies and practices in Canada and elsewhere.