Civil Liberties Group Says Maryam Monsef’s Birthplace Error Highlights Unfair Citizenship Law

A civil liberties association and a group of lawyers representing refugees are suing the Canadian government over a law that allows it to unilaterally strip people of their citizenship—and point to Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef as someone who could be caught in its crosshairs.

The Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, brought in under the previous Conservative administration and slammed by the Liberals at the time as "dictatorial," means people accused of fraud or misrepresentation can lose their citizenship without so much as a hearing. "The minister's situation… is exactly the kind of situation that many other Canadians are facing right now because of this unjust process," Josh Paterson, executive director of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, said at a press conference, as it launched the legal challenge alongside the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers. Monsef revealed last week that she'd recently learned she was born in Iran and not Afghanistan, setting off a storm of controversy and drawing calls from other politicians for her resignation. READ MORE: Is the Controversy over Maryam Monsef's Birthplace Just a Racist Witch Hunt? The law would apply to her if the incorrect birthplace was listed on her citizenship application. Under the Act, those accused of fraud or misrepresentation while trying to become citizens don't have a right to an oral hearing or an opportunity to have their case heard by an independent decision-maker. They also have no platform to present humanitarian and compassionate grounds for why their citizenship shouldn't be taken away. The government has set a quota of processing 40 to 60 cases per month, according to the BCCLA. It's not known how many citizenships have already been stripped under the law. "Bill C-24 changed the process so a single government official can strip a Canadian citizenship and that person has no right to a fair hearing and not even a right to see all the evidence against them," said Laura Track, counsel for the BCCLA, which along with the refugee lawyers' association, is acting as a public interest litigant. No individuals are named in the legal challenge. It's being brought on behalf of people who could be impacted by the law, Track said. In the spring, the Liberal government introduced Bill C-6, which would repeal a number of other widely criticized provisions brought in by Bill C-24—for example, the ability of the government to revoke the citizenship of anyone convicted of terrorism, treason or espionage, and the requirement for new citizens to declare their intention to stay in Canada. But the general process of revocation still hasn't been fixed, Track said. That's why the BCCLA and CARL are calling on the government to grant a global stay, noting that not everyone is aware they can get a stay, or has the means to hire a lawyer. On Monday, Immigration Minister John McCallum said the government was "considering options" for changes around revocation for misrepresentation. When asked why a stay could not be issued, he said "we are considering alternatives going forward." While the legal challenge focuses on people accused of fraud and misrepresentation, these are not the only instances where the government can automatically take away a person's citizenship. In April, Squamish, BC resident Byrdie Funk found out that because a section of the 1977 Citizenship Act, which requires second generation Canadians who were born abroad to apply to retain their citizenship before they turn 28, meant she was no longer Canadian. "No one told me I needed to do this," she told VICE News, adding that she only found out because in 2013, she'd applied to replace her lost proof of citizenship card. "There was no letter, no phone, no contact or warning whatsoever." Funk, who immigrated to Canada from Mexico with her parents when she was an infant, hasn't been threatened with removal, but has no legal status in Canada. Two weeks ago, she was informed that she could apply for a discretionary grant, at a cost of $630. She's opted not to do so in order to shed light on the issue. "I believe that if the Canadian government wants citizens to treat citizenship as a sacred opportunity, that should apply to the government as well," she said. "Taking something as important as citizenship from someone must include giving the person at risk an opportunity to plead their case." Follow Tamara Khandaker on Twitter.