Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Member of Parliament
Government of Canada
Constituency Office
9140 Leslie Street, Suite 407
Richmond Hill, Ontario L4B 0A9
Tel: 905-707-9701; Fax: 905-707-9705
Majid.Jowhari@parl.gc.ca
March 5th, 2016
the reaction was practically identical. I did not carry out a statistical study, but
from my personal experience it seemed that almost nobody knew of this
immigration policy, and almost all were equally appalled.
The Immigration & Relocation Coordinator from York University was right. I
have encountered stumbling blocks because of my now 13 year old son and his
genetic condition, a genetic condition that, by the way, has not precluded him
from being happily in school where he recently was awarded the recognition for
Most Improved, or from being in hip-hop dance classes and participating
already in two year-end presentations to standing ovations, or from taking Tae
Kwon Do classes and slowly moving up the belt ranks. Here in Canada my son
learned how to ride a bike. He is now bilingual in his native Spanish and
acquired English. He still hasnt mastered ice skating, but now owns a hockey
stick and loves to watch Canadas favorite sport on TV.
Three years ago, when we began the paperwork to apply for permanent
residency, I was still in denial about the possible setbacks my son and his
genetic makeup might mean for us. I knew that in many places there were
archaic and often silly laws that remained on the books by inertia (such as the
unenforced law in Michigan that requires a woman to get permission from her
husband to get a haircut). I was convinced that something similar to this had
to be the case with the law that singled out people like my son for possible
inadmissibility into Canada. But I was mistaken. After going through all the
required paperwork for the entire family, and finally receiving confirmation that
our application was completed for evaluation, my son was then singled out for
further documentation in order to determine our familys admissibility for
permanent residency. Despite the fact that my son had no history of medical
complications, he was repeatedly required to undergo additional medical
examinations (x-rays, blood tests, thyroid examination, pediatric evaluation,
psychologist cognitive and developmental assessments), based solely on his
genetic identity as a person with Down syndrome.
Disheartened and disgusted, I sought out the law that was being applied to my
son. What I found only served to deepen my indignation. The law was not
some arcane legislation redacted in the misty past. The so-called Immigration
and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) was passed by Parliament in 2002 (the year
my son was born), replacing the Immigration Act of 1976 as the primary federal
legislation regulating immigration to Canada. The IRPA describes the different
grounds of inadmissibility, identified as such for their possible threat to
Canadas safety and security.
The first ground for inadmissibility is for Security reasons. People engaging in
espionage against Canada or its interests, or in subversion against a
democratic government, or in terrorism or acts of violence that endanger the
lives and safety of persons in Canada, or belonging to an organization that
Many others before us have been denied admissibility to Canada for the same
reason my son could be denied. Although I would like to see my application for
permanent residency have a positive outcome, and be able to continue working
at the amazing Faculty of Environmental Studies of York University, alongside a
fabulous interdisciplinary team of colleagues, to dedicate ourselves to
improving social and environmental justice and wellbeing in Canada and
around the world, it is not to defend my particular case that I am moved to
write this letter. It is rather, to spark a debate that might lead to erasing this
blemish on Canadas honor, a blemish that is unbelievable and abhorrent to
most people who learn about it, foreign nationals and Canadians alike. It is, to
say the least, unbecoming of this country. I am sure the majority of Canadians
would agree. If I might contribute to the discussion that one day eliminates
this aberration, then our adventure in Canada, whether temporary or
permanent, will have achieved its greatest goal.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter, and I would ask you to do
what you can with the power and authority invested in you to revise Section
38(1)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, if for no other reason
than, as our Prime Minister would say, because its 2016!
For a five minute video about our case, you can watch Inadmissible Nico:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te3smROIc-0
Sincerely,