Are you a second class Canadian?

[twitchyzero]

somewhat related
When Canada took away Captain Paul Watson's passport on behalf of Japan... : canada

coles:
japanese gov't asked canada to revoke environmentalist's passport...done
environmentalist is known to ram his ship into japanese vessels that are conducting illegal whaling
reddit comments says despite losing his canadian passport he is still a citizen and can re-enter canada

biased article and not really a result of c-24 but shows what our federal gov't is wiling to do at the drop of a hat.

[ancient_510]

Originally Posted by underscore

Are you certain it's the possibility of citizenship from another country, and not that you actually have existing dual citizenship?

+1

A fundamental part of countries that base citizenship on Jus Sanguinis is that if you are eligible to receive citizenship by their criteria, you are a citizen. Doesn't matter if you don't have or don't want a passport, or don't even realize it; you are a citizen.

But I'm not a terrorist! This doesn't affect me!
Ever think of protesting the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion? Well you may end up on a terrorist watch-list.

So now let's connect some dots:

• Born in Canada?
• Have a father or grandfather from Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Greece, Haiti, Hungary, Israel (or Jewish from any country), Iran, Italy, Kiribati, Lithuania, Philippines, Rwanda, Serbia, Tunisia, or Ukraine? (non-comprehensive list)
• Attended an anti Kinder Morgan protest
• You didn't even have to "cross the line" against the injuction on Burnaby Mountain when considering Criminal Code 83.01 (1) (b) (ii) (E) together with a "terrorist group" as defined in the Criminal Code.

Congratulations. You are now eligible to be removed from Canada.

[multicartual]

If you're not a billionaire and/or famous, you're automatically a second or third class citizen

If you're famous or have enough money, you are truly an asset to the country

[CP.AR]

This bothers me a lot.

Yes, I moved away from Canada for work... that is after fully paid out all my student loans and working for the past 7 years part time and full time (including working for the federal government). I paid all my taxes, loved and continue to love my mother country (I have a Canadian flag on my front door here in Hong Kong). I participate what I can still participate in Canada in terms of voting, and have always longed to one day return to Canada to build my own family and eventually retire and die.

Now, just because I have dual citizenship there is the SLIGHTEST hope that I can have my citizenship taken away? that doesn't sit right with me.

I participated in the Occupy Central protests in Hong Kong, something that the mainland government will (i'm sure) one day frown down upon as a "revolution/anarchist movement". will this put me on the map as a potential threat to Canada because I was fighting for true democracy?

man this is so wrong.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by CP.AR

Now, just because I have dual citizenship there is the SLIGHTEST hope that I can have my citizenship taken away? that doesn't sit right with me.

I participated in the Occupy Central protests in Hong Kong, something that the mainland government will (i'm sure) one day frown down upon as a "revolution/anarchist movement". will this put me on the map as a potential threat to Canada because I was fighting for true democracy?

man this is so wrong.

Bruh, under Bill C-24, you are so fxxked. You are practically the exact example that I thought of as a victim to the bill.

When the Chinese Mainlandization of Hong Kong is complete, you know the Mainland central government will brand the active Umbrella Movement participants (or anything similar to that) as terrorists. If you continue to engage in those kinds of activities, you are practically setting yourself up to be labelled by the Mainland central government to brand you as terrorist as well. And then what happens? Canada will theoretically have the power to revoke your citizenship under Bill C-24 as well.

Conspiracy theory? Possibly. Will the Canadian government exercise this power to revoke your citizenship? I'd say it is extremely unlikely. But the mere fact that the Canadian government has the power to do this -- ie. revoke your Canadian citizenship because you participated in a democracy rally -- is ridiculous enough.

[Hehe]

Originally Posted by CP.AR

I participated in the Occupy Central protests in Hong Kong, something that the mainland government will (i'm sure) one day frown down upon as a "revolution/anarchist movement". will this put me on the map as a potential threat to Canada because I was fighting for true democracy?

man this is so wrong.

I think this is the main concern. If you have done something against the gov't in a country that Canadian gov't is trying to kiss their ass, our gov't can strip your citizenship based on whatever criteria it wants to lay on you.

No fair judicial process, and no argument. You are wrong because the other country says so. But citizenship is the last protection to anyone.

Think when Canadian are arrested for whatever reason in foreign soil, they'd first contact the consulate/embassy for assistance.

With C24, our gov't has the power to cherrypick who it wants to help with depending on its political agenda.

[$_$]

Originally Posted by Traum

Bruh, under Bill C-24, you are so fxxked. You are practically the exact example that I thought of as a victim to the bill.

