Canada has long been seen as a safe haven for those fleeing persecution, political violence, or oppression. But proposed Canada immigration changes under Bill C-2, also called the Strong Borders Bill, could alter this reputation. Refugee experts and immigration lawyers are raising alarms that the bill, in its current form, could unintentionally harm dissidents, journalists, human rights defenders, and others who once visited Canada for innocent reasons like conferences, tourism, or education. The concern? Many could now lose the right to have their asylum claims heard—leaving them vulnerable to deportation and continued danger.
What Bill C-2 Proposes
Bill C-2 is designed to tighten Canada’s border and asylum system. One of its most controversial provisions states that anyone who entered Canada more than a year before making a refugee claim will be excluded from a hearing at the Immigration and Refugee Board.
The bill says this one-year period starts from the day after a person’s first entry into Canada—regardless of the reason for that entry.
This means a student who attended a university exchange program, a journalist who once spoke at an international event in Toronto, or even a child who visited Canada with their family years ago could now be disqualified from seeking protection if they later face persecution in their home country.
Why Experts Are Concerned
Immigration lawyers and refugee advocates argue that this rigid “one-year rule” lacks flexibility. Unlike the U.S., where exceptions exist and the rule is tied to the most recent entry, Canada’s proposed legislation leaves no room for context.
According to Toronto lawyer Warda Shazadi Meighen, this blanket approach has “troubling implications.” Innocent visits in the past could block genuine asylum seekers in the future. Dissidents, LGBTQ+ individuals, and human rights defenders fleeing authoritarian regimes might be stripped of their chance to find safety in Canada.
The Canadian Council for Refugees adds that the proposed changes defy logic. For example, a renowned journalist who once visited Canada for professional reasons could later be barred from protection—simply because of that earlier visit.
Possible Consequences for Refugees
If passed without exceptions, Bill C-2 could:
| Impact Area | Effect |
| Asylum Claims | Many could be denied hearings at the IRB. |
| Vulnerable Groups | Dissidents, activists, LGBTQ+ communities at higher risk. |
| Canada’s Reputation | Perception as a safe haven for refugees may weaken. |
| Deportation Risks | More people at risk of being returned to unsafe conditions. |
Experts warn that these rules could be discriminatory in practice, punishing those whose past interactions with Canada were unrelated to their future need for protection.
What Experts Recommend
Advocates suggest creating clear exceptions within Bill C-2. At a minimum, dissidents and others facing state persecution should have access to a discretionary process. Such a carve-out would help separate genuine cases from less legitimate ones.
They argue that protection should never be time-limited. Political realities change rapidly—what may have been a safe environment during someone’s last visit could become dangerous within a few years.
The proposed Canada immigration changes under Bill C-2 raise difficult questions. While the government’s goal is to strengthen border rules, experts stress that the policy may put vulnerable dissidents and human rights defenders at greater risk. As the debate continues, many are calling for exceptions that would preserve Canada’s reputation as a place of safety while ensuring the asylum system remains fair. Follow ImmigCanada for the latest updates and expert insights on Canada immigration changes.
Leave a Reply