On lit dans les paragraphes 39 à 43 de l’affidavit de Mali pour l’audience d’appel de l’ASFC :

39.  We eventually won the first hearing, and that was a happy time for both [Victor] and me, as I felt there was finally an official from Canada who had declared my innocence.

40.  However, what happened following the hearing has only disappointed us.

41.  We went to pick up my passport at the CBSA following the hearing, as the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) member had declared that there were no more conditions imposed on me and I could get my passport back as a regular visitor to Canada. During my third visit, the officer said that they could not release my passport, as CIC had the intention to appeal the case and I had to comply with all of the previous reporting conditions or otherwise they would re-arrest me.

42.  I was devastated. I thought I had won the case; however, the CBSA could totally ignore the Board’s decision and do whatever they wanted.

43.  My lawyer then wrote a letter to the CBSA pointing out their practice is against the law, and they finally released my passport. A copy of my lawyer’s letter is enclosed as exhibit H.

On lit dans les paragraphes 17 à 21 de l’Affidavit de Victor :

17.  On 22 September 2015, I had handed the receptionist the IRB’s decision in my wife’s favour, and then he left our sight. A few minutes later, CBSA Officer [MacDonald] arrived, returned it to me, and informed me that the CBSA had not yet received the IRB decision and that my wife must sign in and return on 24 September. On 24 September, the receptionist informed us that the CBSA had still not received the decision and that my wife had to sign in again and return on 29 September. On 29 September, Officer [Bélanger] told me that the CBSA would not release my wife’s passport as the CBSA intended to appeal the IRB decision. The officer told me that my wife had to keep complying with the release conditions such as regularly reporting to the CBSA or the CBSA would re-arrest her. The CBSA did not release her passport until [her] lawyer sent a fax to the CBSA. We were very disappointed by the way the CBSA had treated her after the hearing.

18.  Though I believed in my wife’s innocence of the charge against her, she feared that I might not and so insisted that I meet her parents [in their country] before I decide to marry her, which I did. […] To my surprise, not only had my wife told her parents of the incident in sufficient detail, but her parents insisted that we return to and stay in Canada until this matter is resolved and even offered money to cover the additional legal and other unexpected costs surrounding this incident. For her it was a matter of principle as it was for her parents.

19.  Her character and my love for her compelled me to marry her [...]. My wife had lost weight since the last hearing, and often suffers insomnia and irritability due to the appeal. I have found it difficult to discuss her case with her since.

20.  Due to the appeal date being rescheduled so far into the future and my wife’s legal obligation to attend and insistence on attending it, the appeal had left us stuck in limbo [in this city]. I had crossed some opportunities in both [another Canadian city] and [abroad] that I had to ignore due to her legal obligation to appear at the appeal hearing and the fear that we could miss it, be arbitrarily refused re-entry if we weren’t in Canada, or be caught in the middle of a move had I accepted an opportunity [in another Canadian city].

21.  I have since had to accept employment with my previous employer which I shall be restarting soon. Unfortunately, that contract will require the company to devote up to one month to my training for the new task and me to sign at least a one-year commitment, essentially forcing us to remain [in our present city of residence] for at least the next year against our original plans and at the expense of other opportunities due to the appeal hearing.


©2019 by La Nation française du Canada. Proudly created with Wix.com