加拿大华人论坛 加拿大留学移民代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信

在加拿大

希望与媒体等分享香港已经ME的申请人的请愿。This is a petition on behalf of a group of ME’d HK FSW applicants (including both applicants who have taken medical examinations per your office’s request and those who have received instruction to take medical examination prior to June 29, 2012) who are now, based on your interpretation of Operational Bulletin 442, affected by Bill C-38 and OB 442 (a list of which is attached hereto).As you have probably noted, this group of ME’d applicants have initiated a litigation proceeding against the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration at the Federal Court of Canada. As you may appreciate (since you have been living and working in this part of the world), Chinese are inherently seeking “harmony”, and litigation is nothing fun for anyone, particularly for people who have been quietly waiting in the queue for the past 6 years, most of whom are experiencing the very first lawsuit in their lifetime, ironically, in Canada, a destination they have been dreaming of for years, not China, a place they have been trying to escape, primarily for the future of their next generation). This group of litigants has been forced to the corner, because these are “lives”, not “files”, that you will be shredding, by implementing Bill C-38 in such a ridiculous way as imposed by OB 442. This is also because we are still having this last light of hope, hoping “justice” will eventually be recognized and upheld, a belief supporting us to continue to pursue our “Canada Dream”!Our legal counsel has shared his sympathy, particularly to this group of ME’d applicants, not from a professional standpoint, but more as a layman, using his common sense, judging from what has been taking place in Hong Kong in the past couple of month after the proposed bill as of March 29, 2012.Justice von Finelstein synthesised: [21] The actions of CIC in this instance lack common sense. As Muldoon J. so aptly put it in Taei v [M.E.I.] …, [1993] F.C.J. No. 293 (dealing with a refugee claim rather than a live-in caregiver) "(t)he rule of law does not require that statutes be read and interpreted in a robotic mindless manner. Common sense has not been abolished either by the Charter or by statute". It is also useful to recall the admonition of Jerome A.C.J. in Thakorlal Hajariwala v. M.E.I. [1989] 2 F.C. 79 that "the purpose of the statute [then the Immigration Act which is now the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act] is to permit immigration, not to prevent it.” Jonalyn May Lim v. M.C.I , 2005 FC 657, von Finkelstein, J. So here, we are begging you, setting aside the whole economic and political backdrop for thirty seconds, to listen to this group of victims, about fairness, about equity, and about their lives:1.We are of the view that the unfair and inconsistent implementation of OB442 is totally arbitrary, treating the same group of applicants in an unjustifiable different way with no reason. It does NOT make any sense under "common sense" to differentiate this same group of applicants (who was invited by your HK office to perfect their applications by submitting supporting documentation, by taking medical examinations, by going through this painful process), some of whom got visa and went to paradise, and some of whom spent so much time, efforts and money to comply with what your office asked and requested them to do (simply in reliance of the "good faith" of your office) got terminated and went to hell. Does that make sense under “common sense”? How do you justify this “discrimination”?2.The fact that OB442 allowed the finalization of cases where selection decision was made post March 29 itself proved the level of discretion that the Minister has in applying Bill C-38. Isn't contradictory for the Minister to allow some of the cases to be finalized before June 29, while Bill C-38 has no reference to June 29 as any sort of cut-off date whatsoever? If the Minister has no discretion or power whatsoever, then what is the justification to allow the issuance of visa for those applicants who got “finalized” before June 29?Finally, I want to quote A25(1) of the Act, as reminded by our legal counsel:25. (1) The Minister must, on request of a foreign national in Canada who is inadmissible or who does not meet the requirements of this Act, and may, on request of a foreign national outside Canada, examine the circumstances concerning the foreign national and may grant the foreign national permanent resident status or an exemption from any applicable criteria or obligations of this Act if the Minister is of the opinion that it is justified by humanitarian and compassionate considerations relating to the foreign national, taking into account the best interests of a child directly affected. [emphasis supplied]By virtue of “humanitarian”, we are requesting your office to take into account the best interests of this group of ME’d applicants and the best interests of the children directly affected.Thanks, again, for your time and attention! We would be extremely grateful if you can continue to appropriately and timely process and finalize our applications.With best regards,On behalf of a group of ME’d HK FSW Applicants

