The refugee system

What happens to people who have asylum claims in the system now that Bill C-11, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act has received Royal Assent?

Only certain provisions in the bill take immediate effect at Royal Assent. Most changes will occur 12 to 18 months after the bill receives Royal Assent. Once the new system comes into effect, what happens to an asylum claim will depend on where it is in the process. See the table below for more information.

Scenario	Next Steps
Any person whose claim has not been heard by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) before the legislation comes into force.	Their claim will be heard by the new Refugee Protection Division at the IRB composed of public servant decision makers. However, the proposed timelines such as a hearing within 90 days will not apply.
A person whose claim has been heard by the current Governor in Council (GIC) decision makers, but no decision has been made yet.	A decision on their claim will be rendered by the initial GIC decision maker. The individual will be able to appeal that decision to the Refugee Appeal Division. The one-year limit on  pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA) applications applies.
A person whose claim was rejected under the current system.	This person will not have access to the Refugee Appeal Division at the IRB, but will be able to apply for a pre-removal risk assessment and/or humanitarian and compassionate consideration if desired.
A person whose claim was rejected under the current system, but was ordered back for re-determination after judicial review by the Federal Court.	Their claim will be heard by the new Refugee Protection Division composed of public servant decision makers. The individual will be able to appeal a negative decision to the Refugee Appeal Division and the one-year limit on PRRAs will apply.
A failed refugee claimant who is subject to a removal order and has an ongoing pre-removal risk assessment.	The pre-removal risk assessment application will continue to be considered by CIC.

Why are these changes necessary?

Canada’s asylum system is broken. These changes are necessary to ensure that refugees who need Canada’s protection receive it quickly. Canada’s existing asylum system is crippled by an ever-increasing number of new unfounded claims and it can take years to deal with them. As the Auditor General and refugee advocates have said, this encourages people to make unfounded claims knowing they would be able to live and work in Canada for many years. This reduces our ability to help those who truly need our protection.

Not all asylum claimants are in need of Canada’s protection. Between 2006 and 2008, there was a 60% increase in the number of refugee claims made in Canada. Yet last year, fewer than half, only 42%, of the claims were accepted. This contributes to the growing backlog of approximately 60,000 claims currently pending before the IRB.

These changes to the system are also in response to the unreasonable amount of time it currently takes failed asylum claimants to get a final decision on their claim and be removed from Canada. On average, this process takes 4.5 years with the removal of some failed claimants taking more than 10 years.

Will these changes limit access to the asylum system?

No. Under the new measures, all eligible asylum claimants continue to be entitled to a fair hearing before an independent decision maker.

These new measures will strengthen our system and our humanitarian tradition of helping those in need of protection while continuing to exceed international and legal domestic obligations.

Can a claim be rejected at the information-gathering interview?

No. The purpose of this interview is to gather information from an asylum claimant and to schedule their hearing before the IRB and to provide the claimant with information on the process.

Will the public servant decision makers be truly independent?

Yes. These decision makers will be hired by the IRB, which is an independent organization. Both the institution of the IRB and individual decision makers are fully independent.

In addition, any IRB research used to assist its decision makers is not affected or influenced by immigration or visa policies, which are CIC’s responsibility.

Is there a time limit within which a decision must be made on an asylum claim?

No. However, timeframes for hearings on claims will be set out in regulations. Hearings on most claims are expected to occur within 90 days, and within 60 days for those from designated countries of origin. In many cases, decisions can be rendered at the hearing or shortly thereafter. Some decisions, however, may take longer, depending on the complexity of the case, difficulty in obtaining the required documents and the amount of research involved.

How long will the Refugee Appeal Division take to reach a decision?

In most cases, decisions are expected within four months unless a hearing is held.

Will claims from people from designated countries of origin be fast-tracked?

