What's the difference between the immigration cases of Maryam Monsef and of Ms. B? One is the federal minister for democratic reform, the other is the pseudonym for a university student. Both had parents put incorrect information on their applications, but one is set to lose their citizenship and the other isn't.
The question is, why?
The absence of real answers is having the practical effect of diminishing the public's faith in our immigration system. And in doing so, is empowering those looking to argue in bad faith against the admission of refugees and other immigrants.
To recap: A Globe and Mail report from a few weeks ago revealed Monsef, an Afghan citizen and refugee to Canada, was actually born in Iran. Monsef says her mother had lied to her for many years, saying she was born in Afghanistan, until the Globe came poking around, then the truth came out. But since then, her local political opponents have whispered to the press they had known about this for some time. Which is weird, if her mom was supposed to be the only one who knew. None of this changes her Afghan citizenship—Iran does not grant citizenships just because you're born there—but it's unclear what this might have meant if her immigration paperwork had her birthplace listed incorrectly.
I say "unclear what this might mean" because the government has said there's no problem with Monsef's status, without saying if there's anything wrong with her paperwork. At the same time there are plenty of cases cropping up of people in seemingly similar situations who are being told there is a problem with their paperwork and their citizenship is being revoked.
Ms. B's, for example. She came to Canada as a child from Egypt, according to the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. Her parents were recently told by immigration authorities their citizenships along with Ms. B's were being revoked because of misrepresentations on their applications. Ms. B is no longer a minor, wasn't informed of this, and her parents submitted explanations on her behalf. These weren't good enough, and all their citizenships were going to be revoked.
Immigration law is pretty clear on the subject. Incorrect information on immigration forms, no matter how small, can call into question the validity of all the information contained in the application. And there is no way to appeal such decisions once they're made. The BCCLA is suing the government claiming that stripping citizenships without legal recourse is unconstitutional.
This is leading some commentators—not all of them respectable, mind you—to claim Monsef is getting special treatment because of her position in cabinet.
It's creating the impression that citizenship laws are immutable, unless you're in a privileged enough position. Whether the impression is true or not hardly matters given the present circumstances. Once you create the impression something is rigged or broken, it's very hard to get away from that.
When Gerry Butts, the prime minister's principal secretary and Canada's most famous backroom staffer, was quick to link any questions about Monsef's story as evidence of a homegrown birther movement, he wasn't looking to fill the information void. He was looking to shut down any questions as racist demagoguery.
The irony, of course, is into that empty space jumped the racists and the demagogues. We're in the middle of an ugly period. The gap between what the government will say about Monsef's situation and what has come to light from the cases of others is being filled not with reasonable discourse, but the ravings of the type of people looking to exploit any chance to demonize immigrants or refugees.
Add to that the ever-present threat of terrorism and the inevitable finger-pointing at immigrants and refugees in the wake of an attack—who are practically never responsible—and we find ourselves in a toxic stew.
Letting this drag on is doing more long-term harm to our refugee programs and is further poisoning the way we talk about these things.
Maryam Monsef is getting the benefit of the doubt to keep her status, it's worth asking why Ms. B isn't.
Photo Credit: CBC News
