CIMM – Bill C-12, Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act – March 23, 2026

Key Messages

• The Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act (the Act) proposes important reforms to enhance the integrity and fairness of Canada’s immigration and asylum systems.
• The asylum measures would:
  • Address challenges faced by the in-Canada asylum system through the introduction of system-wide efficiencies and enhancements that improve all stages of the asylum application process, from initial application through decision making to the post-decision stage;
  • Create new ineligibilities for asylum claims to prevent misuse and reduce pressures from potential surges.
• The proposed measures to strengthen immigration integrity would:
  • Strengthen control over immigration documents and applications on a large scale when needed in the public interest. These authorities will give the government greater tools to respond to unforeseen events, such as large-scale emergencies and risks to health, safety, and security of Canadians; and,
  • Improve how we share information within Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and with key federal, provincial, and territorial government partners and stakeholders.

Impact on Levels

• IRCC processes files in accordance with the Levels Plan set by Parliament.
• Bill C-12 will have no impact on how these processing targets are established.

Asylum Claim Ineligibilities

• Two proposed measures in the Act would protect the asylum system against sudden increases in claims, alleviate current burdens on the system, and deter people from using the asylum system to bypass regular immigration rules or to extend their temporary stay in Canada.
  • The “one-year” ineligibility: Asylum claims made by people more than one year after they first entered Canada after June 24, 2020, would not be referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB). This would apply to anyone, including students and temporary residents, regardless of whether they left the country and returned.
  • The “14 days” ineligibility: Asylum claims made by people who enter Canada irregularly (between ports of entry) from the United States and who make a claim after 14 days would also not be referred to the IRB.

Pre-removal Risk Assessment

• Anyone affected by these new asylum ineligibilities will have access to a pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA). If made within the regulatory timelines, a PRRA application stays removal until IRCC renders a decision on the risk a person may face upon being removed from Canada. The PRRA process will still take into account each claimant’s situation and may still result in refugee protection being granted. It ensures we are not sending people back to situations of harm.

Strengthened Asylum System (Amendments to IRPA)

• Legislative amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) are needed to streamline the asylum system and continue to uphold its integrity and fairness by creating system-wide efficiencies and enhancements.
• Specifically, the amendments would:
  • Allow IRCC and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to analyze and review claims fully prior to referral to the IRB, so that only complete “scheduling ready” files are referred to the IRB;
  • Set out a single online application that specifies information and documents required within prescribed timelines. This supports client service by avoiding duplicate questions on multiple forms/interviews;
  • Create an authority to prevent the IRB from making decisions with respect to refugee claims or holding admissibility hearings if the person is no longer in Canada, and;
  • Clarify the authority to appoint a designated representative to help vulnerable claimants, like minors or those who do not understand the process, by assigning representatives to support them during IRCC and CBSA proceedings.
• Budget 2024 provided $743.5 million over five years, including $159.5 million ongoing, to support the stability and integrity of Canada’s asylum system, increasing processing and decision-making capacity.

Strengthening Document Control (Mass Authorities)

• Legislative amendments to IRPA contained in Bill C-12 aim to strengthen our control over immigration documents we issue and the applications we process for reasons determined to be in the public interest. They are key to improving the integrity of the immigration program.
• The proposed amendments would:
  • Allow the Governor in Council to issue an order in council to mass cancel, suspend, or vary immigration documents; cancel and suspend immigration applications for these documents; and stop application intake for reasons determined to be in the public interest;
  • Provide officers the authority to examine document holders outside Canada for the purposes of carrying out the terms of an order; and,
  • Include authorities to make regulations that would allow an officer, on a case-by-case basis, to cancel, suspend, or vary an immigration document or cancel an immigration application in prescribed circumstances. This would also include authorities for officers to examine document holders outside of Canada, in prescribed circumstances.
• These authorities are not being sought with a particular set of circumstances in mind and the legislation does not pre-determine scenarios for use. Rather, the authorities would be available for use in exceptional circumstances if there is strong justification that it is in the public interest. An amendment was adopted by the House of Commons to clarify the intended scope of “public interest” to include matters such as administrative errors, fraud, public health, public safety, and national security.
• The use of these authorities would be limited to interventions on immigration documents and applications for those documents; they could not be used to block access to the asylum system or affect a person’s status. The use of these authorities for a person in Canada would not result in an immediate loss of status, meaning they would not need to leave Canada right away, nor in the granting of a new status, meaning they cannot be used to grant permanent resident status or grant new work/study permits.
• It is important to stress that an order to suspend, cancel, or change documents, or an order changing conditions on temporary residents, cannot result in the immediate loss of status for either permanent or temporary residents in Canada. There are existing laws and processes in place related to loss of status for permanent and temporary residents.
• Given potential impacts the use of such authorities could bring beyond the immigration space, the Governor in Council would determine which situations require action based on public interest grounds, rather than leaving the decision to a single minister. This ensures a strong level of oversight and rigor commensurate with their impact. Furthermore, any use of these authorities that concerns persons inside of Canada would require the concurrence of the Minister of Public Safety.

Potential Uses of Mass Authorities

• We cannot speculate on how or when the Governor in Council may wish to use these powers and would like to emphasize that these authorities are meant to be used exceptionally when needed to protect the public interest. An example might include a pandemic, where the government may want to suspend visas for clients abroad to pause travel to Canada, and protect Canadian public health. The suspension may then be lifted, for example after the risk subsides, or after clients provide evidence of a vaccine or health test.
• Other examples could include a cybersecurity attack where a vast number of fraudulent immigration documents were issued in the system, potentially requiring mass cancelling of the documents to ensure that nefarious actors cannot use them to travel to Canada. Where large-scale fraud trends were to be observed, these authorities could also be used to cancel or suspend documents and applications for documents based on known fraud indicators. Such actions would be grounded in objective indicators linked to fraud.
• Lastly, these authorities could be used to change conditions on temporary residents in Canada to respond to social or economic matters that concern the public interest. For example, IRCC could modify temporary residents’ authorized length of stay or restrictions on location, allowing persons to work in different locations across Canada where there is an increased demand.

Strengthened Domestic Information Sharing

• Legislative amendments are needed to allow for the development of systematic information sharing processes within IRCC and with key federal, provincial, and territorial government partners and stakeholders.
  • Current domestic information sharing is resource-heavy, and experience has shown that some desired uses/disclosures are not allowed (including between IRCC’s own business lines) under current legislation.
• Specifically, amendments to IRPA and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act would:
  • Enable secure and systematic sharing across IRCC’s business lines to improve integrity and support service delivery improvements;
  • Enhance how we share identity, status, and document information with federal-provincial-territorial partners—who rely on this information to ensure the integrity of their own programs; and
  • Ensure that information sharing is done responsibly, consistently, and securely.
• Robust privacy safeguards are built into these amendments, including a requirement for written agreement or arrangements that set clear boundaries around what personal information is shared, how it is used, and onward disclosure. They also expressly prohibit onward sharing by provincial or territorial government partners to foreign entities, except with the written consent of IRCC and where this would happen in a way that complies with Canada's international obligations with respect to mistreatment as defined in the Avoiding Complicity in Mistreatment by Foreign Entities Act.
• These new authorities are limited to information sharing within IRCC and with domestic federal, provincial, and territorial government partners. They do not give additional enforcement or compliance powers to other organizations.
• The proposed authorities were amended while in the Senate as part of Bill S-6 to reflect recommendations from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. They have also been determined by the Department of Justice to be in compliance with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms