GallowayWatch: Okay, it’s not just us. This whole CIC/CBSA thing really is confusing.

According to Barbara Jackman, who is heading up the Galloway border ban legal team, the decision to bar him from entering the country does seem to have been preemptive.

In an emailed response to a query from ITQ, she notes that Galloway “did not need to apply for a visa to visit Canada”, although she suggests that he could have informed the Canadian High Commission of his upcoming visit “as a matter of courtesy”.

Even if that turns out to be the case, however, it doesn’t really explain the apparent involvement of the Canada Border Services Agency:

What is unusual about the ‘refusal’ is that [name deleted], the Immigration Program Manager at the High Commission in London did not just say “we” consider you inadmissible but said that the preliminary assessment of the Canadian Border Services Agency was that he is inadmissible. I have never seen an overseas refusal rely on the Canadian Border Services. It is the Canada Immigration who make decisions on applications for admission to Canada, not that it appears there even was an application for admission.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m really looking forward to reading the full injunction request, which his lawyers will presumably release within the next day or so. At the very least, that should least answer the question of which department, agency or minister is ultimately responsible for the initial finding of inadmissibility.




Browse

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *