Inland Enforcement Program

Document navigation for "Standing Committee on Public Accounts: Spring 2020 Auditor General report"

• Previous page
• Table of contents
• Next page

Immigration enforcement continuum

The CBSA is responsible for pursuing enforcement action against foreign nationals and permanent residents (PRs) who are inadmissible to Canada pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).

The IRPA also provides for the arrest and detention of a permanent resident or foreign national (with or without a warrant) who the officer has reasonable grounds to believe is inadmissible, a danger to the public or unlikely to appear for an immigration proceeding (e.g. admissibility hearing, removal).

Also in accordance with IRPA, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is responsible for immigration enforcement, including arrest, detention, removal, as well as  any policy related to removal orders.

A finding of inadmissibility begins with an allegation by an officer who prepares an inadmissibility report, setting out the evidence to support the allegation. The report is then reviewed by another official (i.e., a Minister’s Delegate), who will then determine if the report is well founded.

If the report is well founded, the Minister’s Delegate may either issue a removal order (if the allegation is within their jurisdiction) or refer the report to the Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board for an admissibility hearing.

Furthermore, if an individual is found inadmissible to Canada, a removal order will be issued and the person is expected to leave Canada or become subject to removal proceedings by the CBSA.

It is important to note that all actions and decisions by CBSA officials in regards to removals are subject to judicial review by the Federal Court.

Questions and answers 

Q: Why does it take so long to process a case and remove inadmissible people?

Immigration enforcement is governed by the provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and Regulations as well as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Persons subject to immigration enforcement are afforded due process provided for by legislation, including appeals and judicial reviews before they can be removed. Once all legislative remedies have been exhausted, however, inadmissible person are expected to depart Canada or be subject to removal proceedings.

Q: Why are some removal orders issued by the Minister’s Delegate and some by the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB)?

Immigration Regulations prescribe who has the authority to issue a removal order for each allegation. The Minister’s Delegate has jurisdiction to issue removal orders over for cases involving straight-forward fact-based assessments. Admissibility determinations based on more complex or nuanced evidence fall within the jurisdiction of the Immigration Division of the IRB.

Q: Who can issue which orders?

The following chart outlines who has the jurisdiction to issue which order:

Q: Why are persons subject to immigration enforcement not detained until the outcome of their case?

The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) does not permit for proactive arrest and detention of all persons subject to immigration enforcement. CBSA officials must assess specific factors prescribed in the Immigration Regulations in considering immigration detention. Furthermore, all persons in Canada are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which provides that everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned. CBSA officers, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, are required to consider any alternatives to detention, which may include any or all combinations of the following: general conditions to co-operate with immigration enforcement proceedings and advise the CBSA of their current address; payment of a deposit or a guarantee; reporting conditions (e.g., voice reporting or in-person reporting), community case management and supervision (i.e., services in the community related to mental health and addiction offered by non-government organizations) as well as electronic (bracelet) monitoring offered in co-ordination with Correctional Services Canada for individuals who represent a higher risk, but whose predicted length of detention favours release.

Background information

A primary role of the Government of Canada is to maintain the safety and security of Canada and its citizens, which includes the securing of Canadian borders. The CBSA, within the portfolio of the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency preparedness (Public Safety Canada), provides integrated border services that support national security priorities, while facilitating the flow of people and goods across its borders.

The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) outlines the objectives of the Act, two of which are directly linked to the Canada Border Services Agency’s (CBSA) responsibility for the enforcement of IRPA, namely to protect the health and safety of Canadians and to maintain the security of Canadian society; and to promote international justice and security by fostering respect for human rights and by denying access to Canadian territory to persons who are criminals or security risks.

The IRPA sets out ten categories of inadmissibility and which Minister is responsible for the policy relating each of the inadmissibilities (see chart that follows):

Pursuant to the IRPA, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness also has policy responsibility for immigration enforcement, including arrest, detention, removal and the policy related to removal orders.

