What is Denaturalization and Deportation as a policy ("d & d")?
A Federal Government policy that purports to attempt "to bring to justice" alleged war criminals from the World War II era, using a civil process which alleges the accused obtained their Canadian citizenship by false representation, fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances.
How does d & d remove due process and why is it fundamentally unfair?
1. The process is not a criminal trial!
Despite claims to the contrary, d & d does not involve a finding of guilt or innocence on charges of war criminality. In fact, most Federal Court judges have specifically ruled there was no evidence whatsoever of war crimes or atrocities of any kind on the part of the accused!
2. Nature of proceedings removes fairness because ...
3. What the government substitutes for fairness ...
4. No substance to government's case ...
which is based on a hypothetical interview 50 years ago, during which a hypothetical question was asked of the accused, who gave a hypothetical answer that is today judged as probably untrue!
5. Case is not decided beyond a reasonable doubt ...
but is decided on a balance of probabilities (i.e. Judge need only be 50.1% satisfied on any point)
6. Other basic flaws include ...
7. Government's complicity ...
What do legal experts say about key aspects of d & d?
"It should require more than a mere balance of probabilities to deprive any persons of the rights and remedies that would otherwise be theirs ... It is one thing to deport those who have actually committed or assisted in the commission of [war crimes]. But their is no justification for deporting permanent residents simply because they happen to be involved in the same organization as the offenders." - Canadian Civil Liberties Assoc. Brief, April 14/99
"For permanent residents, [revocation of citizenship] ... should not be based on the probability that an offence has been committed ... Crimes against humanity and war crimes are now offences under Canadian law, and persons in Canada can be prosecuted for offenses committed outside Canada. [Criminal] conviction is the appropriate threshold for loss of permanent resident status." - Canadian Bar Assoc., Citizenship & Immigration Section Issue paper No. 3
"Is it fair for the government to have alleged war crimes against [an accused] and then, having failed to prove its case, to obtain the same result (d & d) through a much less serious allegation? ... Is this not tantamount to guilt by association?" - Ian Hunter, professor emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of W. Ont.
"It is only when the criminal responsibility of the individual has been established by a criminal standard of justice that such draconian measures [as denaturalization and deportation] begin to acquire a semblance of justice." - the late Justice John Sopinka, Supreme Court of Canada, prior to his elevation to that Court, May 5, 1986.
"One is either a member of an organization or one is not. The fact that one may be forced to do a bidding of an organization does not make them a member ... [Judge MacKay's] reasoning would mean that the janitor at the police station is not a member of the police force in a formal sense, but he is still a member because he provides a service to the police. In my respectful view, this conclusion is simply unreasonable." - retired Justice Roger Salhany, critiquing a recent d & d Court decision, May 17, 2000.
".. if I had to express a priority [between criminal process and d & d] today ... I would have thought that it would be a more severe punishment to send someone to jail [criminal trial route]" - Justice Jules Deschenes, Nov. 12, 1998.