Why are organizations that represent Blacks and other racialized minorities being left out of RCMP and CBSA Oversight Legislation

BY MICHAEL THOMAS

It has been brought to the attention of Toronto Caribbean Newspaper that organizations representing Blacks and other racialized people who have decades of expertise in the areas of immigration and refugee law, criminal law, human rights, international law, civil liberties, and national security, to name a few are being left out of the process of shaping and having any input in Bill C-20.

Despite this present government’s verbal sermons on accountability, it is instead dancing around it by failing to properly consult with the communities that CCLA (aka Canadian Civil Liberties Association) represents and include them in the democratic process of law-making.

Even though Bill C-20 is a vital measure to ensure greater accountability of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) the big question here is, why were most of these equally vital organizations pushed aside?

How in a democratic and fair society can most of the important players be left off the team and a winning result be expected?

These are the organizations that have major concerns with Bill C-20

• Amnesty International Canada (English-speaking)
• Amnistie Internationale Canada (francophone)
• British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
• Canadian Civil Liberties Association
• Canadian Council for Refugees
• Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association
• Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association
• Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council
• International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group

Let us look at what Bill C-20 means and how it will affect the people these organizations represent.

Bill C-20: An Act establishing the Public Complaints and Review Commission and amending certain Acts and statutory instruments is an overdue bill that attempts to respond to the longstanding call to create a dedicated independent review and complaints process for the activities of the CBSA and make changes to the RCMP review process – amalgamating both under a Public Complaints and Review Commission (PCRC).

Many of the judgments that immigration hands down affect minorities especially Blacks in a big way, therefore, it should be imperative that all nine organizations who lend their services to these minority and disenfranchised folks be given a seat at the table when these vital laws are concocted, tabled and passed.

Likewise, many of the daily doings of the RCMP affect the lives of minorities and Blacks plus their families and as a result, they turn to these nine organizations to get many kinks straightened out daily, so my question for this government is “Who is more qualified and have a stake in shaping these laws like Bill C-20 than these nine organizations?”

These organizations are collectively saying, “We have decades of expertise in the areas of immigration and refugee law, criminal law, human rights, international law, civil liberties, and national security, to name a few.

The collective expertise of our groups can help the federal government fulfil the mandate of this Bill, expressed by the Minister of Public Safety in November 2022, to strengthen independent accountability and combat systemic racism and discrimination.”

Here are some of the flaws and many shortcomings of the proposed Bill C-20 as pointed out by the nine organizations named in this article. Aspects that should be addressed include:

• The need to ensure the independence of the PCRC’s operations
• The PCRC’s independent access to information
• Ensuring there is a mechanism for complaints on systemic issues
• Third-party complaints
• Broadening the PCRC’s redress and recourse powers

“Bill C-20 contains various limitations on complaints, reviews, and investigations, which are overly restrictive and unnecessary,” these are the words of Amnesty International Canada.

I had a short conversation with Julia Sande, the Human Rights Law and Policy Campaigner for Amnesty International Canada. I asked Sande for her views on why most organizations representing these victims were left out of Bill C-20 and the decisions surrounding it; here is what Sande had to say.

“I think the government had a stated goal of introducing oversight legislation, and so I think there is a focus on meeting that goal, but less of a focus on how they are meeting that goal and not how to make sure it’s the most effective and entangled oversight possible rather than just creating oversight that exists.

The bill falls short in some ways, one of our big concerns is that there is a provision section of the bill that talks about being able to transport people outside of CBSA care and control and into provincial prisons for people who are in immigration detention as long as there is another provincial oversight body.

We have concerns with that practice because the practice of sending people in immigration detention to provincial jail is contrary to human rights standards.”

I also spoke with Tim McSorley who is the National Coordinator of International Civil Liberties Watch Group. McSorley’s story was very similar to Sande’s; here is what he had to say.

“We have had limited amounts of input. One of our groups did appear at the committee but overall, we found there were very limited opportunities to provide feedback and input on the bill. We expected consultation before they came out with this bill and that never happened.”

McSorley explained that even though some organizations had done decades of work there were not invited to participate in the Bill C-20 process, “That we found troubling.”

I asked McSorley about his organization’s concerns surrounding Bill-C20 and the RCMP and his answer was, “I think our major concern is around who is able to make complaints, it is very limited in terms of whether or not a third party can make a complaint.”

Finally, I spoke with Samuel Escobar, Canadian Immigration Lawyer and founder of How To Immigration Law PC and the current Vice President, Communications and Media for the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association (CILA).

Escobar’s response was similar to Sande and McSorley. “I can’t speak as to why this government would allow this to occur, but what I can say is that just like the other organizations, I am frustrated with this.

The only thing we can do is call this out, call for transparency, accountability and just hope that the amount of news coverage this gets would sort of pressure the government from dodging the sort of processes that they just seem to bypass.”

After listening to McSorley, Escobar and Sande, I could not help but conclude that Bill C20 was put into place to “handcuff” these multiple organizations trying to help the disenfranchised. When government entities like the RCMP are allowed to investigate themselves, I think it’s time for Webster’s to change the meaning of the words “conflict of interest.”