When the Chinese Mainlandization of Hong Kong is complete, you know the Mainland central government will brand the active Umbrella Movement participants (or anything similar to that) as terrorists. If you continue to engage in those kinds of activities, you are practically setting yourself up to be labelled by the Mainland central government to brand you as terrorist as well. And then what happens? Canada will theoretically have the power to revoke your citizenship under Bill C-24 as well.

Conspiracy theory? Possibly. Will the Canadian government exercise this power to revoke your citizenship? I'd say it is extremely unlikely. But the mere fact that the Canadian government has the power to do this -- ie. revoke your Canadian citizenship because you participated in a democracy rally -- is ridiculous enough.

This is scary on so many levels. If the government suspects that you have terrorist affiliations, they can take other actions against you. I don't understand the logic behind this at all. We were all immigrants at some point. What about home grown separatist terrorists?

[Mikoyan]

Originally Posted by underscore

Are you certain it's the possibility of citizenship from another country, and not that you actually have existing dual citizenship?

Been working this weekend, looks like it's been answered by now by others.

Originally Posted by underscore

I'm doubtful that it's an instant, black or white response to charges, but I could be wrong. Care you direct me to some sauce on that?

My wording may have been a bit glib, but a quick show trial in a kangaroo court is going to put you in a world of trouble.

My guess would be that countries would be quick to revoke someone's citizenship, just so they wouldn't be stuck dealing with that citizen. "He/she's not *our* citizen anymore, they're _________'s problem to deal with now."


Exact wording of the section in the bill:

(2) The Minister may revoke a person’s citizenship if the person, before or after the coming into force of this subsection and while the person was a citizen,
(b) was convicted of a terrorism offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code — or an offence outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would constitute a terrorism offence as defined in that section — and sentenced to at least five years of imprisonment;

http://www.cba.org/cba/submissions/pdf/14-22-eng.pdf

I found that to be worth reading, even though the Canadian Bar Association has it's own biases, but for me, it put the main points we've been discussing in plain english.

[Hehe]

The main concern is again the power that the bill grants to the gov't.

We have always taken the presumption of innocence in our justice system. Because we believe in that we'd rather have hundreds of guilty men roaming free than put one innocent man in jail. The justice system had always had the ultimate authority and nothing can be above law.

This bill basically lets the gov't to skip the law system and decides what is in the best interest of the gov't, which it argues it's in the best interest of people.

Should a person gets stripped of its citizenship as a consequence of this bill, sure he might appeal in the court of law, but the person would have to bear the consequence first until the court decides. Taking a guilty until proven innocent approach instead. However, this is against the fundamental right that Charters grant us.

[haymura]

Im trying to make sense of this...

Im currently a dual citizen and after reading all these comments, it makes me wonder if i should surrender my foreign citizen and just stick with my canadian citizen. Would giving it up lessen my chances of being revoked my canadian status?

[RFlush]

Originally Posted by CP.AR

This bothers me a lot.

Yes, I moved away from Canada for work... that is after fully paid out all my student loans and working for the past 7 years part time and full time (including working for the federal government). I paid all my taxes, loved and continue to love my mother country (I have a Canadian flag on my front door here in Hong Kong). I participate what I can still participate in Canada in terms of voting, and have always longed to one day return to Canada to build my own family and eventually retire and die.

Now, just because I have dual citizenship there is the SLIGHTEST hope that I can have my citizenship taken away? that doesn't sit right with me.

I participated in the Occupy Central protests in Hong Kong, something that the mainland government will (i'm sure) one day frown down upon as a "revolution/anarchist movement". will this put me on the map as a potential threat to Canada because I was fighting for true democracy?

man this is so wrong.

If it bothers you a lot, why not renounce your Chinese citizenship in HK?

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by haymura

Im trying to make sense of this...

Im currently a dual citizen and after reading all these comments, it makes me wonder if i should surrender my foreign citizen and just stick with my canadian citizen. Would giving it up lessen my chances of being revoked my canadian status?

no, you don't need to be a dual citizen, as long as you're eligible to be one, it applies to you

i wouldn't go as far as surrendering your other citizenship unless you're already labeled as a criminal there

[underscore]

Originally Posted by ancient_510

A fundamental part of countries that base citizenship on Jus Sanguinis is that if you are eligible to receive citizenship by their criteria, you are a citizen. Doesn't matter if you don't have or don't want a passport, or don't even realize it; you are a citizen.

If that's the thought process then I'm a citizen of the UK. On the plus side I know of a very easy way to be ineligible for 5 years for the low price of a $598 ticket, which is nice.

Originally Posted by Mikoyan

My wording may have been a bit glib, but a quick show trial in a kangaroo court is going to put you in a world of trouble.

Not exactly, because as it says:

Originally Posted by Mikoyan

(2) The Minister may revoke a person’s citizenship if the person, before or after the coming into force of this subsection and while the person was a citizen,
(b) was convicted of a terrorism offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code — or an offence outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would constitute a terrorism offence as defined in that section — and sentenced to at least five years of imprisonment

It's not as simple as someone shouting "you're a terrorist!" and you get the boot, you need to have been charged with something considered terrorism in Canada and have gone to jail for 5 years for it.

Section 2 of the Criminal Code points you to 83.01(1)b, which states:

(b) an act or omission, in or outside Canada,

(i) that is committed

(A) in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause, and

(B) in whole or in part with the intention of intimidating the public, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act, whether the public or the person, government or organization is inside or outside Canada, and

(ii) that intentionally

(A) causes death or serious bodily harm to a person by the use of violence,

(B) endangers a person’s life,

(C) causes a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public,

(D) causes substantial property damage, whether to public or private property, if causing such damage is likely to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C), or

(E) causes serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that is not intended to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C),

and includes a conspiracy, attempt or threat to commit any such act or omission, or being an accessory after the fact or counselling in relation to any such act or omission, but, for greater certainty, does not include an act or omission that is committed during an armed conflict and that, at the time and in the place of its commission, is in accordance with customary international law or conventional international law applicable to the conflict, or the activities undertaken by military forces of a state in the exercise of their official duties, to the extent that those activities are governed by other rules of international law.

I bolded the ands because I feel someone will probably miss them, and underlined the two key clauses. As you can see, you have to try to seriously hurt of kill people for this to take effect, and you need to have gone to prison for at least 5 years for it. Given how severely acts of terrorism and murder are generally considered to be, I have doubts as to how many people will have done something severe enough to be branded a terrorist and charged with much less than a life sentence, in which case your citizenship doesn't matter for shit because you're never going anywhere.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Mikoyan

Exact wording of the section in the bill:

(2) The Minister may revoke a person’s citizenship if the person, before or after the coming into force of this subsection and while the person was a citizen,
(b) was convicted of a terrorism offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code — or an offence outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would constitute a terrorism offence as defined in that section — and sentenced to at least five years of imprisonment;

http://www.cba.org/cba/submissions/pdf/14-22-eng.pdf

I think I have already briefly mentioned it in a previous post, but the fact that the "offence"can be committed outside Canada, when combined with the lack of a Canadian judge to oversee and review the process, is a seriously flawed problem. Any kind of dictatorship / authoritarian country can and will fabricate charges if they want to. The two prime examples that I can easily think of are Russia and China. I have friends that are vocal critics of the Russian and Chinese regimes, and I can easily foresee how they might travel to Ukraine or Hong Kong, only to be abducted and taken back to Russia / China, have some phony charges thrown at them. And then what? Is the Canadian government gonna follow up by revoking their Canadian citizenship as well? Canada may not kiss a$$ to Russia, but with at least one of the federal parties, I would not be surprised if they try to cozy up to the Chinese regime and go along with the citizenship revocation.

[nsx042003]

Originally Posted by CP.AR

This bothers me a lot.

Yes, I moved away from Canada for work... that is after fully paid out all my student loans and working for the past 7 years part time and full time (including working for the federal government). I paid all my taxes, loved and continue to love my mother country (I have a Canadian flag on my front door here in Hong Kong). I participate what I can still participate in Canada in terms of voting, and have always longed to one day return to Canada to build my own family and eventually retire and die.

Now, just because I have dual citizenship there is the SLIGHTEST hope that I can have my citizenship taken away? that doesn't sit right with me.

I participated in the Occupy Central protests in Hong Kong, something that the mainland government will (i'm sure) one day frown down upon as a "revolution/anarchist movement". will this put me on the map as a potential threat to Canada because I was fighting for true democracy?

man this is so wrong.

eeh...does canada see permanent resident of hong kong as a citizen of china?

[RFlush]

Originally Posted by nsx042003

eeh...does canada see permanent resident of hong kong as a citizen of china?

Of course not, why would someone with permanent resident in HK that's not even a Chinese citizen be considered Chinese?

[BoredAtWork]

To those who say "I was born in Canada so I dont give a sh!t about C-24":

The law applies to all those who have dual citizenship. ie. if one day you move to US to work or elsewhere, and you decided to enroll in citizenship there, your are under C-24 as well. Does not matter where you were born.

