Canada Targets Faster Resolution of Study Permit Rejection Cases Amid Surge
Canada’s Federal Court has launched a pilot project to streamline the adjudication of rejected study permits and address the rapidly increasing number of immigration-related court proceedings. Starting October 1, 2024, this initiative aims to reduce the backlog of cases and offer a faster, more efficient process for international students seeking a judicial review of their rejected applications. This announcement follows record-breaking immigration cases in the Federal Court. In 2024 alone, according to a Global News report, the Court anticipates receiving 24,000 immigration-related filings, a fourfold increase compared to pre-pandemic levels. The immense pressure from the surge has prompted the court system to simplify and expedite certain cases—especially those involving international students’ study permits. A Summary Of What Just Changed Launch of Pilot Project: The Federal Court introduced a pilot project on October 1, 2024, to expedite the judicial review process for rejected study permits, reducing the review time from 14-18 months to five months. Rising Immigration Cases: Canada’s Federal Court faces a surge in immigration-related cases, with 24,000 filings expected in 2024, primarily driven by rejected study permits for international students. Eligibility Criteria: To qualify for the project, both the applicant and IRCC must agree on the facts, with cases involving complex legal issues or inadmissibility being excluded from the streamlined process. Streamlined Procedures: The pilot eliminates in-person hearings and combines the application for leave and merits decisions into a single step, offering a quicker resolution for rejected study permits. Challenges and Impact: While the pilot offers faster outcomes for straightforward cases, more complex disputes will still follow the traditional review process, maintaining longer timelines for some students. Changing Policies Canada’s high-quality education system and favourable post-graduation work opportunities draw international students. However, the influx of students over the past decade has led to challenges in processing applications. As of 2024, more than 800,000 international students are enrolled across Canada’s educational institutions, making it one of the world’s top destinations for prospective students. The growing number of applications has led to delays, rejections, and, in many cases, legal proceedings as students turn to the courts. The Federal Court has seen a dramatic rise in immigration cases since the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly about study permit rejections. Chief Justice Paul S. Crampton acknowledged the pressures from an overwhelmed system, hence the pilot project. “This will be a win-win for applicants, who will save significant time and costs, and for the Court, which will save scarce judicial and registry resources,” he said in a statement. The Canadian government has also introduced new rules and stricter requirements for study permits in 2024, adding to the plight of international students. These changes, such as caps on permits and increased financial requirements, have made it more difficult for many students to qualify for study permits. As a result, more students are turning to legal channels to challenge rejections, contributing to a record number of court cases. The Study Permit Pilot Project Launched on September 26, 2024, the Federal Court’s pilot project is designed to handle judicial reviews of rejected study permit applications under section 72 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The project introduces several procedural changes to allow applicants and government representatives to resolve disputes quickly and cut the timeline for judicial review, which typically takes 14-18 months, to just five months. Eligibility Criteria To take part in the pilot project, both parties involved in the dispute—the applicant and the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC)—must agree to the following: The study permit application has been rejected. Parties opt in to the pilot project and agree on the underlying facts, as evidenced by the application materials submitted to IRCC, including the full reasons for the rejection. The case is not complex, meaning there are no legal issues related to inadmissibility, national security, or requests for certified questions. The applicant does not request more time to file the Application for Leave. No affidavits are filed by either party. IRCC provides a Simplified Certified Tribunal Record. These criteria allow for quicker resolution. Streamlining Procedures The pilot project introduces three significant procedural changes that simplify the judicial review process for rejected study permit applications: No Hearings Required: Judicial reviews involve written submissions and oral hearings. Under the pilot, parties submit their cases in writing, and a judge will decide without an in-person hearing. This change is expected to save time and resources for the Court and the applicants. Merits of the Case: Traditionally, the judicial review is divided into two stages: first, a judge must decide whether to grant leave for the applicant to proceed and if leave is granted, the judge hears the merits of the case. The pilot project allows the leave application and the merits of the case to be considered simultaneously. If leave is granted, the judge will immediately rule on the merits, avoiding the delays of a two-stage process. Shortened Timeline: The standard process for judicial review of study permit rejections can take over a year to complete. Under the pilot project, however, the goal is to resolve cases within five months. This shortened timeline benefits students who need a quick resolution to begin or continue their studies without significant disruption. Efficiency The pilot project is necessary to address the growing backlog of especially study permit cases. For many international students, delays in the court process can lead to losing their place in university, forfeiting scholarships, or missing critical deadlines. With a streamlined process, the Federal Court aims to reduce students’ financial and emotional toll and help them secure resolutions on time. However, some legal experts are concerned about the pilot project’s limitations. Many study permit rejections involve complex issues such as inadmissibility or disputes over the accuracy of IRCC’s decision-making, which may require more in-depth review and oral hearings. As a result, these cases will still go through the traditional, lengthier process. Impact on International Students For international students seeking to challenge their study permit rejections, the pilot project offers a new avenue for a quicker resolution. By opting in, students can avoid lengthy delays, allowing them to move forward sooner and focus on their studies. However, only some accepted