Here is a National Post report on a man found to be complicit in "crimes against humanity during the Rwandan genocide, and the murder of a neighbour for refusing to have sex with him". He entered the country as a refugee (don't they all!?) but was stripped of this status in 2006.
Henri Jean-Claude Seyoboka, 43, of Gatineau, Que., has already been told at least six times in official and judicial proceedings that he is excluded from refugee protection after investigations by the RCMP's War Crimes Unit, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the Canada Border Services Agency.
Still in Canada and free from custody, he has again appealed to the Federal Court of Canada.
He has been told six times already that he is "excluded from refugee protection" by Canada's judicial system yet he has launched a seventh appeal. How many is enough?
Mr. Seyoboka came to Canada from Rwanda on Jan. 17, 1996, and claimed refugee protection two days later, which he was granted. He then applied for permanent residency status.
In both of his applications, however, he made no mention of his tenure in the Forces Armées Rwandaises (FAR), the Rwandan army, during the height of the genocide.
Then a witness in Rwanda told the ICTR that Mr. Seyoboka had killed a woman, a neighbour named Francine, after she refused to have sex with him.
In 2002, an indictment filed in the ICTR against another person spoke of "Second-Lieutenant Jean-Claude Seyoboka" manning a roadblock in Kigali on April 7, 1994, along with members of the Rwandan army and the Interahamwe, the Hutu militia. The group were later ordered to search nearby houses and kill any Tutsis they found and to kill any Tutsis trying to cross the roadblock, according to the indictment.
Henri Jean-Claude Seyoboka is considered a war criminal yet here he is in Canada free of custody and on his seventh appeal to stay in Canada. Is this about justice or just work for lawyers?
Here is a Toronto Star article on a man named Parminder Singh Saini. He was convicted of terrorism in his native land of India after he hijacked a plane and shot at some of its 270 passengers.
On July 5, 1984, when he was 21, he and four accomplices in the militant All India Sikh Students Federation boarded an Air India flight to Delhi from the northern city of Srinagar.
Twenty minutes after takeoff, he and another man stood up. They pushed aside a female attendant, walked to the front of the plane and Saini - in full view of passengers - raised a handgun to the head of a male attendant and fired.
“(The bullet) did not hit him,” the trial judge later wrote in a 184-page judgment, “but there is little doubt that the object of Parminder Singh (Saini).....was to intimidate and terrorize the crew members and the passengers.”
At the cockpit door, Saini fired two or three more shots - risking the plane’s destruction, the court judgment said. One bullet pierced the door, striking the flight engineer in the back, not seriously. Other hijackers beat and stabbed two other crew members with kirpan daggers.
The door opened and Saini seized control of the plane.
The hijackers eventually surrendered and Saini was convicted and sentenced to hang but had that conviction reduced to life imprisonment. After 10 years in prison he was released on the condition that he leave the country, a move by India to dump their problem elsewhere. And of course he chose Canada. No wonder "there are more Sikh extremists in Canada then in India."
Aside from hijacking a plane and shooting at several of his 270-plus hostages - wounding one in the back - Saini lied his way into Canada, has never gained landed-immigrant status, faces deportation and by ministerial order remains a national security threat.
On Jan. 21, 1995, he presented himself to Canadian customs as Balbir Singh carrying a fake Afghan passport.
He said he had no criminal record and no family in Canada, then went to live with his mother and brother in Brampton. Eight months later, CSIS caught him and ordered him deported.
In two separate reviews, adjudicators declared him a threat. One noted an “almost total lack of credibility and trustworthiness” and “a continuing ability and willingness to engage in unlawful behaviour.”
He's been fighting deportation ever since with courts and tribunals declaring him for the past 15 years "a danger to the public and security in Canada and that he shouldn’t remain". But thanks to the appeals process he remains in Canada and has delayed his deportation for so long that he has been able to get an undergraduate degree and law degree in Canada. The man has no legal status in Canada yet we cannot remove him.
And who can forget Mahmoud Mohammad Issa Mohammad, the "poster boy" for the appeals process.
Lawyers ruin anything they get their hands on. They produce no wealth, no jobs, no art, no culture, and add value to nothing. The legal profession is parasitic in nature, attaching itself to a healthy host, bleeding it of anything of value, and undermining its ability to properly function.
Here is a good illustration of the legal profession at work. It's about the significant differences between car insurance rates in Toronto and its outer regions.
But the cost of assessing, treating and compensating the drivers was a world apart. One of the collisions took place in London, Ont., and the driver's claim cost his insurer $1,674. The second incident took place in Toronto and has cost a whopping $51,808 to date.
A major insurer supplied the Toronto Star with 10 sample case histories of comparable collisions, without revealing names, to illustrate the enormous differences in costs between the Toronto area and the rest of the province – differences that will result in major premium increases for GTA drivers if something is not done soon.
The reason is explained in the following:
"We know when lawyers get involved, they want lots of assessments because there you have a dispute. Lawyers are driving costs up in a way because they want to make the case that their client is suffering and they are going to get lots of opinions, and the insurer is going to do the opposite ..."
Cassidy concluded in a study of Saskatchewan's insurance system published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2000, and in subsequent published studies, that whiplash cases would go down, and be resolved many weeks sooner, if no lawyers were involved.
Lawyers make their living on disputes and that is what an appeal is. It is continuous work for lawyers. Canada's immigration system is a mess because of lawyer self interest. Conflict of interest should excluded them from immigration policy decisions yet they remain an influential "stake holder" in Canada's immigration industry. Canada will never be in a position to reform the immigration system as long as lawyers can shape the policy.