Immigration.ca - Canada Immigration News - November 2006
The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada is planning to initiate an outside independent review of the cases previously heard by Refugee Protection Division board member Steven Ellis. Last month Ellis was charged by the RCMP with "breach of trust and knowingly making or issuing a false document or statement or accepting or agreeing to accept a bribe or other benefit in respect to a refugee application, s. 129(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act" after Ellis was caught on videotape allegedly suggesting to a refugee applicant that he would help her with her claim in return for sexual favors.
The chairperson of the IRB, Jean-Guy Fleury, will initiate the review of the cases heard by Ellis and Law Society of Upper Canada complaints resolution commissioner Clare Lewis would be conducting the review. Lewis will provide advice regarding the "scope and means of the review of the member's case files," while the subsequent review will be carried out by IRB officials under Lewis's direction.
Vice-chairman of the citizenship and immigration section of the Canadian Bar Association, Alex Stojicevic, said that the CBA supports the quick and effective decision to initiate a review and the swift action taken to preserve the integrity of the administration of justice. The CBA supports the board, believing the board to be an integral part of the process, particularity as in the last five years the appointments to the board have been merit-based on competence, reinforcing that the members are independent decision makers.
There are mixed opinions regarding the decision to use an independent review. Stojicevic believes “people would perhaps be a little more willing to come forward or participate” in an independent review, noting that an independent review is “important for the board's own integrity."
Raoul Boulakia, a member of the executive and former president of the Refugee Lawyers Association, disagrees with the decision to have the decisions made behind closed doors as what may be proposed “could have an impact on many claimants and many lawyers.” As this is the first time the IRB has called for a general review of a board member's decision making because of one incident of misconduct, Boulakia notes that it is “unclear how they're going to correlate the alleged impropriety with the one claimant to every single decision he has made or if they are even asking for that”.
As the RLA hasn’t been invited to have a standing, Boulakia says they will have to wait and see what the independent review will be asking for to understand what their purpose is.
Source: www.lawtimesnews.com