The CBSA, along with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), support Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada to protect Canadians by conducting appropriate background screening of immigrants, temporary residents and refugees to identify individuals who could pose a security risk to the country.

A finding of inadmissibility begins with an allegation by an officer pursuant to subsection 44(1) of the Act and then must be substantiated before a second official (i.e. a Minister’s Delegate). Depending on the grounds of inadmissibility, the decision whether or not to issue a removal order will be within the jurisdiction of the Minister’s Delegate, or else the Minister’s Delegate will need to refer the inadmissibility report to the Immigration Division (ID) of the Immigration and Refugee Board for an admissibility hearing. The Minister’s Delegate has jurisdiction to issue removal orders over for cases involving straight-forward fact-based assessments. Admissibility determinations based on more complex or nuanced evidence fall within the jurisdiction of the ID. CBSA Hearings Officers represent the Minister during Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews.

The regulations outline three types of removal orders which have varying consequences that are generally proportionate to the seriousness of the inadmissibility:

• a departure order, which does not bar a person from returning to Canada; this applies, for instance, to permanent residents who have not complied with their residency obligation
• an exclusion order, which puts a temporary bar, for a period of 1 or 5 years depending on the ground of inadmissibility, on a person’s return to Canada; this applies, for instance, to misrepresentation and non-compliance cases
• a deportation order, which puts a permanent bar on return to Canada unless special authorization to return has been granted by an officer; this applies, for instance, to security and criminal inadmissibility cases

The IRPA provides for an arrest and detention of an inadmissible person with or without a warrant who the officer has reasonable grounds to believe is inadmissible and is a danger to the public; or is unlikely to appear for an immigration process, including removal.

Immigration Regulations prescribe specific factors which officers must assess in considering immigration detention on the basis of danger to the public. A criminal record, in and of itself, does not mean that an individual is a threat to public safety. Officers must weigh various factors, such as the nature of the offence, the circumstances under which they were committed, punishment imposed by the Courts, the period of time elapsed since the offence as well as availability of alternatives to detention and whether they are sufficient to mitigate the danger to the public risk.

Immigration Regulations also prescribe factors which officers must consider when assessing flight risk, such as previous history of non-compliance with immigration proceedings, compliance with conditions imposed in respect of entry, release or stay of removal, existence of ties to a community in Canada, etc.

The Act currently provides several tools to remedy a person’s inadmissibility and authorize a person to enter or remain in Canada where appropriate (see chart below). Most of these tools fall under the policy and operational responsibility of IRCC, and those which have been designated to the CBSA have been restricted for use by officers solely at ports of entry.

Relevant data and statistics

Case management

Case files at the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) move quickly and repeatedly between inventories and are interconnected with other program lines at the CBSA.

As part of its overall case management strategy, the CBSA employs a number of electronic resources and, among these systems, are the Global Case Management System (GCMS), the National Case Management System (NCMS) and Cognos, a statistical reporting tool.

The CBSA established Integrated Intelligence and Enforcement Priorities to prioritize work, which guides local management in assigning files to officers with highest priority files being assigned first.  Management also balances the workload between officers and respects individual workload tolerances

National headquarters conducts national reviews of inventories and files within the case management systems in order to review the status of various inventories and identify cases for further action by the regions.

Regional offices also perform regular reviews of their cases to ensure that files are being managed as effectively and efficiently as possible.

The regions further manage their cases by using various reporting requirements, community case management and supervision and by conducting interviews. This ensures the highest rates of compliance and affords high degrees of procedural fairness.

Questions and answers:

Q: Is CBSA’s case management system effective?

The CBSA’s overall case management system is very effective, in that the Agency is able to monitor in excess of 220,000 files across the country and between multiple program lines. This has led to increases in overall removals over the last two fiscal years. Furthermore, the CBSA has managed to prevent the growth of the actionable sub-inventory, despite significant increases in refugee claimants.

