Abstract
AbstractFor years, Canadian refugee status determination (RSD) procedures have faced significant administrative capacity issues. Arguing that the RSD system was attracting “unfounded” claims and becoming inefficient, the Harper government pursued rights‐restrictive reforms. Is there a connection between applicants' procedural rights and the efficiency of Canadian RSD? This article outlines and empirically tests arguments for and against restricting refugee applicants' procedural rights to enhance efficiency. Examining macro‐level trends in applications and micro‐level adjudicator‐specific routines, it presents evidence against the notion that rights‐restrictive measures save adjudicators time. The article also shows that procedural rights can foster efficient RSD practices when applicants and adjudicators have access to competent legal counsel.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
