Refugee Claimants Research Articles

The Politics of “Doing Exactly Nothing”: Feminist Legal Change and Bureaucratic Administration of Refugee Protection

This article explore the limitations of progressive and feminist legal change through a study of the development of gender-based refugee policy in Canada. I argue that the actual impact of feminist and progressive legal change is determined in interaction with the wider bureaucratic and administrative contexts of its implementation; administrative strategies and bureaucratic procedures may, in fact, capably undermine the potentially expansive effects of progressive jurisprudence. As I will show, feminist legal interventions in Canada’s refugee policy did not increase actual access to refugee protection. Not only were these interventions delivered in a decidedly limited administrative form, they occurred simultaneously with highly innovative and coordinated bureaucratic practices that limited the access of large groups of refugee claimants to protection. Thus, while the Canadian refugee system expanded jurisprudentially, access to this system was tightly restricted through administrative and bureaucratic measures.

Safe Haven Questioned: Proof of Identity Over Persecution of SOGIE Asylum Seekers and Refugee Claimants in Canada

Canada, being a country that recognizes sexual orientation and gender identity/expression (SOGIE) as grounds for asylum or refugee status, can appear initially to be a safe haven for those persecuted based on such characteristics. Yet, claimants are required to prove the SOGIE upon which the persecution of the person is reported to have been based. Given that essentialist and binary notions of sexual orientation and gender identity/expression are the criteria utilized, such policy imposes traditional Westernized notions of identity with homonational and recolonizing effects on individuals who are attempting to resettle in Canada.

Between queer liberalisms and Muslim masculinities: LGBTQI+ Muslim asylum assessment in Germany

ABSTRACTThis article focuses on Germany’s assessment of refugee claims made by LGBTQI+ Muslims. Based on the analysis of several asylum decisions, it seeks to render insight into the ways in which credibility is assessed at the intersection of sexuality and Islam. Drawing on Jasbir Puar’s theory of homonationalism, this article first argues that Germany is more likely to grant protection in cases where the asylum seeker successfully adopts German/Western standards of moral on gay/queer sexualities. Secondly, this article discusses the manner in which “acceptance” and “tolerance” for gay and queer Muslim asylum seekers is inextricably linked to constructions of Muslim sexualities and masculinities in current asylum and the immigration debate in Germany. In closing, the article offers some suggestion on how to work towards a more inclusive asylum system in Germany and Europe more generally.

Queer Credibility in the Homonation-State: Interrogating the Affective Impacts of Credibility Assessments on Racialized Sexual Minority Refugee Claimants

This article critically appraises Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board decision-making that imposes burdens on diverse sexual orientation and gender identity and expression refugee claimants of colour to prove that they are queer according to homonationalist interpretations of queerness. This article examines decisions clustered around historical developments in the reception of racialized sexual minorities, including Canada (AG) v Ward, which made sexual minority refugee claims possible; Bill C-31, the immigration and refugee policy motivated by national security interests in the post-9/11 era; and 2017 guidelines designed to dispel misunderstandings about refugee claimants’ sexuality. Across this history, credibility assessments of refugee claims have undergone significant recalibrations, yet continue to reflect homonationalist values.

Pragmatic solidarity and asylum expert witnessing

The demand for expert witness testimony has increased in recent years as the numbers of applicants for refugee status/asylum continue to rise and legal restrictions tighten. While the contribution of expert testimony improves outcomes for refugee and asylum claimants and has generated new critical scholarship, participation as an expert witness is not without political, legal, and ethical concerns. Framed in terms of “pragmatic solidarity,” or the application of specialized knowledge to social justice goals, this article situates expert testimony in refugee and asylum procedures within wider considerations of power to explore how it is both beneficial and problematic, and how it may shape, and be shaped by, a researcher’s own situated questions, methods, and orientation.

Understanding the Rise of Mexican Migration to Canada

This article shows that the number of people seeking asylum in Canada from Mexico continues and has increased at an exponential rate. Canada has become a favorite destination for Mexican asylum seekers while Canada accepts their claims at an alarmingly low rate compared to those from other nations. We argue that the reason Mexicans choose Canada to claim refugee status is due to Canada’s long history of open immigration policies and especially its economic and temporary labor agreements. These policies give the impression to Mexicans that they are welcome in Canada. This proved to be untrue when Canada changed its immigration and refugee policies in response, specifically, to the overwhelming number of Mexican refugee claims.

