No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Canada and the Refugee Question in International Law**
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 March 2016
Extract
“A victim of man’s inhumanity to man, the refugee has been with us since the beginning of history.” History records the expulsion of the Moors and Jews from Spain, the scattering of the Huguenots to all corners of Europe, the departure of the émigrés during the French Revolution, the migration of the United Empire Loyalists, and the lengthy exodus of minority groups and sects from Europe to settle in North America. It was not until the twentieth century with its cataclysmic wars and revolutions, however, that the problem reached epic proportions and the international community became sufficiently organized to make serious efforts to manage the refugee movement on a global scale.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international , Volume 13 , 1976 , pp. 3 - 24
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Canadian Council on International Law / Conseil Canadien de Droit International, representing the Board of Editors, Canadian Yearbook of International Law / Comité de Rédaction, Annuaire Canadien de Droit International 1976
References
1 A Report of the Canadian Immigration and Population Study (Green Paper), Department of Manpower and Immigration, Ottawa, 1974, Vol. 2, (The Immigration Program), 99.
2 189 U.N.T.S. 137. By April 1975, sixty-five member states had ratified or acceded to the 1951 Convention. The Canadian Instrument of Accession was deposited on June 4, 1969: [1969] Can. T.S. No. 6.
3 606 U.N.T.S. 267. By April 1975, fifty-nine member states were parties to the Protocol.
4 [1969] CT.S. No. 29. Canada acceded to the Protocol on June 4, 1969.
5 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, July 28, 1951, Article iA(2), 189 U.N.T.S. 150.
6 Final Act of the United Nations Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Status of Refugees and Stateless Persons, United Nations, Geneva, 1951, Resolution D.
7 The competence of the High Commissioner under the 1951 Convention extends to any persons considered to be refugees under previous conventions. But the 1951 Convention applied the term “refugee” only to these persons and to persons displaced by “events occurring before January 1, 1951.” It left it to acceding states whether or not to apply its provisions to persons coming from outside Europe (Article iA(2), iB(i) and (2)). The 1967 Protocol removed the time and geographical limitations of the Convention, but still gave those states applying the limited geographical criterion the option of maintaining it. Some countries continued to apply the Convention and Protocol only to European refugees. Thus non-European refugees generally recognized under the Convention and Protocol, and hence by the UNHCR, are not recognized by all contracting states (Article 1(2) and (3)).
8 For a comprehensive discussion of types of new refugees, see Paludan, Anne, The New Refugees in Europe, 16–19 Google Scholar (Working Group on Refugees and Exiles in Europe, Geneva, 1974). (Sponsored by the International University Exchange Fund, Geneva).
9 Paul Weis, The Legal Aspects of the Problems of De Facto Refugees (Working Group on Refugees and Exiles in Europe, Geneva, 1974).
10 Paludan, op. cit. supra note 8.
11 Statement by the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King, H.C. Deb. (Can.), 1947, Vol. Ill, at 2644–47.
12 By 1962 the refugee problem in Europe had been reduced, transportation was no longer a problem, and Canadian immigration offices had been established in Europe, giving Canada the capacity to select and resettle refugees without the assistance of ICEM.
13 Canada granted UNHCR $950,000 for the fiscal year 1974-75, and $600,000 for the fiscal year 1975–76, placing it sixth in rank among contributors.
14 By November 30, 1975, approximately 4,000 visas had been issued, although about 1,000 had yet to be used. As the Chilean programme was continuing, moreover, final figures could not be estimated.
15 Canadian Immigration Policy: White Paper on Immigration, Ottawa, October 1966.
16 For a full description of these guidelines, see op. cit. supra note 1, Chapter 4 and Appendix F.
17 R.S.C. 1970, C. 1–2.
18 Immigration Regulations, Part I, P.C. 1962–86 as amended by P.C. 1966–525, P.C. 1967–1616, P.C. 1972–2502, P.C. 1972–3073; P.C. 1974–318, P.C. 1974–1129, and P.C. 1974–2211.
19 R.S.C. 1970, C. I–3; as amended by S.C. 1973–74, C.27.
20 Act to Amend the Immigration Appeal Board Act, S.C. 1973–74, C. 27, sections 1 and 5.
21 For example, P.C. 6687(1945), P.C. 2180(1947), P.C. 2856(1947), P.C. 3926(1947), P.C. 1628(1948), P.C. 3371(1948), P.C. 3721(1948), P.C. 3750(1948), P.C. 3963(1948), P.C. 5009(1949), P.C. 5521(1949).
22 Immigration Regulations, P.C. 1954–1351 as amended by P.C. 1956–785, paragraph 20(b).
23 Formerly, Immigration Regulations, Part I, paragraph 27(2) (e); an amendment made by P.C. 1974–1129 removed direct reference to refugees, but the effect remains the same.
24 R.S.C. 1970, C. 1–2, section 5.
25 Immigration Regulations, Part I, sections 31, 32 and 33.
26 R.S.C. 1970, C. 1–2, section 8 and paragraph 7(2) (a) respectively.
27 See section infra on Refugees’ Entitlement to Remain in Canada.
28 Declaration on Territorial Asylum, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2312 (XXII), December 14, 1967.
29 It should be noted that territorial asylum is not the same as diplomatic asylum, the peculiarly Latin American custom of permitting embassies to accord sanctuary to residents of their host countries. Canada does not recognize any right to diplomatic asylum and does not accord it in its embassies. Diplomatic asylum must be distinguished, in turn, from diplomatic “temporary safe haven,” the practice of embassies granting temporary shelter to people whose lives are in imminent danger. International law is unclear on the subject, but any rights there may be appear to lie with the embassy rather than the individual. Canadian embassies may grant diplomatic “temporary safe haven” in very exceptional circumstances, as did our embassy in Santiago, Chile, in 1973. Diplomatic “temporary safe haven” is not the same as the “temporary territorial haven,” described infra.
30 Immigration Appeal Board Act, S.C. 1966–67, C.90, section 15 (1)(b)(i)
31 Ibid., section 11 (1) (c) as amended.
32 Ibid., section 11(2) as amended.
33 Ibid., section 11(3) as amended.
34 Minister of Manpower and Immigration v. Diaz Fuentes (1974), 2 F.G. 331 (F.C.A.)
35 R.S.C. 1970, C. I-3, section 11 (3) as amended.
36 Ibid., section 15(1) (b) (i) as amended.
37 Ibid., section 15(1) (b) (ii).
38 Ibid., section 23.
39 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, July 28, 1951, Article 32(2) 189 U.N.T.S. 150.