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信支持?主?信，但要??，太樘VO可能看也不看！要get to the point,少真其他太激烈言遮。此封信只能以??VO?解我?ME後被切的?屈和正面指出在四月收到停料信因而已延锗了我?整整一?月，况且是在329未成法律巳停批。Me信中是有45天?殓斤我?完成，最?的是我?呃批已做了篦?，但?告未能在629到HKVO就被切，但邋不在我?ME的人！

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信老大的雅思9分作文, 我是要来坐坐沙发的.

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信支持主信，但要,太VO可能看也不看！要get to the point,少。封信只能以VO解我ME後被切的屈和正面指出在四月收到停料信而已延了我一月，况且是在329未成法律巳停批，不在我ME的心~点击展开...你又忘记把输入法调到繁体模式了? 专业点咯.

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信 只是感觉begging这个词不太好。。。

评论
FN:2007.2.09S2:2012.2.13补料:2012.5.08ME：2012.6.27回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信支持，不过我觉得也太长了，我认为HK office是有问题的，他们的不补料通知和重新补料通知，是造成我们me了没结果的主要问题，而且有些已经me的但是给了visa，这是不公平的，应该有申诉渠道，最好联合起来，不知有没有效果？vo不给visa，他们有理由，但是我们也是合理诉求，而且已经发visa的有些也不是3.29么，为何我们me了没有dm呢？

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信你又忘记把输入法调到繁体模式了? 专业点咯.点击展开...我只是用iphone4手?版，有屏幕傥接狱不好?，跟??陪否?轹！??篦或繁篦都是希望可以大家一起??怎做最好，是?事不是?人！你不是中介人?？你每天只想收更多客?！?是又疑神疑鬼怕CIC知道你在我?受害人中?中取利？又?呃奄做警察？又想隗我?呃班肯真真?的同? ？你不是已有自己群酵?？又?找客干?？

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信支持，不过我觉得也太长了，我认为HK office是有问题的，他们的不补料通知和重新补料通知，是造成我们me了没结果的主要问题，而且有些已经me的但是给了visa，这是不公平的，应该有申诉渠道，最好联合起来，不知有没有效果？vo不给visa，他们有理由，但是我们也是合理诉求，而且已经发visa的有些也不是3.29么，为何我们me了没有dm呢？点击展开...要有群??力VO才?有反?！

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信要有群??力VO才?有反?！点击展开...关键在渥太华。部长指示他们不继续处理，他们也就无能为力。

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信Well written ! Pure English! I appreciate it!

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信支持！我们ME的也太冤了吧！

评论
被切后于2014年1月2号递交萨省技术移民申请2014年2月6号AR，至今无IP继续等待中回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信特别要支持这个。体检了还切，确实太冤了，不待这样的！

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信关键在渥太华。部长指示他们不继续处理，他们也就无能为力。点击展开...?，所以要渥太攘先收信，cc to Hk VO!

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信支持已ME的联合起来申诉。先申诉，申诉不成然后走法律程序。

评论
慢慢来，一切都会好的。支持已ME的联合起来申诉。先申诉，申诉不成然后走法律程序。点击展开...请问申诉是怎样程序？这不已经有写信的了，已经me的各位，我想一是申诉，二是抗议，三是起诉，因为已经起诉的很多朋友的情况是不一样的，也有已经起诉的，但是我看了家园中的讨论，觉得起诉的结果还是不很理解，不同的情况要求统一的判决吗？已经me的能否联合起来呢？因为情况一样么，为何有的人就差几天，或者更早的，还给退了呢？根本不是我们的原因么，而且索赔应该更多，给我们造成的痛苦更大，更多呢，明明是vo的责任么，为何要我们承担他们的错误？

