Esse v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-4523-96
Rothstein J.
16/1/98
10 pp.
Judicial review of Minister's declaration under Immigration Act, s. 19(1)(l) that he was of opinion would be contrary to national interest for applicant to be landed-Applicant, Ambassador of Somalia to United Arab Emirates from January 1990 to August 1991 when Siad Barre President of Somalia-On October 12, 1993 Siad Barre regime declared by then Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to have engaged in gross human rights violations-Immigration and Refugee Board finding applicant Convention refugee-While permanent resident application pending, Minister issuing impugned decision-S. 19(1)(l) prohibiting admission of senior members of or senior officials of government engaged in gross human rights violations, except persons who have satisfied Minister that their admission would not be detrimental to national interest-(1) Minister's use of "landed", "contrary to", "opinion" having same import as words in statute ("admission", "would not be detrimental", "satisfied")-(2) Applicant arguing procedural fairness demanding contents of memorandum to Minister be disclosed to applicant-Focus of ss. 19(1)(l), (1.1) to ensure Canada not haven for persons engaging in terrorism, systematic or gross human rights violations, war crimes or crimes against humanity-Scheme of legislation to consider senior members or officials of government as persons able to exert significant influence on exercise of government's power such that they must take responsibility for objectionable acts of their government-On that basis, applicant as Ambassador, considered to be person within s. 19(1)(l)-To obtain Minister's exception, must demonstrate that notwithstanding position as deemed senior member or official in service of government, no complicity in objectionable acts of that government-While consideration of person being danger to public in Canada might also be included, although other provisions dealing specifically with such matters, complicity in acts of offending government most obvious consideration-Applicant already knew type of information contained in memorandum; no misstatements of any consequence-(3) Applicant submitting Minister's failure to give reasons contrary to common law, Canadian Bill of Rights, Charter-Principles of fundamental justice as guaranteed by Charter, s. 7 not requiring reasons be given: dicta of Strayer J.A. in Williams v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1997] 2 F.C. 646 (C.A.)-While Canadian Bill of Rights, s. 2(e) requiring fair hearing, absence of reasons not necessarily affecting "hearing"-Applicant citing Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Adam (1997), 137 F.T.R. 68 (F.C.T.D.), wherein held silence in face of compelling evidence making decision without reasons perverse-In view of Williams, Adam may not be law, but to extent it is, no compelling evidence herein providing any indication Minister erred in decision-Not case in which failure to provide reasons perverse-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 19(1)(l) (as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 11), (1.1) (as enacted idem).