Stewart Sharma Harsanyi Immigration Law Firm Blog

Stay of Removals -Deferral Requests and the Federal Court

Practitioners should be alert to the increasing rate of removals by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), as more deferral requests and Federal Court stay applications will likely follow. A thorough discussion of these issues appears in Inadmissibility and Remedies (co-authored with Aris Daghighian and published by Emond), but here are the basics. Record Scratch -How did we get here? An individual facing an enforceable removal order from Canada may seek a judicial stay from the Federal Court as a last resort when all other statutory, regulatory, or logistical impediments to removal have been exhausted. Under section 48 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, removal orders become enforceable once all appeal periods and other statutory bars are exhausted. While removals must be carried out “as soon as possible,” officers do retain limited discretion to defer. A judicial stay of removal typically arises in two scenarios: (1) a removals officer refuses a deferral request, prompting a challenge via an application for leave and judicial review, or (2) a decision imposing or confirming a removal order is being contested at the Court, and a stay is required to pause enforcement pending resolution of that underlying challenge. A deferral request can be... Read more →

Deporting a Protected Person -The Danger Opinion

Abbasi v. MCI 2025 FC 442 from March 10, 2025, presided over by Justice Angus G. Grant, dismissing a judicial review application by Daryoush Abbasi against a "danger opinion" issued by a delegate of the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. This case highlights the challenges authorities face in removing individuals deemed dangerous, even with refugee protection, and the rigorous legal framework balancing public safety and non-refoulement obligations. It also underscores that past refugee status does not preclude deportation if current risks to society outweigh future risks to the individual. It also -troublingly -reveals significant delay in initiating and following through with inadmissibility and enforcement proceedings against a predator of young girls in Canada. Daryoush Abbasi, a 46-year-old Iranian citizen, arrived in Canada in October 2000 and successfully claimed refugee status based on persecution in Iran due to his Baha'i faith. He became a permanent resident but developed a significant criminal history involving sexual offences against young, vulnerable female children. His convictions began in 2002 with a Sexual Interference charge (a 3 year suspended sentence) -the victim was a 13 year old girl with fetal alcohol syndrome. In 2005 a report was written against him by a CBSA Officer... Read more →

Advocacy Before the Immigration and Refugee Board and the Federal Court of Canada [Summarized]

The following is a summary of a presentation done in 2021 for the SABA Advocacy Webinar. Effective advocacy before the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) and the Federal Court of Canada demands thorough preparation and a deep understanding of the facts and applicable legal framework. Mastery of these elements is essential to persuade any decision-maker. There is no substitute for exhaustive preparation. For the Refugee Protection Division (RPD), this means a comprehensive grasp of the Basis of Claim, your disclosure, the National Documentation Package, and the analytical framework under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. At the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD), it requires familiarity with the Appeal Record, your materials, and the relevant framework—such as the Ribic and Chieu factors for removal order appeals or the genuineness factors for sponsorship appeals. Before the Federal Court, you must know the Certified Tribunal Record, your submissions, and the Department of Justice’s arguments with precision, defending your cases and distinguishing theirs. Understanding the decision-maker and opposing counsel is equally critical. The RPD and IAD do not disclose presiding Members in advance, though experience reveals their styles over time. At the Federal Court, contacting the registry a week prior... Read more →

The 30 Year War

Vic Satzewich’s 2021 article, "Lawyers, Immigration Consultants and the 33-Year Jurisdictional War," published in the Canadian Review of Sociology (Vol. 58, pp. 186-206), focused on his observations of the 33-year jurisdictional conflict between lawyers and immigration consultants in Canada. Overview of the Conflict: Satzewich examines a 33-year jurisdictional dispute (starting in the 1980s) between immigration lawyers and consultants over the right to practice immigration law in Canada, framing it as a struggle for professional control. He uses an ecological framework (drawing on Andrew Abbott and Sida Liu) to analyze why lawyers, a powerful profession, failed to monopolize this field against consultants, a "weaker profession in the making." Origins and Context: Consultants entered the immigration law field in the 1980s, driven by rising demand for affordable advice amid increasing complexity in Canada’s immigration system (e.g., federal/provincial streams). Lawyers historically dominated this space, sanctioned by the state with high social status, but consultants gained traction, often at lower cost, prompting a defensive response from the legal profession. Key Jurisdictional Events: Mangat Decision (2001): The Supreme Court ruled in Law Society of British Columbia v. Mangat that federal law (under the Paramountcy Doctrine) allowed non-lawyers to practice immigration law, rejecting the Law Society’s... Read more →

The Perils of Judging "Subjective Fear": A Reminder Amid Canada’s Refugee Backlog

As a refugee lawyer with over 20 years at hearings, a former refugee protection officer, and someone who tackled unwarranted deference to adjudication in my LLM research, I’ve seen the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) wrestle and sometimes struggle with assessing claims. Today’s Refugee Protection Division (RPD) backlog—260,000 cases and counting—cranks up the pressure. Members face a tough gig: decide fast and get it right. Lives hang in the balance. Revisiting Risk Theory and ‘Subjective Fear’ by Hilary Evans Cameron—a brilliant Canadian lawyer and academic I met during my LLM (2009/2010)—provides a caution to Members basing their decisions on (negative) credibility findings and a touchstone for refugee advocates. Her critique of how adjudicators judge fear is a wake-up call, especially now. Canadian law demands claimants prove objective risk and subjective fear. RPD members lean on three ‘common sense’ beliefs: the truly afraid flee instantly, seek protection in the first safe country, and never return home. Delay, fail to claim at the first opportunity, or go back despite persecution and risk? You’re not scared—and therefore not credible. Cameron torches these assumptions with psychology, sociology, and anthropology research. They’re not evidence-based, she says, but adjudicator-made folklore falls back on the intuitive but... Read more →

