Federal Court rules that CBSA is not precluded from considering humanitarian & compassionate factors before issuing someone an inadmissibility report for involvement in organised crime.

Having a criminal track record can prove to be a barrier for your application to become a Canadian citizen. Yet, it entirely depends upon the severity of the offence and subsequent behaviour. The applicant filed a lawsuit against a delegate of the Minister of Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness for denying his stay in Canada.

Overview:

Mr. Guanqun was declared to be unacceptable for entry into Canada for committing monetary fraud (money laundering). The allegation was mentioned in an inadmissibility report that was prepared by an officer of the Canada Border Services Agency. Later, a delegate found that the inadmissibility report was justified & referred it to the Immigration Division of the Immigration & Refugee Board so that the applicant may not be permitted to remain in Canada. Mr. Guaquan challenged this judgment & filed an appeal seeking judicial review.

Background of the Applicant:

Guanqun Zhang is a 28-year-old Chinese citizen. He arrived in Canada in April 2012. He came as a student & then later started working in Canada as a foreign worker. On 2nd February 2017, a report issued by an officer of the Canada Border Services Agency stated that the applicant would not be allowed to remain in Canada as earlier they had been engaged in a transnational money-laundering scheme.

Denial of the application:

“Under subsection 37(1)(b) of the Immigration & Refugee Protection Act, permanent residents and foreign nationals are inadmissible to Canada on grounds of organised criminality for engaging in money laundering.”

In the Highlighted Report it was mentioned that along with the money laundering committed by Mr. Guanqun, his parents living in China had also been accused of engaging in financial fraud & were wanted by the local authorities there.

The applicant had also been accused of questionable international money transfers & many other crimes revolving around him possessing suspicious money.

Verdict:

The applicant filed an application seeking judicial review mentioning that the delegate could have considered the “no criminal conviction certificates” provided by him stating that his parents do not have a criminal conviction in China & given him a chance to refute the claim. He also stated that the judgment was unfair as the Delegate considered the Inadmissibility Report even though it pre-dated the Highlights Report.

The court decided to send the applicant’s petition for a judicial review where another decision-maker will review the case & make a decision.

Law is all about interpretation!