Canadian Immigration Lawyers urged IRPA legislation reform as part of the Legislative Reform Committee. The Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association, or CILA, revealed the suggestions for reforming the IRPA. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act first came to the forefront in 2001, and the Canadian government uses this IRPA to determine the rules and regulations of Canadian immigration. The government grants refugee protection through the IRPA to individuals. These individuals could be displaced, in danger, or persecuted.

Canadian Immigration Lawyers urged IRPA legislation reform

The CILA report claims that its chief aim is to make sure that policymakers grasp the legislative updates deemed urgent by Canadian immigration lawyers. It contends that the existing IRPA legislation is in ardent need of revision. Notably, the legislation hasn’t undergone a detailed review since its inception in 2001.

CILA was established in 2020 through immigration lawyers from all over Canada. This association marked the voice of Canadian immigration lawyers. Moreover, it provided well-thought-out responses and comments related to immigration news, modifications, and measures.

Furthermore, CILA conducts multiple stakeholder meetings annually, such as meetings with prominent IRCC authorities like Marc Miller and former Assistant Deputy Minister.
The possible recommendations by CILA concerning inadmissibility and family-class immigration are given below.

Inadmissibility

CILA suggests a plethora of prominent modifications to IRPA legislation concerning inadmissibility. These changes will significantly modify the way in which the Canadian government handles inadmissibility cases.

Medical Inadmissibility

CILA suggests that the government revise two rules related to medical inadmissibility. Particularly, CILA would like to update IRPA legislation by eliminating the inadmissibility legislation if their health challenges might cause a risk to public health and safety and if their health conditions pose an excessive burden on Canada’s health and social services. This implies that foreign nationals will undergo criminal inadmissibility depending on their cases, but they won’t have to face medical inadmissibility in Canada due to their health conditions.

Financial Inadmissibility

The proposed changes to the inadmissibility legislation would lead to a decline in IRCC’s requirements and consequences. At first, financial inadmissibility would urge IRCC to acknowledge an applicant’s financial support, which they may get from outside sources. Furthermore, the applicants will have increased alternatives available to prove their financial efficiency before they are deemed inadmissible to Canada.
CILA’s proposed change recommends IRPA to expand their financial assistance to acknowledge an applicant’s family or company support.

Misrepresentation

CILA also proposed a change in the consequences of IRPA misrepresentation. This means those guilty of misrepresentation would face punishments; however not as severe as in the existing legislation. For instance, the five-year ban would reduce to one year and there would be more options for those guilty of such verdicts, such as a discretionary waiver of a current ban.

As a result, these alterations will permit barred applicants to apply in order to re-enter Canada before the expiration of ban. The proposed change would enable those guilty of misrepresentation to come back to Canada sooner than the current legislation.

Furthermore, CILA makes it evident through the recommendation that barred applicants, while applying at a time when their ban is due, must let their ban expire. It is only after the ban expires that their application will reach its final stage.

Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association recommends IRPA adjustment of family-class immigration

CILA family-class immigration recommendations include suggestions for IRPA to adjust its policy to evidently expand the existing legislation.

Particularly, CILA’s recommended modifications would affect those who have come to Canada and those able to sponsor family members. The changes would also impact on IRCC’s definition of specific familial relationships.  

Family Class Exclusion

CILA demands a revision of a current IRPA policy that prohibits a foreign national from the family class membership in Canadian immigration if they were not an accompanying member of their present Canadian PR sponsor.

Currently, the IRPA bans these foreign nationals from attaining family-class membership because they don’t fall under an undeclared family member of the sponsor.

However, if the government revises this policy, several excluded foreign nationals would be able to immigrate to Canada again under family-class programs.

Sponsorship through PR holders

In addition, CILA also suggests that permanent residents must be permitted to sponsor a foreign national under IRPA. This is irrespective of whether they reside in Canada or not while applying for being able to sponsor a family member. Moreover, doing so will extend the Canadian resident’s group’s eligibility to sponsor a family member.
At present, only Canadian citizens have the authority to sponsor eligible foreign nationals while they are outside Canada.

Eligibility extension for family class immigration

Besides the above points, CILA recommends two policy changes, including an amendment and an addition.
These would expand the horizon for those who can arrive in Canada using family-class immigration programs.
In particular, CILA suggests that IRPA modify its definition of familial connections by altering the policy language.
Presently, the IRPA claims that a foreign national is not a spouse, common-law partner, or conjugal partner if their relationship is not authentic. This simply means that the individuals came together to gain status or IRPA’s benefits. CILA proposed changing “or”, “to”, “and” among these conditions to solidify the requirement for genuine relationships under the law.

Furthermore, CILA clarified that the relationship must meet both “if” conditions, including “not genuine” and “entered for status”, rather than just one. This way, more foreign nationals could become eligible for Canada’s family-class immigration.

The proposed changes to IRPA would reconcile fiance relationships to the family class. In a way, it will expand the current categories, including spouses, common-law partners, and conjugal partners. This new point must be added to achieve the same impact of broadening the eligibility within Canada’s family-class immigration system.

Minor children’s accessibility to study permits

Lastly, CILA looks forward to proposing a policy change that would make it easier to understand which minor children will need a study permit in Canada. The IRPA legislation calls them “minor children”; however, CILA would like to amend this term to either a “dependent child” or a “child below 19 years”.

This modification would simplify the process for students who need a study permit during their academic session. In addition, they wouldn’t have to pause their education to apply and then receive a study permit before completing their education in that particular year. 

Such types of students who will be under this category are:

• Those turning 18 years old during their senior year of high school or
• Students who were born in the initial six months of a year. 

Future predictions

If IRCC considers CILA’s policy suggestions, any alterations to IRPA legislation will take a great amount of time to implement. This is because IRPA undergoes a significant and tedious process involving several steps before approval. It might take several years to witness these recommendations turning into real-time changes.

If you seek information on how to begin your Canada immigration application process, you can talk to our NavaImmigration experts at 1800-918-8490, or you can drop us an email at [email protected].