Claims from individuals from designated countries of origin will receive a fair hearing before an independent decision maker at the IRB. Hearings on these claims are expected to be held within 60 days as opposed to the 90-day timeframe for other refugee claimants. These timeframes will be specified in regulations. 

In addition, in the event of a negative decision, their appeal, if any, to the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) will be fast-tracked. These RAD decisions will be rendered within the timeframe to be set out in regulations (i.e. 30 days unless a hearing is held) as opposed to the regular processing time target, which is likely to be four months for all other claimants.

All failed refugee claimants continue to be able to ask the Federal Court to review a negative decision. However, there will be no automatic stay of removal for people from a designated country of origin while a judicial review is pending.

If someone is from a designated country of origin, will their claim automatically be rejected?

No. All eligible asylum claimants continue to get a fair hearing before the independent IRB based on their own circumstances. Unsuccessful claimants will also have an appeal to the new Refugee Appeal Division.

When will the clock for the one-year limit start?

It will start from the time of the final negative Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) decision — which would either be

• after a Refugee Appeal Division decision (for most claimants) or
• after the initial decision at the Refugee Protection Division.

The one-year limit also applies once an asylum claim has been determined to be abandoned or withdrawn.

What will happen if a person’s circumstances change within that one year window?

To address exceptional situations, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism may exempt people from specific countries or groups from the one-year limit.

Where will the additional government-assisted and privately sponsored refugees come from?

This discussion will be part of the annual target planning process. Resettlement allows Canada, with the help of its partners such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and private sponsors, to select refugees in camps and vulnerable urban situations who have no other durable solution available to them.

How is Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP) funding used?

Approximately 25% of the budget goes to RAP service providers in 23 cities across Canada. These are non-profit organizations that provide for the immediate and essential needs of GARs, such as reception at the airport on arrival; temporary accommodation for the first week or two in Canada; orientation on living in Canada in general and their city/neighbourhood in particular; assistance in applying for Social Insurance Number, provincial health, bank account, Child Tax Benefit, etc; assistance in finding permanent accommodation; and referral to other programs such as language training. RAP funds also support port of entry services to support resettled refugees transiting through Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary.

Approximately 75% of the budget goes to providing income support to GARs, generally for 12 months or until they become self-sufficient.

What does this mean for asylum claimants?

This provision will require the Refugee Appeal Division at the Immigration and Refugee Board to expedite the processing of an appeal of a claim that has been determined to be manifestly unfounded by the Refugee Protection Division (RPD). Under this provision, the RPD decision maker, in rejecting a claim, may also determine whether the claim is manifestly unfounded.

If a claim is deemed to be manifestly unfounded, the processing time standard for the appeal will likely be similar to that of a claimant from a designated country of origin. This means that these appeals will likely be decided within 30 days unless a hearing is held. 

All failed refugee claimants continue to be able to ask the Federal Court to review a negative decision. However, there will be no automatic stay of removal for people with manifestly unfounded claims while a judicial review is pending.

Will my existing H&C application be affected by these changes?

All H&C applications pending at Royal Assent will continue to be examined according to section 25 as it was prior to Royal Assent. This means, for example, that reference to risk factors that fall under section 96 and section 97 will continue to be considered as part of the application.

Will H&C decisions still consider factors related to risk in a country of origin?

H&C decision makers will no longer consider risks that are assessed within the refugee protection process, i.e. risk of persecution based on grounds set out in the Refugee Convention or risk of torture or of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

H&C decisions will continue to focus on considerations like establishment in Canada, best interests of the child, relationships in Canada, hardships that affect the foreign national and the country of origin’s ability to provide medical treatment.

Why was the public policy provision removed from the H&C provisions?

The new legislation separates out the use of public policies and H&C decisions because they are two very different options. In H&C applications, decisions are made on a case-by-case basis by a single decision maker and must be justifiable on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

Public policies facilitate processing for a large number of individuals who meet the same general criteria, and they are established by the Minister. Public policies may be justifiable on national interest grounds or on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.