Q: Can the CBSA’s case management system be improved upon?

There is always room for improvement and, as such, the CBSA continually strives to improve processes and systems to enhance the Agency’s ability to manage cases within the immigration continuum. Improvements have included adding irregular arrivals to the priorities document as a tier 1 priority, and the creation of a departure incentive program.

Q: Is it possible for a removal case to appear un-actioned even though work has been done on the file?

Unfortunately, neither our current electronic systems, nor the physical files, capture every detail of work that may be conducted in relation to a case. Although the Agency is able to capture a great deal of the work that occurs in relation to a file, activities between concrete events may not be continuously noted, giving the appearance that the file has become dormant. An example of where work toward removal may not be recorded in the file, or on electronic systems, is when headquarters takes the lead on a case in order to carry out the intricacies of negotiating a travel document for removal with foreign representatives at Embassies and High Commissions. The activity is not always straightforward and may take a great deal of time.

Background information:

The movement of cases at the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) is very fluid, often moving between inventories quickly and repeatedly. These cases and inventories are interconnected with other sub-programs within the inland enforcement continuum, such as the hearings, detentions and immigration investigations sub-programs.

For example, the area of immigration investigations is responsible for conducting investigations into the whereabouts of individuals who failed to appear for removal and, as such, had a warrant issued for their arrest. Subsequently, when an individual is located, they may be detained, which falls under the detentions sub-program as well as the hearings sub-programs. Throughout, officers working in the removals sub-program continue their work on planning for removal. 

As part of its overall case management strategy, the CBSA employs a number of electronic resources to administer processes, transfer files between offices and officers, and track files within the immigration continuum. Among these systems are the Global Case Management System (GCMS), the National Case Management System (NCMS) and Cognos, a statistical reporting tool.  These systems are available to all officers and include a variety of standard and customizable reports at both the micro and macro level. 

To further support the Agency’s case management strategy, the CBSA uses an inventory management system to help guide the monitoring of files along with the associated resource allocation. These various inventories provide a clear picture as to which files need to be actioned, when they may be actioned and by which officer or sub-program. 

In addition to the inventories, the CBSA has established Integrated Intelligence and Enforcement Priorities, which provide for a consistent approach across the country in the prioritization of files within each inventory. This document guides local management in the assignment of files, from various inventories, to officers based on Agency, as well as Government of Canada, priorities so that the highest priority files are assigned to officers first. While the unpredictable nature of removal files prevents truly equitable distribution of work, management does strive to balance the workload between officers while also taking into account that officers have a maximum number of files that can be effectively managed at any given time.

The Removal Programs and Removal Operations units at headquarters conduct national reviews of inventories and files electronically in order to assist the regions in identifying cases for action by conducting various data integrity reviews, and assigning those files that appear to be dormant at various stages within the removal continuum.

Regional offices also perform regular reviews of their cases, both physically and electronically, to ensure that files are being managed as effectively possible. This may mean transferring files between offices, officers and units, or pulling physical files from the file room.

Finally, the regions further manage their cases through various reporting requirements, such as in-person reporting, telephone reporting and community case management and supervision, and by conducting various interviews throughout the inland enforcement continuum. This is to ensure the highest rates of compliance from individuals and to afford them a high degree of procedural fairness.

Cases with criminality

The CBSA places the highest priority on removal cases involving national security, organized crime, crimes against humanity and criminals.

If a foreign national or a permanent resident commits a crime in Canada, they must complete their sentence through Canada’s judicial system before a removal can take place.

Once individuals have exhausted all legal avenues of appeal and/or due process, they are expected to respect our laws and leave Canada, or be removed by the CBSA.

Should a foreign national be deemed inadmissible and is considered to be a danger to the public, they may be detained in immigration detention until their removal is conducted.

It’s important to note that detention is an essential tool to support the removal of inadmissible persons from Canada. The primary objective of detention is to protect the health and safety of Canadians and to maintain the security of Canadian society.

