Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab is defending sweeping new measures introduced under Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, which proposes giving the federal government unprecedented powers to cancel immigration documents in bulk and significantly tightens the timelines for asylum claims. Diab says the changes are necessary to bring more efficiency to a strained immigration system while ensuring that those most in need of protection are treated fairly.
Introduced in the House of Commons this week, the legislation would require most asylum seekers—including students and temporary residents—to file claims within one year of arrival in Canada. For those entering the country at irregular, unofficial border crossings, the window is even tighter—just 14 days to make a claim. The bill would also make removal orders effective immediately upon withdrawal of a claim, accelerating the voluntary departure process.
Critics, including the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, are raising red flags over the proposed changes. Adam Sadinsky, advocacy co-chair for the association, said some individuals may only develop a legitimate fear of returning home after being in Canada for over a year—whether due to political changes, new conflict, or risks arising from public advocacy while in Canada. Denying them access to the asylum process could funnel their cases into the already overloaded Federal Court system, creating new legal bottlenecks.
Federal data shows nearly 40,000 asylum claims were processed between January and April this year. The government says Bill C-2 is necessary to handle rising numbers and reinforce the integrity of Canada’s immigration and refugee systems.
Justice Minister Sean Fraser acknowledged that courts are facing delays but argued reform is needed to manage both immigration backlogs and legal efficiency. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree added that the bill would also help combat transnational crime, drug trafficking, and money laundering, while enhancing public safety.
One of the most controversial aspects of the bill is a provision granting the immigration minister authority—under cabinet approval—to cancel large groups of immigration documents. Critics like Syed Hussan from the Migrant Rights Network argue this could pave the way for mass deportations and effectively undermine Canada’s commitments under international refugee conventions. Diab rejected that characterization, insisting such powers would be used only in exceptional situations, such as during pandemics or national security crises.
The bill is currently progressing through Parliament but has yet to be assigned to a committee for study. With Parliament scheduled to rise for the summer by the end of June, it remains unclear how much progress will be made before the break. Meanwhile, refugee advocates are preparing to submit formal letters of concern and hope to be given a platform to present their objections when the committee review begins.