[Derrickk]

I still can't believe this is haopening

[Mr.HappySilp]

Why don't we stop allowing dual-citizenship altogether. You pick either Canadian or where you come from.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by Mr.HappySilp

Why don't we stop allowing dual-citizenship altogether. You pick either Canadian or where you come from.

Because many Canadians go to work in foreign countries or marry people from other countries.

[Mikoyan]

Originally Posted by underscore

It's not as simple as someone shouting "you're a terrorist!" and you get the boot, you need to have been charged with something considered terrorism in Canada and have gone to jail for 5 years for it.

It does when it's a foreign government that does the shouting, and convicts you under their system. Like Mohamed Fahmy. He was a journalist and got sentenced to 7 years for Terrorism related offences, while reporting about the unrest in Egypt.

Egyptian-Canadian journalist Mohamed Fahmy gets 7 years in prison | Globalnews.ca
Detained Canadian journalist Mohamed Fahmy gives up Egyptian citizenship - Politics - CBC News

[underscore]

Originally Posted by Mikoyan

It does when it's a foreign government that does the shouting, and convicts you under their system. Like Mohamed Fahmy. He was a journalist and got sentenced to 7 years for Terrorism related offences, while reporting about the unrest in Egypt.

Egyptian-Canadian journalist Mohamed Fahmy gets 7 years in prison | Globalnews.ca
Detained Canadian journalist Mohamed Fahmy gives up Egyptian citizenship - Politics - CBC News

He was sentenced to 7 years, but that's a pretty bad example you're picking as he's out on bail after less than a year and Canadian foreign affairs was working to help him. Even if you ignore that, the charges have to be equivalent to Canadian ones that land within the section of the Criminal Code I quoted above, and from what I can gather about the nonsense Egypt threw against him they do not. Maybe I'm missing something here but please read the section of the Criminal Code above and tell me how being charged with fabricating footage is equivalent to any of that.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Originally Posted by Manic!

Because many Canadians go to work in foreign countries or marry people from other countries.

If you work in another country you apply for a work visa in that country. So you are still a Canadian but granted permission from the country that you are there to work.

If you marry other people from other country is the same thing you can opt to stay as a Canadian or apply citizenship for the country you are going to marry and live.

Many countries around the world don't allow dual citizenship.

[Mikoyan]

Originally Posted by underscore

He was sentenced to 7 years, but that's a pretty bad example you're picking as he's out on bail after less than a year and Canadian foreign affairs was working to help him. Even if you ignore that, the charges have to be equivalent to Canadian ones that land within the section of the Criminal Code I quoted above, and from what I can gather about the nonsense Egypt threw against him they do not. Maybe I'm missing something here but please read the section of the Criminal Code above and tell me how being charged with fabricating footage is equivalent to any of that.

I'm happy to even *find* an example.

(A) in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause, and

He was being accused of being a member and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood.

(B) in whole or in part with the intention of intimidating the public, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act, whether the public or the person, government or organization is inside or outside Canada,

Accused of threatening Egypt's national security, and creating a "terrorist media network."

and E) causes serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that is not intended to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C),

Accused of threatening Egypt's national security, and creating a "terrorist media network."

and includes a conspiracy, attempt or threat to commit any such act or omission, or being an accessory after the fact or counselling in relation to any such act or omission, but, for greater certainty, does not include an act or omission that is committed during an armed conflict and that, at the time and in the place of its commission, is in accordance with customary international law or conventional international law applicable to the conflict, or the activities undertaken by military forces of a state in the exercise of their official duties, to the extent that those activities are governed by other rules of international law.

You don't have to actually take part in an actual successful event. Attempting, planning, helping or encouraging is enough.

He was on bail because they were retrying him on the charges. The first trial was was full of gems like:

The prosecution, on multiple occasions, aired video footage that was unrelated to Egypt, showed clips from networks other than Al Jazeera, and played sound recordings that were inaudible, presenting it as evidence.

“Previous court dates have bizarrely included the prosecution showing footage of Sky News Arabia tourism reports, BBC podcasts, songs by Gotye, photo-shopped images of Mohammed Fahmy, Peter Greste’s family photos, and some of Greste’s award-winning work from East Africa,” said Al Jazeera in a statement after a 16 June hearing.

On another occasion, three audio/visual witnesses for the prosecution were unable to recall the footage presented to them by the investigators. They could not identify if the footage constituted a crime, and one witness directly contradicted his written affidavit, and indicated the prosecutor added additional footage after it was viewed by the witnesses.

His second trial is still ongoing. Prosecution lacks evidence of wrongdoing, retrial of Al Jazeera journalists told. | Toronto Star

Here's an op/ed from Mohamed himself, bolds are mine as he points out even Egyptians didn't like a law that treated citizens and non citizens differently, and he's a person that's directly impacted by this bill:
Mohamed Fahmy: I'm a pawn in a geopolitical game | Toronto Star

The ongoing 18-month trial of we Al Jazeera journalists in Egypt has sparked unprecedented global debate about the rule of law, the ethics of journalism and free speech.


Abdel Fattah el-Sissi, the Egyptian president, decreed a deportation law in November 2014 while I was imprisoned for more than 400 days, to permit the extradition of non-Egyptian convicts or prisoners under investigation to their respective countries to serve their time or continue their trial.


Several weeks after the announcement, Egyptian secret service officers came to ask me to renounce my Egyptian citizenship so I could benefit from the new law. My initial reaction was an immediate refusal — I cherish both my Egyptian and Canadian citizenships. “This is from high above,’” I was told. “We want to help you get out of this case.”


The officer handed me a phone. To my surprise, it was a senior official: “Fahmy, we know you are patriotic and innocent,” he said. “Sign the documents. You can come back as a tourist and easily apply for it again. Nationality is in the heart, not just a piece a paper.”


I signed but still struggle today to describe the humiliating feeling as I stamped my finger prints on the official renunciation documents. I also signed an agreement that both the government and I would not disclose my renunciation in the media.


The decree stated that Ottawa would have to officially request my deportation and that is exactly what my lawyers and embassy did. We got assurances from both governments that it was a matter of days.


Sadly, an announcement from then Canadian foreign minister John Baird, who declared my deportation “imminent,” was premature.


My mixed emotions of joy for my buddy Peter Greste and the feeling of despair for myself got the best of me as I watched him freed while our third colleague Baher Mohamed and I faced a retrial.


The government in Egypt published confirmation of my renunciation of citizenship in the official paper. This was after I had already been wrongly framed as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood — designated a terrorist organization under Egyptian law.


There was never any evidence against me personally and the fact that I protested against the despicable group alongside millions of Egyptians didn’t resonate with the prosecutor who branded me as the ringleader of a terrorist group.


Overnight, I was branded as the man who “sold out” his country. Indeed, it was a first, for an Egyptian to drop his citizenship to get out of prison.

The backlash against me continued because my colleague Baher Mohamed held only Egyptian citizenship. Public opinion crystallized against a law that allows foreigners in the same case, facing the same charges, for the same evidence, to be let off the hook while their Egyptian co-defendants languish in jail.

In court I raised an Egyptian flag to make a point that nationality is not just a piece of paper. Indeed, I am planning to legally reclaim my citizenship at the appropriate time. I just hope Judge Hassan Farid, who is presiding over the retrial, understands that I am no traitor as he announces his new verdict next month.


Meanwhile the Canadian government has implemented a new law that allows ministers to revoke the Canadian citizenship of dual nationals convicted of terrorism. As I face bogus terrorism charges in Egypt, I now have to worry about Canada stripping my citizenship under this dangerous law that overrides the judiciary and tramples due process.


The failure of Stephen Harper’s government to gain my release when I renounced my Egyptian citizenship resonated again last month when the U.S. government won the deportation from Egypt of Mohamed Soltan, an American-Egyptian activist and Brotherhood sympathizer serving a life sentence, who had renounced his Egyptian citizenship secretly before his transfer was announced last month.


As my retrial reaches a conclusion I’m confident that on the basis of the evidence — or lack thereof — we should be acquitted, so that this long and very painful ordeal will be over and I can get on with my life. But I know this trial is influenced by factors other than evidence.


It is still possible that we will take the fall for violations committed by Al Jazeera in failing to obtain a proper operational licence, and that we will pay a heavy price for Qatar’s meddling in Egypt’s internal affairs — its well-documented sponsorship of the banned Muslim Brotherhood. I and my colleague have spent too long as pawns in geopolitical games in which we, as journalists, have no part. Perhaps our situation is a manifestation of the biblical tale of David the shepherd who defeated Goliath the mighty giant using only his slingshot and rock. But, the underdog here is only armed with words of truth and the world’s best lawyers who will hopefully prevail.

 

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by Mr.HappySilp

If you work in another country you apply for a work visa in that country. So you are still a Canadian but granted permission from the country that you are there to work.

If you marry other people from other country is the same thing you can opt to stay as a Canadian or apply citizenship for the country you are going to marry and live.

Many countries around the world don't allow dual citizenship.

What if you move to another country for work and have kid with a woman from that country?