Citizenship, Non-citizenship and the Rule of Law

This article explores aspects of the relationship between citizenship and the rule of law in Canada. I do not advance the extravagant claim that the rule of law has no purchase on the state’s assertion of power over non-citizens. But I do contend that a kind of immigration exceptionalism dilutes the rule of law’s in relation to non-citizens. I begin by setting out some uncontroversial attributes of the rule of law. I then provide snapshots from legislation, jurisprudence, and ‘law in action’ that exhibit countercurrents at work in migration law that divert, attenuate or dissipate the force of these rule of law principles. I begin on a high note, by considering the role played by citizenship in two Supreme Court of Canada judgments, Roncarelli v. Duplessis, and Baker v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Next, I present vignettes from the ordinary operation of immigration and refugee law to illustrate the tenuous grasp of standard rule of law principles in this sphere. In particular, I focus on the rule-of-law implications of the Canada-US Safe Third Country Agreement, the Trump Administrations anti-refugee policies, and irregular border crossing by refugee claimants (asylum seekers) from the Untied States to Canada. Finally, I hypothesize about the source of this immigration exceptionalism.

In the Name of Humanitarianism: The Interim Federal Health Program and the Irregularization of Refugee Claimants

Since 1957 Canada’s Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) has provided health-care coverage to refugee populations. However, from June 2012 to April 2016 the program was drastically revised in ways that restricted or denied access to health-care coverage, specifically to refugee claimants—persons who have fed their country and made an asylum claim in another country. One of the main intentions of the revision was to protect the integrity of Canada’s humanitarian refugee determination system. However, this had a major unintended consequence: within everyday healthcare places like walk-in clinics, doctor’s offices, and hospitals, IFHP recipients were denied access to services, regardless of actual levels of coverage. In this article I analyze how these program restrictions were experienced within Toronto’s everyday health-care places through the concept of irregularization. I discuss how the IFHP, as a humanitarian health-care program, problematizes the presence of refugee claimants in ways that created experiences of vulnerability, insecurity, and anxiety. Building on this view, I conclude with a discussion of how activists who sought to draw attention to the experiences of refugee claimants in the aftermath of the IFHP revisions closed of truly transformative pathways toward social justice.

Refracting exoticism in video representations of the victim-refugee: K’Naan, Angelina Jolie and research responsibilities

Media that makes use of the fixed, two-dimensional victim-refugee figure participates in a kind of exoticization of refugee-ed people by reading forced displacement exclusively through the lens of suffering. Yet the body of scholarship critiquing this media is susceptible to saying more about the scholars and their concerns than about the concerns of those whose experiences are being represented. This article returns to focus group research from 2009 when the author ran media discussion workshops with refugee activists, including both refugee and citizen participants. The workshop discussions focused on K’Naan’s hip hop video ‘Soobax’ and Hollywood film Beyond Borders. The research aimed to understand the pedagogical potential of textual and audio-visual narrations of refugee cultures but became an exercise in refracting the exoticization latent in the project’s research questions. One important outcome of this research was the different emphases in participant responses to the victim-refugee figure in the videos. Workshop participants with a refugee background iterated that, given the context of growing apathy and antipathy towards refugee claimants in Canada, the representation of refugees as suffering victims remains a useful and powerful intervention in public debates. The article finishes with some reflections on the implications of the research findings and on the responsibility of engaged scholarship for researchers in cultural refugee studies and humanitarian communication.

Who are you afraid of and why? Inside the black box of refugee tribunals

AbstractRefugee hearings perform an important function in migration management. They filter unwanted immigrants while offering possibilities for the protection of human rights for others. Building on insights from frontline decision‐making and migration studies, and from the standpoint of law and society, this article examines how Canada's refugee adjudicators assess the facts of a refugee claim. The data come from ethnographic research that combines observation of hearings, interviews with implicated actors and archival research. Going beyond adjudicators’ individual‐level attitudes towards refugee claimants, the article finds that hearing room assessments are shaped by adjudicators’ divergent approaches to fact‐finding, their interdependent relationships with lawyers, and their training.

EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT VISITS BY CHILD REFUGEE CLAIMANTS AT A PEDIATRIC TERTIARY CARE CENTER

Abstract BACKGROUND The Canadian government has announced the resettlement of 50 000 refugees from the Middle East by 2018. The proportion of refugees that are below 18 years of age have increased from 20% to almost 40% from 2005 to 2014 and is expected to increase further with new refugee influxes. Barriers to timely health care can worsen clinical presentations and outcomes, especially in vulnerable children such as refugees. This study aims to provide an overview of the epidemiology, clinical presentations, hospital stay metrics, and non-clinical support needs for child refugee claimants presenting to the emergency department at a large tertiary care hospital in Canada. OBJECTIVES To describe the emergency department visits by refugee claimants with IFH, including demographics, primary care access, immunization status, acuity of presentation, repeat visits, and admission rates. DESIGN/METHODS A retrospective chart review of all refugee children presenting to the emergency department at this tertiary care hospital from April 1 2014 to March 31st 2017. A case was defined as a child who presented to the hospital with Interim Federal Health (IFH) which is the federal health insurance program covers newly arrived refugee claimants in Canada. Descriptive statistics and chi square test for categorical data was used. Data was analyzed using SPSS v21 IBM 2012. Ethics was approved by the Ethics Review Board of the hospital. RESULTS In total, there were 646 visits to the emergency department by 388 patients with IFH. The average age was 6.4 years (IQR 2.9–9.3), of which 58% were females. Travel history was documented in 65% of cases. The majority of patients arrived from Southeast Asia and the Middle East. The average time spent in Canada was 217 days (IQR 78–205). Sixty percent of patients did not have an identified primary care provider. Those with an identified primary care provider had more non-acute (CTAS 4–5) visits than those without an identified primary care provider (p<0.05). Immunizations were not up-to-date per Canadian standard in 25% of those who had an immunization history documented. Translation services was used in 11% of visits. Admission rate was 12%, with average length of stay 3.4 days (std 4). Top three reasons for admission were febrile neutropenia, respiratory distress, and blood per rectum. One fifth (20%) of admissions occurred on the same day as the arrival of the patient to Canada. CONCLUSION A significant number of refugee children are needing emergency care and admission to hospital on the day they arrive to Canada. Most child refugees presenting to the emergency department did not have an identified primary care provider, and a quarter did not have up-to-date immunizations. Association with primary care provider suggests that linkage to primary care in this population should be a priority.

The Exclusion Trap for Women Refugee Claimants who Escape Domestic Violence with Children

The Exclusion Trap for Women Refugee Claimants who Escape Domestic Violence with Children

Use of the emergency department by refugees under the Interim Federal Health Program: A health records review.

IntroductionIn June 2012, the federal government made cuts to the Interim Federal Health (IFH) Program that reduced or eliminated health insurance for refugee claimants in Canada. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the cuts on emergency department (ED) use among patients claiming IFH benefits.MethodsWe conducted a health records review at two tertiary care EDs in Ottawa. We reviewed all ED visits where an IFH claim was made at triage, for 18 months before and 18 months after the changes to the program on June 30, 2012 (2011–2013). Claims made before and after the cuts were compared in terms of basic demographics, chief presenting complaints, acuity, diagnosis, presence of primary care, and financial status of the claim. Bivariate or multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to yield odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsThere were a total of 612 IFH claims made in the ED from 2011–2013. The demographic characteristics, acuity of presentation and discharge diagnoses were similar during both the before and after periods. Overall, 28.6% fewer claims were made under the IFH program after the cuts. Of the claims made, significantly more were rejected after the cuts than before (13.7% after vs. 3.9% before, adjusted OR 4.28, 95% CI: 2.18–8.40; p<0.05). The majority (75.0%) of rejected claims have not been paid by patients. Fewer patients after the cuts indicated that they had a family physician (20.4% after vs. 30% before, unadjusted OR 1.67, 95% CI: 1.14–2.44; p<0.05) yet a higher proportion of patients without a family physician were still advised to follow up with their family doctor during the after period (67.2% after vs. 41.8% before, unadjusted OR 2.85, 95% CI: 1.45–5.62; p<0.05).ConclusionA higher proportion of both rejected and subsequently unpaid claims after the IFH cuts in June 2012, as demonstrated in the logistic regression analysis in this health records review, represents a potential barrier to emergency medical care, as well as a new financial burden to be shouldered by patients and hospitals. A reduction in IFH claims in the ED and a reduction in the number of patients with access to a family physician also suggests inadequate primary care for this population, yet this was not reflected in the follow-up advice offered by ED physicians to patients.

Safe Country of Origin: Constructing the Irregularity of Asylum Seekers in Canada

AbstractThis article discusses the role of Canada's Designated Country of Origin (DCO) policy in the illegalization of asylum seekers. The policy allows the government to designate countries in which it is presumed that citizens do not face risks of persecution, torture, or similar abuse. Refugee claimants from DCOs are thus subject to accelerated processing timelines with reduced rights. Canada has implemented the policy as a way to deal with a backlog of asylum applications, increase efficiency, and exclude fraudulent refugee claims. Based on a primary field research conducted between October 2015 and May 2017 in three provinces, Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia, this article argues that the DCO policy is likely to have the unintended effect of shifting asylum seekers into an irregular status.

Neither Here nor There: Pakistani Hindu Refugee Claims at the Interface of the International and South Asian Refugee Regimes

Neither Here nor There: Pakistani Hindu Refugee Claims at the Interface of the International and South Asian Refugee Regimes

The Securitisation of Canada’s Refugee System: Reviewing the Unintended Consequences of the 2012 Reform

In 2012, Canada made regulatory changes and adopted legislations amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, including the Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act and the Balanced Refugee Reform Act. These pieces of legislation contain a number of measures which include: expedited refugee claim hearings, reduced procedural guarantees and reviews, growing use of socioeconomic deterrents, and increased immigration detention. Drawing on a qualitative research, this article explores the unintended results and counter-productive effects of these new measures, with a particular focus on their practical and human rights implications. It is argued that the government has used the language of security to rationalise the imposition of disproportionately harsh treatment on asylum seekers. Unsurprisingly, the new measures have resulted in violations of asylum seekers’ human rights. In addition, they have had a detrimental impact on third parties involved in the refugee protection system, such as legal counsels and service providers. Finally, it is argued that there is a correlation between the new refugee measures and the increase in irregular migration in Canada.

Borderzones and the politics of irregularisation: the Interim Federal Health Program and Toronto's everyday places of healthcare

Engaging with the concept of borderzones, this article critically analyses the irregularisation of refugee claimants residing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Specifically, attention is placed on the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP), a federal health insurance program provided to refugee populations, and how it was experienced in everyday healthcare places. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with doctors, lawyers, social workers, and refugee claimants, this article empirically demonstrates irregularising bordering practices within these everyday places, and how refugee claimants and allies challenged such practices through, what I term, acts of liberating irregularity. Overall, this article sheds new light on the role of borders in the processes and politics of irregularisation within the Canadian asylum context.

Borderzones and the politics of irregularisation: the Interim Federal Health Program and Toronto's everyday places of healthcare

Engaging with the concept of borderzones, this article critically analyses the irregularisation of refugee claimants residing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Specifically, attention is placed on the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP), a federal health insurance program provided to refugee populations, and how it was experienced in everyday healthcare places. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with doctors, lawyers, social workers, and refugee claimants, this article empirically demonstrates irregularising bordering practices within these everyday places, and how refugee claimants and allies challenged such practices through, what I term, acts of liberating irregularity. Overall, this article sheds new light on the role of borders in the processes and politics of irregularisation within the Canadian asylum context.

Access to Prenatal Care for Pregnant Refugee Women in Toronto, Ontario, Canada: An Audit Study.

Prenatal care providers in Toronto were contacted twice using standardized scripts to book appointments for a pregnant non-refugee and refugee claimant, both eligible for prenatal care. unequivocal offer of appointment. Secondary outcome: reasons for refusal of prenatal care. There was a statistically significantly lower rate of offering prenatal care (34%) to refugee claimants compared with non-refugees (95%) (p &lt; .001). Lack of knowledge, confusion about policies, time-consuming administrative requirements, and slow reimbursement processes were cited as reasons for refusal of care. Our results highlighted barriers to accessing prenatal care for refugee women. There are important future policy implications when considering the numerous changes to refugee health care policy in the last five years.

The Mexico-Canada border: extraterritorial border control and the production of 'economic refugees'

By examining the Mexico-Canada border, I argue that the interplay between discourses of the 'bogus economic refugee' and Canada's extraterritorial bordering practices is crucial to understanding human security in North America. The concept of the Mexico-Canada border is shorthand for how Canadian policies and practices aim to police Mexico's borders. For example, Canada implemented a visa requirement in 2009 in response to a 'surge' in refugee claims by Mexican nationals. The term also signals how Mexico has been constructed as the focus of regional migration management, including through Canada's Anti-Crime Capacity Building Program to support policing and border security efforts within Mexico. Both initiatives contribute to a broader Canadian strategy of Mexican refugee deterrence.