The portion of Bill C-18 relevant to Wasyl Odynsky, Helmut Oberlander and other victims of the d&d process appears to be in Part 2, LOSS OF CITIZENSHIP, sections 16 through 18.
Frankly, I am appalled. If Bill C-18 is passed without major amendments, the Holocaust Industry will have succeeded in a full consolidation of the d&d process as proposed on page 172 of the Deschenes Commission Report (traced to a 1985 report by William Mandell to the OSI). In other words, if Bill C-18 were law, Andrew MacKay's subjective judgment "on a balance of probabilities" against Wasyl Odynsky and Helmut Oberlander would automatically result in their loss of citizenship and their deportation (without any right of appeal or judicial review). It is far worse than the present situation, where, at least, there are some checks and balances imposed by the separate revocation and deportation processes.
The news release of the government, the positive interpretation of the news media and even that of Andrew Telegdi does not correspond to the reality of the legislation.
I will very concisely list the offending sections:
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****
16(2) If 16(1) [citizenship or permanent residency acquired by fraud],
then automatic revocation of citizenship.
16(5) If 16(4) [security grounds, violation of human rights, organized
crime], then automatic deportation.
16(6)(b)(ii) Any new evidence "is not bound by any legal or technical
rules of evidence".
17(1) Implies that secret information may be withheld from defense.
17(4)(b) Confidentiality due to national security or safety of
informants.
17(4)(c) Judge acts "as informally and expeditiously as" ... possible.
17(4)(d) Judge must examine info in private within 7 days.
17(4)(e) Info from Immigration or RCMP/CSIS may be withheld from
defense, if national security or safety of informants jeopardized.
17(4)(g) Nevertheless, info in 17(4)(e) may be utilized by judge in
judgment without including it in his summary, if national security or
safety of informants is at stake.
17(4)(h) Judge shall provide victim with summary of info, except for
that jeopardizing national security or safety of informants.
17(4)(j) "Judge may receive into evidence anything ... , even if it is
inadmissible in a court of law, and may base the decision on that
evidence."
17(5) Judge shall determine
17(5)(a) On the balance of probabilities, whether citizenship was
obtained by fraud.
17(5)(b) Whether "certificate" is reasonable with respect to 17(2)(b) [national security, human rights abuse, organized crime]
17(6) If 17(5)(a), then citizenship is automatically revoked.
17(8) If 17(5)(b), then deportation is automatic.
17(9) Determination in 17(5) "is final and may not be appealed or
judicially reviewed".
18(1)-(4) I think these sections describe the present procedures of notifying
the victim of intention to revoke citizenship within 30 days unless the
victim applies for a judicial review by the Federal Court. [It does NOT supercede Sec. 17(9)]
18(5) Immigration cannot revoke citizenship of people who have been
citizens for 5 years.
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****
My own personal view is that even the concept of "revocation of citizenship" should be wiped off the face of the planet. It doesn't solve anything and does more harm than good to world society. It is far preferable to scrutinize immigrants more carefully before granting them citizenship. Thereafter, any allegations against a naturalized citizen should be handled in a criminal court of law in exactly the same manner as Canadian-born citizens.
Failing that, Canadians should insist that
(1) All revocation of citizenship proceedings be held in criminal courts of law in front of a jury utilizing rigorous rules of evidence and a "beyond a reasonable doubt" rather than "on a balance of probabilities" criterion.
(2) All evidence must be made available to the defense, notwithstanding the national security or safety-of-informants argument.
(3) Normal criminal court appeal processes be available to the accused at all stages of the proceedings.