LAIBAR SINGH CASE

LAIBAR SINGH CASE: PEOPLE AT AIRPORT WERE ACTING OUT OF A SENSE OF JUSTICE
AND COMPASSION

A version of this article was published in the Indo-Candian Voice,
December 15 2007

The recent case of paralyzed Laibar Singh has created much debate and
division. There is a strong outpouring of sympathy for Laibar Singh and
his medical condition, however the fundamental question turns on whether
Canadian society has any "obligation" to support Mr. Singh as he has
exhausted all his legal avenues. In addition, much of the public
perception around Mr. Singh has unfortunately been fuelled by inaccurate
facts.

Firstly, Mr. Singh was never handed down a deportation order prior to the
one he received in July 2007. He has, therefore, never been "illegal" in
Canada before taking sanctuary at the Abbotsford Gurudwara. Prior to his
aneurysm, Mr. Singh worked as a labourer in Montreal.

Secondly, Mr. Singh arrived on a fake Indian document, which he declared
to Canadian immigration authorities. This is not illegal as both
international and Canadian refugee law recognize the reality that many
asylum seekers will be forced to travel on fake documents. An overwhelming
majority of refugee claimants arrive with false documentation and Section
178 of the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides
refugee claimants the ability to make a statutory declaration that attests
to their identity.

It is unfortunate that some of us are declaring that he must leave because
he does not "belong" any longer, despite the fact that his newly found
family and community are here. Certainly his physical state of paralysis
and the widespread community support he has received are all crucial
factors and realities for Mr. Singh. He, like anyone else, should be
entitled to live a healthy and dignified life. Instead of making
declarations on what others are entitled to simply by virtue of the fact
that we happen to already have immigrated to Canada or have inherited the
privilege of Canadian citizenship by birth, let us support one another in
being able to live a life of well-being and dignity.

We must challenge the idea that some are more worthy than others to decide
their fate and their right to mobility; instead we should accept these as
universal values of humanity. The struggle against deportation and to
support Laibar is not for him alone nor is it simply one case, rather it
symbolizes the struggles for all immigrant and refugees who daily struggle
to live with dignity. His situation reveals how hard and long racialized
migrants must fight to assert their right to self-determination which the
Canadian government consistently denies and instead perpetuates pain,
anxiety, and violence through detentions and deportations against which we
must actively organize ourselves.

The assumption is that Mr. Singh is being deported because he is an
"undesirable" who has "failed" the designated legal processes. However his
refusal as a refugee claimant must be understood in a climate where an
increasing number of critics are pointing to a failing immigration and
refugee system. This includes a growing movement of faith communities who
are responding to structural flaws by publicly offering sanctuary,
including nine current cases of sanctuary across Canada where churches are
defying deportation orders handed down by the government.

For example, Immigration and Refugee Board members are political
appointees who are not mandated to have any experience in the law; there
is no Refugee Appeal Division despite its guarantee provided in the June
2002 Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; certain avenues such as the
Pre Removal Risk Assessment have acceptance rates of 3-5% while others
such as the Humanitarian and Compassionate claim do not have to be
processed prior to deportation. The refugee system has been termed a
"lottery system" because acceptance rates can vary from 0-80% depending on
the judge. Most recently, the Federal Court of Canada struck down the Safe
Third Country Agreement between the US and Canada which was creating a
"Fortress Canada" by disallowing up to 40% of asylum seekers.

In the case of Mr. Singh, his deportation order was handed down despite
the fact that he still had a pending legal humanitarian and compassionate
claim. It is not far-stretched to suggest that one should not be deported
prior to this legal claim being heard. While Mr. Singh received two
temporary stays of deportation as a result of immense community pressure,
a negative decision on Mr. Singh's humanitarian and compassionate claim
was rendered largely on the basis that he 'does not have significant ties
to Canada`, clearly a false assessment. In addition to 40,000 petition
signatures, a variety of organizations have expressed their support
including the Canadian Labour Congress, BC Coalition of People with
Disabilities, B.C Hospital Employees Union, the Multifaith Action
Committee, Association of Chinese Canadians for Equality and Solidarity
Society, a long list of South Asian community and faith groups, and
politicians from all political parties.

A group of health care professionals issued a letter to Immigration
Minster Finley stating, "As health professionals, we are outraged at the
fact that the Canadian government would consider deporting a paraplegic
man, whose health condition is extremely fragile... For the sake of his
safety, health and well being, we fully support him and demand that [the
Minister] grant him permanent residency status on the basis of
humanitarian and compassionate."

It is crucial to highlight that Mr. Laibar Singh's situation is not
unprecedented. In October 2006, a Polish family on tourist visas in
Winnipeg suffered from a car accident that left the father paralyzed.
Initially they were refused on their humanitarian application; however
their deportation order was subsequently overturned after pressure by the
Polish-Canadian community, residents of Winnipeg, and political
intervention by federal politicians. Therefore ministerial discretion in
humanitarian and compassionate claims can and has been exercised in the
past to stop deportations; in fact it exists for that very purpose.

Many in the South Asian community have been deterred by the negative
backlash that has been fostered, specifically the racism in mainstream
media outlets and online discussion forums that utilize commentaries and
images of angry and frothing brown men to invoke a fear of violence and
terror particularly in the post 911 climate. The campaign around Laibar
Singh has revealed the ways in which the South Asian community is being
constructed as "Outsiders" who do not quite belong to the Canadian nation.
As we know, Canadian history is marked by racism against racialized
communities such as the Komagatamaru incident, the Chinese Head tax, the
Japanese internment and much more. The very labelling of these communities
as "immigrant communities" despite the reality that these communities have
resided here for centuries, reveals their second-class nature and their
eternal status as hyphenated citizens.

Multiculturalism in Canada celebrates our communities' culture as long as
it does not disrupt too deeply any social or political issues. This
internalized model-minority syndrome (the perpetual foreigner syndrome
which forces us to constantly prove ourselves as being "worthy" of being
in Canada) restrains us from believing that we can- indeed we have a
responsibility- to stand up and exercise our rights and to stand united
against systemic injustice without being deemed "unpatriotic" or
"ungrateful", which is a brilliantly manipulative tool to impose a
chill-effect on immigrant communities.

Finally, we have to vigorously challenge the assertion that the protest on
International Human Rights Day was unlawful. Civil disobedience has its
roots in human rights struggles including the Indian independence
movement, the American Civil Rights movement, the South African
Anti-Apartheid struggle, and all across this stolen land of Kanada by
peace activists, indigenous communities, women's rights activists, and
trade unionists. Those who went to the airport were expressing their
commitment to moral values and were acting out of a sense of justice and
compassion to protect human life.

In fact, the only thing that has transformed harmful laws and unjust
decisions are such courageous movements driven by dedicated and
compassionate people.

- Harsha Walia, South Asian activist, writer and member of No One is
Illegal with previous No One Is Illegal writings by Harjap Grewal, Mia
Amir, Naava Smolash, and Cynthia Oka.