Reflection #2

October 14, 2010

Death due to disease, an accident or natural causes is disheartening. Death as a result of murder is tragic. The act of taking the life of another, for whatever reason is truly upsetting and not comprehendible to many – so much so that when a person knows and conceals information pertaining to a murder or is an accomplice to such they are considered to be a part of the ending of the victims life in the eyes of the law. But why then when people are fully aware that their lives are in danger in the country they reside in, like Grise in the article “Mexican woman deported to her death,” are forced back to their countries to face fear, brutality and in the case of this young woman death those who are in charge of their deportation, that is essentially the reason for their death, are not charged as accomplices to their death?

An obvious theory to answer this question would be that the criminals are those doing the physical act of killing – not those in charge of citizenship and immigration. But the truth is that those who control who enters Canada and who does not are in a sense regulating the people that are given an opportunity to reside in a safe country where they have at least some sources of protection, and who is deported – left to face probable kidnapping, rape, gang abuse and/or death.

What is proposed as a solution to aid in people to being deported to their death in this article is an appeal process suggested to give claimants another chance if immediately rejected into Canada. I suppose this is helpful for those who are successfully passed through immigration and are then sheltered from the danger within their country, however, I find that challenging to comprehend how the same people responsible for (dis)approving immigrants now would truly respond differently when presented with a previously rejected case versus a new one. If anything would this not just extend the process putting even more lives in danger as those who are hopeful to immigrate to Canada wait patiently in fear for their own lives and those they care about? I propose that the altering of procedures should not rest in how many times a case is reviewed, but the content that is considered valid to enter the country of Canada. Human life is not political, perhaps how people choose to live it is but certainly not the life itself. Nobody has the right to play God, no matter where they stand in the world’s hierarchy of power. Morally and ethically speaking – if Canada fails to save a life through denial of immigration, in a sense our country is just as guilty as the killer themselves.

Those who “filter” the people who enter Canada are eager to place trust in politically acceptable statements such as when the department of Citizenship and Immigration Canada stated in recognition to this conflict that "In rare cases, persons removed from Canada fall victim to unfortunate circumstances, which may or may not be related to factors examined in the pre-removal risk assessment.”This acknowledgement is convenient and admissible, but it is certainly not progressive and for many it is a certification that death has and will continue to happen to rejected immigrants when they return helpless and threatened to their countries. The message in this article is that the reality for many is that whether their lives end with dignity, despair, naturally or tragically comes down to the piece of paper they are granted – a visa, or a death certificate.