applications will qualify for the pilot project. Students whose cases involve more complex legal issues may still face a longer timeline. As the pilot project progresses, it will be crucial to monitor its success and determine whether it can accommodate a broader range of cases. The Federal Court’s Study Permit Pilot Project represents a significant step toward addressing the rising number of immigration cases and improving the judicial review process for international students. The pilot project aims to provide faster resolutions for rejected study permit applicants. In the short term, the pilot offers a promising solution to an overburdened court system and hope for international students navigating Canada’s complex immigration landscape. FAQ: Federal Court’s Study Permit Rejection Pilot Project What is the Study Permit Pilot Project? The Study Permit Pilot Project is a Federal Court initiative launched to streamline the judicial review process for rejected study permits. It aims to reduce processing time from 14-18 months to just five months. When did the pilot project start? The pilot project began on October 1, 2024, following a surge in immigration-related cases, particularly those involving international students’ study permit rejections. Who is eligible for the pilot project? Eligibility requires both the applicant and Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to agree on the facts of the case, and the case must not involve complex legal issues like inadmissibility or national security. How does the pilot project expedite the process? The project eliminates in-person hearings, combines leave and merits hearings, and shortens the timeline to resolve cases within five months, providing faster resolutions for students. What are the limitations of the pilot project? The pilot only applies to straightforward cases. More complex cases, such as those involving legal disputes over inadmissibility, will still undergo the traditional, longer judicial review process. https://immigration.ca/canada-targets-faster-resolution-of-study-permit-rejection-cases-amid-surge/
News
Ugandan Citizen Abducted, Held in Secret Detention for Three Months, Sparks Outrage and Calls for Justice
A disturbing new case of unlawful detention has surfaced, highlighting the ongoing human rights crisis in Uganda. A Ugandan citizen was reportedly abducted and held in a secret facility, known as a “safe house,” for three months, only to be released without charge or explanation. This incident, reported by NTV Uganda, has sparked widespread condemnation and renewed calls for accountability regarding human rights abuses in the country.
While the details surrounding the abduction remain unclear, reports indicate that the individual was taken without due process and held incommunicado—an action that has long been condemned by human rights organizations. The victim’s release, with no charges filed and no clear justification, has angered activists and citizens, who view this as yet another case of egregious abuse of power by the state.
“This is a recurring pattern,” said one human rights activist. “Abductions, secret detentions, and unexplained releases have become all too common in Uganda. These acts violate fundamental human rights and erode public trust in the justice system.”
The use of “safe houses,” unregistered detention facilities reportedly operated by security forces, has been a focal point in numerous allegations of torture and illegal imprisonment. Despite repeated calls from both local and international organizations for their closure and accountability for those involved, little action has been taken to address these violations.
This case underscores the urgent need for reform within Uganda’s security apparatus and greater accountability for human rights abuses. Observers hope that drawing attention to these injustices will spur concrete action to bring those responsible to justice and ensure the protection of basic human rights.
As frustration mounts, calls for both domestic and international pressure to hold the government accountable for such crimes grow louder. “One day, there must be accountability for all these crimes against our people,” stated one social media user, reflecting the sentiments of many Ugandans.
National Unity Platform (NUP) President Robert Kyagulanyi has accused Ugandan security forces of using excessive force to disrupt a planned NUP gathering. The allegations were detailed in a statement shared on Twitter, following an event held to honor children of NUP supporters who were killed, disappeared, or detained for their political beliefs.
According to Kyagulanyi, security personnel, under the command of an officer identified as Asiimwe, carried out a preemptive operation early in the morning upon learning of the NUP’s plans. The forces allegedly stormed the premises, arrested workers, and deployed tear gas to disperse those present.
“The criminals under the command of one Asiimwe deployed early morning, arrested our workers, and threw tear gas into our premises. They’ve cordoned off the premises and blocked all people from accessing the place,” Kyagulanyi wrote.
Among those reportedly arrested were Saava Peter, Mudenya Samson, and Turyasingura Samson. Kyagulanyi claimed the detained workers were subjected to beatings and interrogated about their political affiliations, with security operatives labeling them as terrorists.
“These JATT operatives asked the workers who they support politically, branding them terrorists and criminals—their only crime being that they work with us. You can imagine the indignity!” Kyagulanyi lamented.
This incident adds to the growing tension in Uganda’s political climate, where opposition parties frequently accuse the government of stifling dissent. Despite the challenges, Kyagulanyi ended his statement with a message of defiance and optimism, proclaiming, “UGANDA WILL BE FREE.”
NUP Gathering Disrupted: Kyagulanyi Alleges Security Force Harassment and Arrests
News
Sudan Demands Apology from Uganda Over Army Chief Muhoozi Kainerugaba’s Threat to Invade Khartoum
Sudan has demanded an official apology from Uganda over “offensive and dangerous” comments made by the chief of Uganda army staff, who threated to invade Khartoum, the Sudan Tribune has reported.
General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, son of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and CDF of the Ugandan army, posted two comments on the X platform on Tuesday in which he threatened “to capture Khartoum” with the support of the US President elect Donald Trump after he takes office. The posts were deleted later.
“The government of Sudan demands and official apology from the Ugandan government for the offensive and dangerous comments of the army commander,” Sudan’s foreign ministry said in a statement that the Sudan Tribune said it has seen.
Sudan Demands Apology from Uganda Over Army Chief Muhoozi Kainerugaba’s Threat to Invade Khartoum