Canada Court Rules US 'Not Safe' for Asylum Seekers

Morning Brew via UNSPLASH

Canada’s federal court has invalidated its Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) with the United States in place since 2004 because it has determined that the US violates the human rights of refugees. An STCA requires an asylum-seeker to seek protection in the first safe country they reach. Under this agreement, both countries have been able to turn back asylum-seekers attempting to enter at official crossings because they each recognized the other as safe places to seek refuge. 

In a 60-page ruling, Judge Ann Marie McDonald ruled the deal as a violation of Canada’s Charter of Rights that prevents the government from impeding the right to life, liberty and security. The deal was thus declared unconstitutional because of the US government’s practice of imprisoning migrants and asylum-seekers, citing the conditions asylum-seekers face in detention, including the lack of access to adequate health care and legal counsel.

Judge McDonald found the experience of Nedeira Mustefa particularly compelling, a Muslim asylum-seeker from Ethiopia. After Canada returned her to the United States, Mustefa was detained and placed in solitary confinement, where despite telling guards of her religious beliefs, she believes she was fed pork, was placed in solitary confinement, which she said was “a terrifying, isolating and psychologically traumatic experience”

The judge said “Canada cannot turn a blind eye to the consequences that befell Ms. Mustefa in its efforts to adhere to the STCA. The evidence clearly demonstrates that those returned to the US by Canadian officials are detained as a penalty”

The court ruling is suspended for six months to give Parliament time to respond, which it can appeal, and litigants could potentially appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Otherwise, the ruling is set to go into effect on January 22. 

The agreement has been under fire in Canada since the election of Donald Trump, who has actively sought to limit asylum, refugee resettlement and immigration in the United States, as well as detain and separate migrants. With increasing arrivals of Central American asylum-seekers who are fleeing violence, gang violence, crime but also the impacts of climate change and climate variability that has exacerbated poverty and left many parts food insecure, the US has pursued and entered into Safe Third Country Agreements with several Central American countries. 

University of California, Hastings College of Law professor Karen Musalo, who testified on behalf of litigants, called the decision “an indictment of the inhumanity of the American detention system for asylum-seekers.”

We could not agree more. 

(BBC, Washington Post, NY Times)

---

We have written extensively about asylum conditions in the United States and the situation of Central American asylum-seekers, including the climate conditions in their countries of origin. For further reading, here’s one such Feature.  

---

In Today's News: Climate Change Hits Women Hardest; How Should We Respond to Climate Migrants (Analysis); Somalia Ratifies Kampala Convention

CLIMATE CHANGE HITS WOMEN HARDEST, REPORT FINDS

In a new report, the Irish NGO Trócaire found weather-related disasters are likely to kill women and girls 14 times more than boys, increase girls chances of being trafficked 30 percent and put women at increased risk of violence during crises and displacement. The report found corporate human rights violations impact women more disproportionately and looking at indigenous, environmental and land rights defenders, Trócaire found them to be at increased and growing risk of violence, evidenced by the fact that in 2019, almost half of the 137 attacks on human rights defenders were against indigenous women in rural communities. (NRC Online)

---

How Should the World Respond to the Coming Wave of Climate Migrants?

Analysis

This is a policy editorial that mostly summarizes the state of play with respect to the plight of climate migrants and the current policy discourse based on the worst case climate migration models. The opinion piece does address the legal challenge that climate change falls outside the purview of protected refugee grounds under the 1951 Convention, but fails to include broader refugee definitions in the 1969 OAU Convention and the 1984 Cartagena Declaration. 

It also fails to include the recently adopted, albeit non-binding, UN Global Compacts for Migration and Refugees, respectively, which discuss environmental migration and further, UNHCR’s more recent position that refugee law frameworks may apply in situations where nexus dynamics are present - that is, situations where conflict or violence are interconnected to situations linked to climate change or disaster. 

Most notably, the author’s belief is that climate migration is voluntary, and while there is certainly a lack of data and full understanding yet on the topic, there are viable and numerous qualitative indicators to suggest that where climate migration interconnects with poverty, development and challenges to security, choice may not be a luxury afforded to many, and certainly not to everyone. (World Politics Review)

---

Somalia Ratification of Kampala Convention Crucial Step for Millions Displaced by Conflict, Violence, and Climate Shocks

With 2.6 million people uprooted by violent clashes and climatic shock in recent times, Somalia became the 30th African state to ratify the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa, the first-ever binding treaty dealing with internal displacement. In a press release, the International Committee of the Red Cross commended Somalia’s commitment to the rights of thousands of Somali’s displaced by both conflict and climate change. (ReliefWeb)