Immigration Consequences & Criminal Convictions: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!

Today, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation discusses immigration consequences for criminal convictions and how they intersect with Canada’s criminal and immigration laws.

Key Points Discussed:
The Case of Akim Mvana:
Akim Mvana, a citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo, was convicted of summary offenses in Canada. Despite the offenses being prosecuted summarily, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) treated them as indictable for deportation purposes due to its classification of hybrid offenses.

Unconstitutional Argument Dismissed:
Mr. Mvana argued that the IRPA’s treatment of hybrid offenses as indictable—despite their summary prosecution—was unconstitutional. The courts dismissed his challenge, and the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal.

Why This Case Matters:
Discretion vs. Statutory Interpretation:
The IRPA undermines Crown discretion in prosecuting offenses. If an offense isn’t deemed serious enough for indictment by the Crown, why should it automatically trigger serious immigration consequences like deportation?

Serious Criminality and Hybrid Offenses:
The IRPA provisions on “serious criminality” treat minor offenses as serious crimes for non-citizens. For example, impaired driving, often prosecuted summarily, can lead to deportation even in cases without injuries or egregious circumstances.

Lack of Appeals and Justice:
Individuals like Mr. Mvana face automatic deportation without an appeal process, despite the prosecution’s assessment that the conduct didn’t warrant an indictable offense.

Policy and Taxpayer Costs:
Automatic deportation proceedings are costly for taxpayers and unjust for individuals subjected to them without proper judicial oversight or recourse.

Missed Opportunity by the Supreme Court:
The Court could have addressed:

The fairness of treating hybrid offenses as indictable in immigration law.
The balance between immigration policy and prosecutorial discretion.
How to ensure consistency in applying immigration consequences for summary offenses.
A ruling could have provided clarity and fairness to individuals facing disproportionate immigration consequences for minor offenses.

Topics Covered:
The intersection of criminal and immigration law.
Discretion in prosecuting hybrid offenses.
Fairness in deportation proceedings.

Scroll to Top
CALL ME NOW