Punjabi Language Broadcast Discussing the Political Impasse and the Trump Presidency on Immigration Policy and Processing

Stewart Sharma Harsanyi Immigration Lawyers · 2025 01 13 RedFM Interview I was interviewed on January 13, 2025 by Rishi Nagar, the inestimable news director of RedFM Calgary discussing the significant changes that the new year has already brought. The interview started by discussing the impact of the prorogued Parliament on immigration processing and policy. While day to day operations are unaffected by the political stasis no significant legislative change can occur. This is of course a time of great uncertainty and it is very difficult to prognosticate (prognostication being difficult in the best of circumstances). At the time of the interview, Donald Trump was yet to return to the Presidency but it is a certainty that Canada will be impacted on a number of fronts, including immigration processing. I did share on social media my thought that 2025 would be a year of refusals and we will see the ascendancy of integrity over integration and enforcement over facilitation. CBSA will be at the forefront rather than IRCC. Other topics included the Trudeau (Near) Decade has seen asylum claims skyrocket, acceptance rates increase, and now an unprecedented refugee backlog of 260,000. the MIA (missing in action) Home Support Worker Pilot... Read more →

December 27, 2024 Interview on CBC News Network on the Allegations of Widespread Human Smuggling

Natasha Fatah Raj Sharma, who's joining us from Calgary, he is the founder and managing partner of Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, one of Canada's largest dedicated immigration law firms. Raj, thanks so much for making time for us. Raj Sharma KC: Thanks for having me. Natasha Fatah: Raj, I know you follow what's happening in the world of immigration in Canada and many of these geopolitical stories closely. What's your reaction to what we just heard from Ehsan coming out of New Delhi? Raj Sharma KC: Natasha, the initial reaction is that the allegations, if they're true, would be truly staggering. The allegations involve hundreds of these private DLI -designated learning institutions, these colleges that sort of cater to the international student market, shall we say. So the Indian media reports are indicating over 250 of these DLI we're working with two as yet unnamed Indian entities. They're paying between 50 and 60 lakhs per person. Again, according to your reporter, that's a significant amount of money, let's say $60,000. And if it's true, if the allegations are true, it would reveal shocking gaps in our integrity protocols. And we know already that last January, not so long ago, Mr. Miller... Read more →

2024 Immigration Year End Review

Stewart Sharma Harsanyi Immigration Lawyers · 2024 12 22 RedFM year end interview It's been an eventful year in immigration and there's little doubt that 2025 will be another year of disruption and dislocation. In this Punjabi language interview on RedFM Calgary I touched on a number of developments including some of the following: Reduction in Immigration Levels: Canada has announced a significant reduction in immigration targets. For the years 2025-2027, the country aims to welcome only 1.1 million new permanent residents, marking a 21% drop from previous targets. This policy shift is aimed at pausing population growth after a significant drop in public support for this government's largesse on immigration intake particularly temporary residents; Restrictions on Study Permits: Marc Miller moved on his responsibilities after integrity concerns were raised. The Canadian government has set a cap on international student permits, with a further 10% reduction for 2025 relative to 2024's targets. Some provinces were 'over subscribed' and others were not; BC and Ontario will see a significant reduction and other provinces not so much. Open Work Permits for Spouses: Along with a reduction of student numbers changes were introduced to the eligibility for spousal open work permits, particularly for... Read more →

Federal Court Stay of Removal -Understanding the Officer's Discretion, Children's School Year and the "Clean Hands" Doctrine

Madam Justice Sadrehashemi granted a stay of removal in Goitom v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 CanLII 126597 (FC) for a family whose status was vacated after it was discovered they had hidden their status in Sweden while claiming protection against Eritrea. Following the status revocation, their H&C application was refused, leading to removal proceedings. The family requested a deferral of removal, arguing that disrupting the children's education mid-school year would cause significant harm. The removal officer denied the request, refusing to exercise discretion, which the Court found problematic. The Court emphasized two critical issues: Scope of Discretion and Children's Education: The Federal Court clarified that removal officers must consider the short-term best interests of children (obviously if it is raised and supported by evidence), such as completing a school year, even if not required to conduct a full "best interests of the child" assessment (Lewis v Canada, 2017 FCA 130). Here, the officer failed to acknowledge or perhaps did not even realize that educational disruption could justify a deferral. Doctrine of Clean Hands: The government argued the applicants were precluded from relief due to their prior deception regarding Swedish citizenship. The Court reaffirmed (and cited a FCA decision) that... Read more →

Looking Ahead to 2025

Another year is in the books (more or less). 2024 saw reductions in immigration levels, restrictions to both the international student and temporary foreign worker programs, and a dramatic decrease in public support for immigration fueled by housing costs, availability or lack thereof of public services and a strain on infrastructure. What lies ahead? The return of Donald Trump -another Trump administration is going to impact Canada in manifold ways -we've already witnessed some of that these last few days and weeks with his threat to impose tariffs on Canadian goods -but it's what he does with the large undocumented population in the country is what will matter most -even if a fraction were to roll the dice by coming to Canada or crossing our largely undefended border would pose a significant challenge to our immigration system. The departure of hundreds of thousands of students and workers that expected to remain. It's true that their status was 'temporary' but it's also true that there were pathways to navigate that status to permanent and clear signals as to that fact from the then Minister of Immigration himself. Many were sold on these dreams and many will not simply pack their bags... Read more →