441-02706 (Foreign affairs)
- Keywords
- Civil and human rights
- Criminal records
- Foreign policy
- Hong Kong
- Immigration and immigrants
Original language of petition: English
Petition to the House of Commons
Whereas:
- Free and fair trials, judicial independence, and the rule of law are all cornerstones to Canada's democracy;
- Since June 2019, protests for democracy, freedom, universal suffrage, and regional autonomy have been occurring in Hong Kong;
- On many occasions, peaceful protestors of Hong Kong are charged and convicted of penal offences through a judiciary that is neither impartial, fair, or free;
- The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c.27), Section 36 renders foreign nationals who have committed or been convicted of a foreign offence outside Canada inadmissible on grounds of criminality and serious criminality; and
- Hong Kong people who have been arbitrarily charged and convicted with pro-democracy movement related penal offences for political purposes are at risk of being deemed inadmissible to enter Canada.
We, the undersigned, citizens and permanent residents of Canada, call upon the Government of Canada to:
1. Recognize the politicization of the judiciary in Hong Kong and its impact on the legitimacy and validity of criminal convictions;
2. Affirm its commitment to render all National Security Law charges and convictions irrelevant and invalid in relation to Section 36(1)(c);
3. Create a mechanism by which Hong Kong people with pro-democracy movement related convictions may provide an explanation for such convictions, on the basis of which Government officials can grant exemptions to Hong Kong people who are deemed inadmissible under A36(1)(b), (2)(b), and (2)(c) upon examination of the circumstances and determination that the applicant's criminal record is political in nature; and
4. Work with the United Kingdom, United States, France, Australia, New Zealand, and other democracies to waive criminal inadmissibility of Hong Kong people convicted for political purposes, who otherwise do not have a criminal record.
Response by the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): Paul Chiang, M.P.
Foreign nationals who are charged or convicted for an offence outside Canada are not automatically barred from entering or remaining in Canada.
Immigration officers examine foreign charges and convictions to determine if there is an equivalent offence in Canada for the act committed. If there is no equivalent offence, the individual would not be inadmissible for having committed or being convicted of that offence. For example, as there is no equivalent offence in Canada for peaceful protesting, a charge or conviction for having partaken in such activities would not make an individual inadmissible to Canada.
Where there are some similarities between the foreign law and Canadian law, a person would only be inadmissible if the underlying action is considered an offence in Canada.
Immigration officers review all applications on a case-by-case basis, considering the specific facts presented by the applicant. All inadmissibility decisions are based on evidence, which may consist of police or intelligence reports, statutory declarations or other documents, such as media articles or publicly-available information.
Decision-makers are required to follow the rules of procedural fairness throughout the decision-making process. In the event that an immigration officer has concerns over the criminal admissibility of an applicant, the individual is informed and given an opportunity to provide a response to concerns about their application.
If an officer determines that an applicant is inadmissible to come to Canada, applicants may be eligible for relief, on a case-by-case basis, using mechanisms available under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. For example, a temporary resident permit may be issued, when justified in the circumstances, to allow an inadmissible foreign national to enter Canada.
Response by the Minister of Foreign Affairs
Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): Rob Oliphant
(1) Canada has a special relationship with Hong Kong that is rooted in a shared history and extensive economic, institutional and people-to-people ties. Canada strongly believes that a stable and prosperous Hong Kong depends on respect for human rights. Canada has consistently underscored this essential fact, both in Canada’s public pronouncements and communication with the People’s Republic of China and Hong Kong authorities. Canada has consistently expressed its deep concern that the National Security Law is eroding respect for human rights. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers expressed concerns in April 2023 about the National Security Law’s impact on the Hong Kong judicial system. In that report, the Special Rapporteur explained that the National Security Law can interfere with the independence of the judiciary, the ability of lawyers to exercise their profession independently, and the due process that guarantees the right to a fair trial in Hong Kong. Canada will continue to monitor all trials related to charges under the National Security Law and anti-sedition law, closely monitor developments in Hong Kong’s judiciary system, and will undertake appropriate action in response to emerging developments.
(4) While Canada and its partners share a common interest in Hong Kong’s prosperity and security, each country has its own legislative framework and is responsible for applying its own sovereign rules and procedures, including those related to immigration and admissibility. For Canada, foreign nationals who are charged or convicted for an offence outside Canada are not automatically barred from entering or remaining in Canada. Inadmissibility decisions are made on a case-by-case basis by Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada. With regards to human rights, Canada has repeatedly expressed its concern over the continued erosion of Hong Kong’s autonomy and rights through joint statements with the G7 and the Media Freedom Coalition. Since 2019, these statements have specified shared concerns on the imposition of the National Security Law, the selection process of the Chief Executive in Hong Kong, changes to Hong Kong’s electoral system which barred opposition candidates from participation, and the deteriorating media environment in the region. Furthermore, Canada and like-minded countries each publicly expressed concerns about the Hong Kong authorities’ issuance of international bounties for pro-democracy advocates living overseas and reiterated opposition to the extraterritorial application of the National Security Law.
During China’s recent Universal Period Review (UPR) appearance on its human rights record before the UN Human Right Council (January 23, 2024), Canada publicly called on China to repeal the National Security Law and to discontinue all cases against individuals in Hong Kong charged with exercising their human rights and freedoms. Furthermore, Canada and like-minded countries publicly expressed concerns at the UPR about the issuance by Hong Kong authorities of international bounties for pro-democracy advocates living overseas, and reiterated opposition to the extraterritorial application of the National Security Law. In March 2024, Canada issued a statement on Hong Kong’s rapid passage of the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance to express deep concern regarding the impact the new law could have on human rights in Hong Kong. Moving forward, Canada will continue to express concerns over the continued erosion of Hong Kong’s autonomy and rights through joint efforts with like-minded countries.
- Presented to the House of Commons
-
Garnett Genuis
(Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan)
October 10, 2024 (Petition No. 441-02706) - Government response tabled
- November 25, 2024
Only validated signatures are counted towards the total number of signatures.
Petitions identical to 441-02706 (Foreign affairs)
Identical Petition | Presenter | Date of Presentation | Signatures |
---|---|---|---|
441-02706 | Garnett Genuis | October 10, 2024 | 31 |
441-02780 | Garnett Genuis | October 29, 2024 | 33 |
441-02247 | Garnett Genuis | March 19, 2024 | 33 |
441-02134 | Garnett Genuis | February 8, 2024 | 29 |
441-01932 | Garnett Genuis | November 20, 2023 | 26 |
441-01863 | Arnold Viersen | October 31, 2023 | 32 |
441-01665 | Garnett Genuis | September 26, 2023 | 40 |
441-01540 | Garnett Genuis | June 13, 2023 | 29 |
441-01517 | Garnett Genuis | June 5, 2023 | 29 |
441-01449 | Garnett Genuis | May 15, 2023 | 38 |
441-01403 | Tom Kmiec | May 2, 2023 | 35 |
441-01338 | Garnett Genuis | April 25, 2023 | 32 |
441-01309 | Garnett Genuis | April 19, 2023 | 38 |
441-00158 | Garnett Genuis | February 9, 2022 | 32 |
441-00133 | Garnett Genuis | February 3, 2022 | 64 |
441-00048 | Garnett Genuis | December 13, 2021 | 27 |
Total signatures | 548 |