Canada designated Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization in 2024. But what happens to people who were forced to serve in the IRGC through mandatory military conscription, committed no crimes, and later immigrated to Canada?
In this episode of Borderlines, immigration lawyers Steven Meurrens and Deanna Okun-Nachoff are joined by Conservative Member of Parliament Garnett Genuis to discuss the growing immigration crisis facing former IRGC conscripts and their families.
In 2023, Genuis introduced Bill C-350, which proposed amending Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to distinguish between individuals who voluntarily joined terrorist organizations and those who were forcibly conscripted. The proposed amendment would protect individuals who completed only their mandatory service, did not remain voluntarily, and did not participate in terrorism, espionage, or subversion. Despite the subsequent designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization, this proposed legislative solution was never adopted.
The discussion explores why the government has not acted, the consequences of Canada's current inadmissibility framework, the limitations of judicial review and humanitarian relief, and what affected individuals can do to advocate for legislative reform.
Topics include:
Why Canada designated the IRGC as a terrorist organization
What Bill C-350 proposed and why it never became law How IRPA section 34(1)(f) affects former conscripts
Why mandatory military service can result in immigration inadmissibility
The impact on spouses, families, and Iranian dissidents
Whether constitutional challenges or the Supreme Court's decision in Mason could change the law
The role of Parliament, IRCC, and CBSA
How Canadians can advocate for a legislative solution
Timestamps
00:00 – Introduction: MP Garnett Genuis and the IRGC conscription issue
06:29 – Bill C-350: The proposed legislative solution for forced conscripts
10:31 – Why hasn't the government adopted the proposed amendment?
15:34 – The legal challenges and limitations of case-by-case discretion
29:51 – Public advocacy and the prospects for legislative change
38:43 – Humanitarian relief, judicial review, and litigation
49:28 – What affected individuals can do to push for reform
","author_name":"Steven Meurrens and Deanna Okun-Nachoff"}