加拿大华人论坛 加拿大生活信息取消公民上诉权利

在加拿大

http://immigration.tigtag.com/canada/experience/178392.shtml新移民法赋予移民部官员撤销加拿大公民身份的极度权力。无论是被认定无意图居住在加拿大的归化公民，又或透过触犯刑事、国防法又或信息保安法而被撤销公民身份的人，除了涉及违反国际人权和战争罪行之外，其它所有撤销都不得上诉和向法院提出复核申诉。大律师公会指出，新移民法同时根本性地改变了撤销公民身份的程序。旧有法律赋予当事人到联邦法院聆讯的权利，即使法院认同部长的决定，公民撤销是由院督（Governor in Council）所执行，在撤销前院督都会再审视撤销公民身份的理据和公正性。新移民法生效后，撤销公民程序只是以文书方式进行。当移民部官员作出决定后，部长会向当事人发出撤销通知，当事人可以书面回复，然后移民部长便会作出最后决定。当事人既不得向法院提出申诉，其撤销亦不会交给院督处理。大律师公会严正地指出，移民部长绝对不是一位独立和公正的决策者。撤销公民身份如此重大的事情，必须经过正式的聆讯，由独立公正的法官，才符合法治和加拿大公民权的价值。令人难以置信的是，在新公民法实施后，公民的司法权利竟然可以比永久居民和难民还要小。无论是永久居民的入籍申请，又或难民申请被移民部所拒絶，都可以获得独立聆讯，但贵为公民的若果被撤销公民身份放逐，却竟然没有申诉的权利。

评论
https://www.cba.org/CBA/submissions/pdf/14-22-eng.pdfC. Lack of Hearing, Equitable ConsiderationsThe Bill would fundamentally alter the process of revocation of citizenship. Currently, theprocess consists of three steps. The first is a report under s. 10 of the Act, that the Minister issatisfied that a person obtained citizenship fraudulently. Second, once notified of the report,the person can request that the matter be referred to the Federal Court for a hearing. Third, ifthe Federal Court makes the finding requested by the Minister, citizenship is revoked by theGovernor in Council, which can and does consider equitable factors in addition to the breachitself.The proposed process cuts out the Federal Court hearing, except where persons have engagedin conflict against Canada or have misrepresented in relation to specific inadmissibilitygrounds under IRPA. In all other cases, the Minister will decide with no requirement of aformal hearing. For a matter as serious as revocation of citizenship, a formal hearing before anindependent and impartial decision-maker must be maintained. A fair process for revocation,including an oral hearing before an independent judge, reflects the value of Canadiancitizenship and respect for the rule of law.Another aspect of these changes of grave concern is the absence of consideration of equitablefactors. Currently, the Governor in Council may consider these factors. Under the proposedprocess, this will no longer be possible – the decision of the Federal Court judge on revocationis determinative and there is no further consideration of equitable factors by the Governor inCouncil. Where the Minister is responsible for revoking citizenship, there is no discretion.Even if discretion could be implied, the Minister is not an independent or impartial decision-maker.A permanent resident alleged to have misrepresented to obtain status under IRPA would havethe opportunity to make written submissions to an officer before being referred to theImmigration Division for an admissibility hearing. If the Immigration Division found theminadmissible, the person would have a right to appeal the removal order to the ImmigrationAppeal Division. The Immigration Appeal Division could consider the validity of the decision toissue a removal order, and also equitable or humanitarian and compassionate factors. Oncebecoming a citizen, the same person could lose their citizenship, permanent residence andbecome an inadmissible foreign national on a decision by a single officer. 11The end result is that Canadians are given less consideration and fair process than permanentresidents. Given the importance of the rights lost, a statutory tribunal, like the ImmigrationAppeal Division, ought to have the jurisdiction to consider the validity of the decision toterminate citizenship if ministerial revocation is maintained, as well as humanitarian andcompassionate factors that warrant retention of permanent residence if not citizenship.RECOMMENDATIONS:11. The CBA Section recommends that a citizen facing revocation always have theright to a hearing before an independent and impartial decision-maker.12. The CBA Section recommends that citizenship not be revoked without anassessment of humanitarian and compassionate factors by an independent andimpartial decision-maker.

评论
希望保守党下台后，别的党派上台可以废除这个法令！

评论
让那些提出C-24法案的人接收教训，C-24居住意向条款将公民分成三六九等，此条款不废，归化公民就得时刻支持反歧视舆论，在选举来临时保持要求平等的高压力。希望加拿大在年轻领导人的带领下更为自信，不那么恐外排外。

评论
狭隘排外恐外地建设世外桃源是违逆人类命运共同体和全球化的潮流。

评论
针对上周六加拿大多元文化部长康尼要求大多伦多万锦-康山选区自由党国会议员候选人麦家廉(图)停止撤谎兼要道歉的言论，麦家廉反驳要做出道歉的是康尼，他对至少数十万人造成损害，并对加拿大的国际声誉造成了损害。麦家廉辩称∶1. 康尼应向30万移民申请人道歉，很多人已等候了数年，康尼取消了这些人的申请资料。2. 康尼应向5万投资类别的申请人道歉，他们的申请被扔进了垃圾桶，新的投资移民计划一团糟，只有6个人申请这一计划。3. 康尼应向公民申请者道歉，他们的申请时间翻倍、申请费增四倍、新增多个障碍。其中一个是取消了他们作为国际留学生所留居加拿大的时间。4. 康尼应向永久居民的家属道歉，他们申请来加的等候时间飙升至顶5. 康尼应向具有双重国籍的加拿大公民道歉，他们成为了二等公民。6. 康尼应向难民申请人道歉，他们被拒绝了基本的医疗。7. 康尼应向来自海外的妻子道歉，她们有可能被暴露於家庭暴力的风险。8. 康尼应向居家护理者道歉，这一项目被搞得一片混乱。9. 康尼应向国际留学生道歉，一些职业类别原定学成合格後可以留下，康尼违背了加国对留学生的承诺，让学生前功尽弃。

评论
你怎么随意判断人呢？你找找我的发言，我哪儿说同性恋是上帝允许的？我反对保守党是因为他们假冒伪善，反对C-24歧视归化公民，我看不惯忽悠利用了华人然后再切。在这些矛盾当中，只能抓住当前的主要矛盾就是反歧视反对一味排外恐外。而且世俗的法律是罪人们博弈出来的，比不上神的良善律法，不愿悔改的罪人，不义的让他不义，给他们堕落的自由，只是将来要接受主耶稣的末日大审判。这世俗的法律只是允许罪人败坏自己的自由，没有剥夺基督徒的信仰自由，如果世俗法律强迫每个人必须实践同性恋，我无疑会坚决反对，所以我把这世俗的法律当做当前的次要矛盾。在这世俗的法律下基督徒可以保持洁身自好，可以遵守主的命令过圣洁的生活。在这淫乱邪恶的世代，“你们驯良要像鸽子，灵巧要像蛇”，世俗的法律有时候是基督徒决定不了的，只能抓住主要矛盾。各位基督徒可以从自己更为偏重的立场出发投票，只要基督徒的信仰实践能有自由。对于我来讲，我受过一刀切的伤害，无法接受假冒伪善，看不惯忽悠了人然后在后面捅一刀的做法。接收少数穆斯林既不会根本性改变加拿大人口构成，还可以激发竞争，以让嘴上称呼主啊主啊的人不服从神的命令而感到羞愧，同时可以向世界展示爱心，让那些穆斯林能接触学习到真理，悔改接受主耶稣的救恩。

  ·中文新闻 悉尼铁路工会纠纷：避免火车混乱的协议细节浮出水面
·中文新闻 为什么比尔·肖顿体现了澳大利亚政治最好和最坏的一面