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信我只是用iphone4手?版，有屏幕傥接狱不好?，跟??陪否?轹！??篦或繁篦都是希望可以大家一起??怎做最好，是?事不是?人！ 你不是中介人?？你每天只想收更多客?！?是又疑神疑鬼怕CIC知道你在我?受害人中?中取利？又?呃奄做警察？又想隗我?呃班肯真真?的同? ？你不是已有自己群酵?？又?找客干?？点击展开...难道就我不知道此人是中介？晕。。。

评论
网络暴力和现实中一样无处不在，远离不诚信的人，管它老乡，同胞，还是网络名人！！！支持已ME的联合起来申诉。先申诉，申诉不成然后走法律程序。点击展开...可以同时走，尤其首抓申诉，尤其两次汇票的同学。

评论
网络暴力和现实中一样无处不在，远离不诚信的人，管它老乡，同胞，还是网络名人！！！支持！我们ME的也太冤了吧！点击展开...的确如此，非常冤，所以要发出声音。强烈支持楼主的行为，希望已经me的没有dm的朋友要联合起来，因为情况都相同，不是我们的原因，我们是‘被冤屈’。很多朋友可能已经参加诉讼了，也有没参加的，我想不管怎样，我们已经me的是否能组织起来，发出相同的声音，采取相同的行动？

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信hk已经me了没有dm，是否除了参加tim的诉讼，就没有其他的声音和方法了吗？？？？难道参加tim诉讼的才有希望么？我们没参加的呢？凭什么相同的情况，甚至更早的tx，有的me给visa，有的不给呢？根本不是我们的原因!!!!只能喊冤枉么？是应该让他们给个说法么。各位高人，请问如何才能将我们的申诉让该知道的人知道？因为tim的诉讼，我们没参加，所以情况也不知道，就是疑问不同的案件情况，怎么会有同样的判决？一个case上千人，情况各不相同，律师要非常忙，怎么回复呢？已经me了没有dm的情况应该是相同的，当然一起打费用低，但是好律师是很贵的。。。。。，但是至少律师要跟起诉人协商讨论啊，但是这么多人的情况不同，律师怎样回复呢？如是，怎样才能保证起诉的质量呢？？已经me但是没给visa的最冤屈了，那是给cic和vo玩的够呛，还不如没有s2，我们也不来来回回折腾个遍，那这几个月过的，是相当的难受，一会告诉你不用办，一会又通知你马上办，办了的，有的给visa，有的不给，还给他们数钱，有的老同学还给两次汇票，真是冤呢。。。。。。

评论
回复: 代表ME申请人向香港移民处提交的请愿信大家都建议申诉，只不过没人建议应该怎样申诉，申诉程序？hk已经me了没有dm，是否除了参加tim的诉讼，就没有其他的声音和方法了吗？？？？难道参加tim诉讼的才有希望么？我们没参加的呢？凭什么相同的情况，甚至更早的tx，有的me给visa，有的不给呢？根本不是我们的原因!!!!只能喊冤枉么？是应该让他们给个说法么。各位高人，请问如何才能将我们的申诉让该知道的人知道？因为tim的诉讼，我们没参加，所以情况也不知道，就是疑问不同的案件情况，怎么会有同样的判决？一个case上千人，情况各不相同，律师要非常忙，怎么回复呢？已经me了没有dm的情况应该是相同的，当然一起打费用低，但是好律师是很贵的。。。。。，但是至少律师要跟起诉人协商讨论啊，但是这么多人的情况不同，律师怎样回复呢？如是，怎样才能保证起诉的质量呢？？已经me但是没给visa的最冤屈了，那是给cic和vo玩的够呛，还不如没有s2，我们也不来来回回折腾个遍，那这几个月过的，是相当的难受，一会告诉你不用办，一会又通知你马上办，办了的，有的给visa，有的不给，还给他们数钱，有的老同学还给两次汇票，真是冤呢。。。。。。点击展开...

  ·中文新闻 昆士兰青少年在穆伦巴唐斯（Murrumba Downs）开着被盗汽车闯红灯
·中文新闻 澳洲航空在悉尼机场发动机“爆炸”迫使紧急迫降