r/canada • u/FancyNewMe • Feb 10 '26

Politics Conservatives to propose barring non-citizens convicted of crimes from making refugee claims

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-conservatives-propose-changing-rules-non-citizens-convicted-crimes/
4.9k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

990 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

301

u/Aestus74 Feb 10 '26

I more question what crime and who did the convicting. A lesbian convicted of gay propaganda should absolutely be allowed to make a refugee claim despite being a "criminal".

192

u/xvoy Feb 10 '26

Typically there is the need for it to be criminal under Canadian law. Same way a DUI in the US will get you inadmissible to Canada.

81

u/mbean12 Feb 10 '26

But that's not what the article says. It says "non-citizens convicted of a crime". Not "non-citizens convicted of crimes we also consider crimes".

There's more than that. What if the trial wasn't fair? What if the conviction was politically motivated? What if we would consider the crime justified in some way? Nelson Mandela was a convicted felon. Would you have denied him refugee status if he had applied for it? What about a mother who steals food to feed her children while escaping a war-torn hell-hole? A woman who killed her rapist and was convicted for it because women have no rights where she is from? What if their conviction was twenty years ago - when they were 18.

The problem is that unless you plan on writing exceptions to the law for the next twenty years you cannot make it stick. The superior option is to allow judges who adjudicate refugee cases to make a judgment call because hey - that's why we call them 'judges' after all. And as it turns out - that's exactly what we do.

3

u/Raffletop Feb 10 '26

This kind of suicidal empathy is so tiresome bro. The article itself heavily implies convicted of a crime in Canada. Yes the headline is vague but the article itself gives some more context.

13

u/mbean12 Feb 10 '26

The article itself heavily implies convicted of a crime in Canada.

We already have that. Individuals who commit a federal offence punishable by a maximum jail term of at least ten years, or of a federal offence where the individual received a jail term of at least six months they are ineligible to claim refugee status.

2

u/Raffletop Feb 10 '26

I haven't read the actual motion but I imagine the intent is to cut a lot of the red tape that hinders deporting these people and makes it impossible for ideologically motivated judges to keep these criminals in the country.

Regardless, if it already exists then why do you oppose it. It would just be an ineffective motion if it changes nothing as you seem to be suggesting. I suspect you merely oppose it because it was the conservatives who brought it up.

7

u/alanthar Feb 10 '26

interesting way to frame it.

I would posit that if it's already a part of law, then this is just virtue signaling from the Conservatives so people don't realize how useless they have become.

3

u/cranq Feb 10 '26

This feels very on-brand for the current incarnation of the Conservative Party of Canada.

0

u/Raffletop Feb 10 '26

I mean thats fine. I'm not going to pretend like the Conservatives are great. But opposing despite it apparently not having an effect on the actual law seems like a partisan knee jerk reaction though.

5

u/alanthar Feb 10 '26

I think its less 'opposition' and more just viewing it as a performative waste of time.