Furthermore, individuals that pose a danger to the public or are considered a flight risk may be escorted to their final destination.

The Agency reports on cases found to be inadmissible to Canada for safety or security reasons while the Office of the Auditor General, during the recent audit, opted to report on all cases with evidence on file that could lead to a determination of serious inadmissibility. For this reason, the numbers reported by the OAG will differ from the numbers reported by CBSA.

Questions and Answers:

Q. Why is CBSA’s reporting on criminal cases different from the Office of the Auditor General (OAG)?

The OAG opted to report on all cases that had evidence on file that could potentially lead to a serious inadmissibility. Not all cases reported for serious inadmissibility result in a deportation order. If it is determined that the evidence presented is not sufficient to support the serious inadmissibility grounds described in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the individual of concern will not be found in contravention of the law and a removal order will not be issued. To ensure consistency in reporting on safety and security cases, , the Agency reports on cases that have completed the entire process and are found inadmissible on safety and security grounds. 

Q. Does CBSA only prioritize cases that are found inadmissible for safety or security
reasons?

The CBSA prioritizes all cases reported for serious inadmissibilities and closely monitors their progress throughout the enforcement continuum to ensure that they are removed as quickly as possible once the deportation order becomes enforceable.  

Q. Are individuals who are found inadmissible for safety or security reasons removed  
immediately? 

The decision to remove someone from Canada is not taken lightly. Everyone ordered removed from Canada is entitled to due process before the law, and all removal orders are subject to various levels of appeal and judicial review, however, it is imperative for the integrity of the immigration system that once all legal avenues of review are exhausted, a person subject to a
removal order respects our laws and leaves Canada, or is removed.

Q.  Are criminals who are sentenced to prison removed immediately?

Individuals sentenced to a term of incarceration benefit from a statutory stay of removal until such time as their term of incarceration is “satisfied” by reason of expiration of the sentence, commencement of statutory release, or the granting of parole. Upon completion of a sentence, individuals are transferred to the custody of the CBSA for removal. The Agency monitors all cases of incarceration closely for any possible “satisfaction” of sentence. It is in Canada’s best interest to maintain the message to the international community that foreign offenders convicted in Canada will serve a sentence of imprisonment before being released for removal.  The act of removal itself is not punitive and does not constitute part of a sentence for a criminal conviction.

Q.  What factors are considered by the CBSA when scheduling the removal of criminals?

When scheduling removal arrangements for an individual who has been found inadmissible for safety or security reasons, the CBSA will determine whether there is any risk associated with the individual travelling, and if the threshold is met, the CBSA will assign escort officers to travel with the individual. The assignment of escort officers will help to ensure the safety of the travelling public, the airline crew and the individual being removed.

Background information:

One of the Canada Border Services Agency’s (CBSA) key mandated objectives is to protect the health and safety of Canadians and to maintain the security of Canadian society.  These objectives are found in both the CBSA Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

The CBSA places the highest priority on cases involving national security, organized crime, crimes against humanity and criminals.  Individuals believed to be inadmissible to Canada for safety and security reasons will have an inadmissibility report written against them. Depending on the particular inadmissibility, a decision as to whether or not to issue a removal order will be made by a reviewing officer acting under the delegated authority of the Minister, or by the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB). If there is sufficient evidence to support the inadmissibility allegation, a deportation order will be issued against the person concerned.

Not all inadmissibility reports result in a removal order. If the reviewing officer or the IRB determines that the evidence presented is not sufficient to support the allegation, a deportation order will not be issued. To ensure consistency in reporting on safety and security cases, the Agency reports on cases that have completed the entire process and are found inadmissible on safety and security grounds. The Office of the Auditor General opted to report on all cases flagged as having evidence that could lead to a serious inadmissibility. Both methodologies are correct but report on two different cohorts

It is important to note that the Agency closely monitors the progress of any cases flagged as having evidence on file that could potentially lead to a serious inadmissibility. If a removal order is issued, the agency will monitor the progress until all legal avenues of appeal and due process are exhausted, and commence removal preparations as quickly as possible. If a Foreign National is considered a danger to the public, they may be detained in immigration detention during the removal process.

