flag wire: true
flag sponsored: false
article_type:
pubinfo.section:
cms.site.custom.site_domain : thespec.com
sWebsitePrimaryPublication : publications/hamilton_spectator
bHasMigratedAvatar : false
firstAuthor.avatar :
By
Sarah Palmer, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter LiveWire Calgary
Hundreds of civil rights groups wrote the federal government to criticize status checks on international students during a Calgary protest.
Over 250 organizations signed a letter sent on Sept. 2, calling for an investigation into allegations that the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) issued removal orders to several people protesting changes to work permit eligibility.
The protests come as approximately 1,500 graduates of non-credit courses at Portage College campuses across Alberta were denied post-graduation work permits (PGWPs) due to policy changes that took effect after their initial enrollment.
Notably, the letter was signed by groups such as Amnesty International, Greenpeace, and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, and it requested an independent review of law-enforcement actions and the immediate suspension of removal orders issued to protesters.
The demonstration took place in Calgary’s northeast community of Saddle Ridge on Aug. 12, the fourth and final in a series of related protests. In an email statement, the Calgary Police Service (CPS) said that they were “largely peaceful in nature,” save for some complaints.
Calgary police said they were called to the protest in question, where they addressed participants who were obstructing the sidewalk and installing structures on city property without a permit.
Upon arrival, CPS said that they informed demonstrators of their right to protest and educated them on how to do so lawfully. While speaking with individuals violating city bylaws, officers asked them for identification and contacted the CBSA for verification.
The CBSA confirmed in an email statement that two of the four individuals were found to be out of compliance with their immigration status. Officials further searched the street of Saddletown Circle NE.
A total of 20 individuals had their statuses checked by the CBSA, with 12 identified as possibly inadmissible under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The persons were directed to attend a follow-up interview at an agency office later that day.
Because immigration information is protected under the Privacy Act, the CBSA could not provide details on the status of these individuals. They noted that if any foreign national is found to be unauthorized to work or study in Canada, they will be expected to depart.
The letter emphasized that freedom of expression and peaceful assembly are fundamentally protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which the CBSA said that they “fully agree” with and are aware of the letter.
One signatory, Bikramjit Singh, a member of the Migrant Rights Network, was quoted in a media release from the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change, calling the involvement of law enforcement a calculated move.
“Migrants are part of every movement in this country,” he said.
“What happened in Calgary was meant to frighten people into silence. It will not work. Migrants will keep organizing, and keep speaking out. We will defend those rights every time they are attacked.”
Another signatory, Julia Sande from Amnesty International Canada, said they are “appalled” by the “crackdown” at the student-led protest, also singing from the same hymn sheet that the incident was suppressive.
“People should not have to choose between speaking out against injustice and protecting their ability to remain in Canada,” she said.
“Targeting peaceful protests strikes fear into the heart of communities, making people think twice about speaking out in public, regardless of their immigration status or how long they’ve lived in Canada. It’s intimidation, pure and simple.”
The CBSA said it is “committed to the fair and equitable application” of immigration laws, noting that anyone ordered to be removed from Canada is afforded due process, including access to appeal and judicial reviews.
One protester who received an exclusion order said he has since filed a judicial review, but he should not have had to do so in the first place, given that his status was not yet unauthorized.
Gurpreet Singh attended the August demonstration and recalled some of the participants setting up tents to shield themselves from the rain. When the police came and asked that the tents be taken down, he said that everyone followed their instructions.
Shortly after, CBSA officers arrived and blocked off the road exit to prohibit people from leaving. Singh said that they went around checking identification documents. When they received their PGWP refusal letters in July, he and the others were granted a 90-day restoration period, so they weren’t worried at first.
Singh was only about 20 days into his three-month grace period, but he said the officers did not consider this and instructed him and others to attend the agency’s office in an hour for an interview.
“It was around 1 p.m., I believe, and they asked us to be in the office by 2 p.m.,” he said.
“I asked them, it is such a short period — we need to get ready, we need to collect our documents from home and get them printed. They said, ‘We don’t care. We will issue a warrant against you guys.’”
They called their lawyers and made it to the office as quickly as they could. During the interview, Singh said the officer was showing him pictures and documents belonging to other permit holders and that he felt he was “trying to trick me.”
When asked why he hadn’t applied for a new work permit, Singh explained that he and several others had been denied their PGWP’s and were currently seeking a judicial review to have this corrected.
Ten minutes later, he was handed an exclusion order with a one-year ban. Singh asked the officer why his restoration period was not taken into account and said he had been told it was just a guideline, not a law.
According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s (IRCC) website, the 90-day period applies to both study and work permits and should be honoured, provided the visa has not yet expired and the individual has ceased classes and employment.
In addition to the initial review already sent to the courts, Singh said he has now submitted a second review regarding the CBSA’s conclusion. He said that coming to the country required extensive work and testing, but that it was supposed to provide him with new opportunities.
“We could have done it in our own country. We could have done it online. We came here,” said Singh.
“We did rent, we paid taxes. Why? Because once we do some study, we [were] supposed to get the experience as well to assimilate in the new atmosphere.”
Instead, he said that he has been met with a legal hassle on top of racism. Singh said that he and other international students should not have had their permits refused, but that going through this has made him think twice about staying in Canada.
“We are doing the hard work,” he said.
“They can check our account balance. We are not homeless. We are working hard. We are earning our living. We pay for studies. How come we are wrong?”
The students, including upwards of 480 who attended Calgary’s campus — delivered through the Canadian Institute of Osteopathic Therapy (CIOT) — announced just over a month ago that they believed that their work permits had been wrongfully refused.
Sikander Singh, now a holder of an Administrative Professional diploma, told LWC during the July 17 media availability that he and his peers were promised PGWPs until the criteria for obtaining a work permit changed.
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) updated this, making students who enrolled on or after May 15, 2024, ineligible. Non-credit courses were also removed in place of programs at designated learning institutions.
Singh said that a majority of students were enrolled in their classes before that date, and that, up until the Government of Canada modified its database on July 16, both CIOT and Portage College were considered designated institutions.
In an email sent to students on Jan. 26, obtained by LWC from Simran Gill, a member of the Naujawan Support Network, the college reiterated that the updated work permit criteria would not affect students who began their studies before Sept. 1, 2024.
“Our institution remains committed to providing the necessary support and information to ensure your continued success,” wrote the college.
“We recognize the importance of the PGWP program, and we want to emphasize that you can pursue your academic journey with confidence, knowing that your eligibility for the program remains intact.”
Singh said he and his classmates received similar alerts from CIOT, stating that changes were coming but that they would still qualify. Still, the updated guidelines have been applied to them, which he said is frustrating.
“We did everything on time…then we got our refusal letters in the mail,” said Singh.
“I have no words to explain what we are feeling on this day, because we were supposed to be eligible for our conditional terms.”
Students have since sent a letter to IRCC requesting a review of the timing of the new guidelines, but with their 90-day time limit to secure permits before their visas expire quickly approaching, further legal action may become necessary.