Individuals subject to a deportation order for a serious inadmissibility may be eligible to a pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA) prior to removal. For those who are serving a term of imprisonment, the CBSA will initiate PRRA while the individual is serving their term of imprisonment to ensure that all due processes are completed before the term is completed. The removal may occur unescorted or under escort if it is required by the airline, the transit country or if the person poses a danger to the public or is a significant flight risk. Once removed, the deportation order bans the individual from Canada for life, unless they receive written permission to return to Canada.

Relevant data and statistics

Table note: ¹ Up to November 12, 2020

Serious inadmissibility cases represent 6% of the overall removal working inventory with 815 cases out of 13,933.  Of these, 61 cases have no impediments to removal and are being scheduled for their deportation.

Data enhancements and limitations

Our ability to quickly remove inadmissible foreign nationals is dependant on timely and accurate data entry as well as systematic information sharing by our own officials and with our partners within Canada’s asylum system ‒ Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB).

The CBSA agrees with the Office of the Auditor General’s findings that there is an opportunity for improvement in relation to data management at the Agency. As such, we have initiated a number of measures to improve the program.

On November 9, 2020, the CBSA and IRCC launched the Integrated Case Tracking and Prioritization Unit to streamline processes and identify opportunities to expedite case management. This work will use data to identify trends, efficiencies and inefficiencies, in order to enhance coordination and collaboration between Federal partners in  Canada’s asylum system.

The CBSA, IRCC and IRB are collaborating on the Asylum Interoperability Project to create greater alignment between case management systems at the IRB, IRCC and the CBSA.  A number of initiatives have already been implemented including, from a CBSA point of view, sharing of information on cases that have been triaged and reviewed and have been cleared for the IRB to proceed with scheduling, changes to warrant and removal information, etc.  This is a sizable initiative that is being led by IRCC and supported by both the CBSA and the IRB.  Work on this initiative will continue into 2021 to 22.

Questions and answers:

Q: Where are the data gaps?

Data becomes relevant when it is accurate and timely. While the current data interface arrangement allows for the automated sharing of information from IRB’s NOVA system to the Global Case Management System (GCMS) and ultimately, the National Case Management System (NCMS), this ability is dependent on the manual input of data. The biggest challenge to data integrity lies with the manual data entry by the end user. This is the initial step to the current information exchange apparatus and it is also one of great importance. Failure to adhere to the established data entry guidelines has far reaching consequences; it may result in cases not being actioned or prioritized due to missing or erroneous data.

The manual data entry process is not the only challenge to data integrity. The Information Technology (IT) systems used by the CBSA, IRB and IRCC also create challenges. The interface connectivity is not seamless and often does not occur according to established IT protocols.

Q. What measures have been put in place to address the gaps?

It is clear that there is a great opportunity for improvement. The CBSA is committed to refining the quality of the data used in support of its mandate. In 2019, the Agency produced enhanced and simplified data entry training guides for NCMS users and it is currently producing a coaching guide to supplement field training. The Agency will soon begin staffing new Data Integrity Analyst (DIA) positions nationally. The DIA will perform functions to capture relevant data for operational planning and monitoring purposes, to support statistical reporting that identifies program trends and inefficiencies and to assist the development of business solutions in response to evolving priorities.

Furthermore, the CBSA, IRCC and the IRB launched the Asylum Interoperability Project, an initiative that will introduce enhancements to NCMS, GCMS and NOVA to improve the interface between the systems with the goal of establishing two-way connectivity between the three organizations case management systems.  While there have been substantive changes implemented already, from a CBSA point of view some of the more significant changes have been implementation of information sharing of decisions on triage and review steps that impact the scheduling of cases at the IRB, changes to track warrants better (reasons for cancellation as well as types of warrants) as well as the R240(3) administrative removal cases.  This work is scheduled to continue into 2021/22 and is led by IRCC.

Background information:

In order to fulfil its legislative duty to enforce removal orders as soon as possible, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) must obtain accurate and timely data from both its own officers and major stakeholders within the Canadian asylum system: the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB), Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the Federal Court (FC).

There are three primary IT systems that support the immigration continuum, including the refugee determination process:

The Global Case Management System (GCMS) is owned by IRCC and is the official system of record for IRCC and the CBSA that is used to create documentation pertaining to an individual’s status in Canada, including confirmations of departure for individuals who have been removed from Canada.

The National Case Management System (NCMS) is owned by CBSA and is the case management tracking tool for the inland enforcement program that captures details that are more qualitative in nature such as pre-removal interviews and travel document acquisition status.

NOVA is owned by the IRB and is the system of record for all the divisions within the IRB, which includes the Refugee Protection Division (RPD), Refugee Appeal Division (RAD), Immigration Division and the Immigration Appeal Division .

There are varying degrees of automated functionality across all three systems.

Case management within each division of the IRB is conducted on NOVA. The information is entered manually on the system by IRB staff. Pertinent data pertaining to the filing of an application and final decision is transmitted from NOVA to GCMS, on an overnight basis. Once this information is uploaded successfully in GCMS, it will be automatically transmitted to NCMS.

Case details are entered into GCMS by CBSA and IRCC staff. GCMS is tailored to automatically update NCMS with information related to travel documents; decisions from the RPD and RAD; Litigation/Appeals and Pre Removal Risk Assessments (PRRA).. This interface is one-directional, while GCMS can upload to NCMS, the reverse is not possible. GCMS has been enhanced to allow for the upload of scanned documents, such as copies of travel documents.

In order to track and report on performance indicators, inventories, etc. the CBSA employs another system, COGNOS, that extracts information from NCMS and GCMS to support case and removal inventory management and other inland enforcement processing.

While the interface from GCMS to NCMS of information associated to the removals process is limited, it has generated small improvements to workload management including reducing the manual data entry required prior to the assignment of the file to an officer. However, the process is still heavily dependent on manual end user input of accurate and timely data making the removal process vulnerable to human error and irregularities.

The CBSA is committed to refining the quality of the data used in support of the removals program. These improvements require a multi-pronged approach to improving data quality and the Agency has already and/or will be undertaking a number of related initiatives:

Improving end-user data input

• In 2019, CBSAs Removal program produced data entry training guides for NCMS users
• An enhanced NCMS training package will be developed in consultation with the Chief Data Office for planned regional delivery in December 2020
• Development of a data and quality assurance unit at the Agency to conduct our own, proactive reviews of information in CBSA systems

Improved system functionality

In response to the OAG audit of the In-Canada asylum system, the CBSA, IRCC and the IRB have partnered to launch and implement the Asylum Interoperability Project, an initiative that will create enhancements to NCMS, GCMS and NOVA, as early as October 2020. This project will improve the interface between the systems with the goal of establishing a two-way connectivity between NCMS and GCMS. The project includes enhancements that will automatically enter and update information on behalf of the user

In November 2020, the CBSA and IRCC will launch the Integrated Case Tracking and Prioritization Unit to streamline processes and help identify opportunities for expediting case processing using data to identify trends, efficiencies and inefficiencies, to ultimately enhance coordination and collaboration within Canada’s asylum system.

All of the above will be supported by a Quality Assurance Program managed by the Immigration Enforcement Division in close collaboration with Regional Data Integrity (RDIs) units. Data Integrity Analysts, a position developed and classified in fiscal year 2019 to 2020, may be staffed within the RDIs.

Document navigation for "Standing Committee on Public Accounts: Spring 2020 Auditor General report"

• Previous page
• Table of contents
• Next page

Date modified:

2021-03-24