Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 03OTTAWA2436 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 03OTTAWA2436 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Ottawa |
| Created: | 2003-08-26 17:44:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED |
| Tags: | CA CVIS PGOV PREL PTER SMIG |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 002436 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: CA, CVIS, PGOV, PREL, PTER, SMIG SUBJECT: CANADA'S VISA ISSUING PROCESS 1. (U) (Summary) Canada,s visa issuing process closely resembles that of the United States. There exist, however, a number of structural and procedural differences between the two countries. In general, the United States tends to have stronger security measures in place and rejects a higher percentage of its applicants than does Canada. In the last few years, Canada has taken a few steps to improve its visa issuing process, but a number of additional actions are needed to bring its practices in line with U.S. standards. (End summary) --------------------------------- The Structure and Staffing of CIC --------------------------------- 2. (U) Poloff met recently with Keith Carter, Director of Citizenship and Immigration Canada's (CIC) Western Hemispheres Bureau, and received a broad overview of the Canadian visa issuing process. Poloff also met separately with H.G. Pardy, Director General of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's (DFAIT) Consular Affairs Bureau and received additional information pertaining to Canadian visa issues. 3. (U) According to Carter, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) is the agency responsible for issuing both immigrant and non-immigrant Canadian visas to citizens of other countries. It was once a part of Canada,s Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), but broke off to form its own agency in 1994 and currently employs 4,700 employees worldwide. DFAIT continues to maintain a Bureau of Consular Affairs, but officers in this bureau do not issue visas; rather they have the responsibility of aiding Canadians abroad. They perform duties roughly analogous to the American Citizen Services duties performed by U.S. consular officers. 4. (U) There are relatively few Canadian posts that are actually staffed and equipped to issue visas. There are, for example, only 18 such posts in the Western Hemisphere and six of these are located within the United States. CIC uses these posts as hub-centers and applicants often have to travel outside of their home countries to one of these hub-centers to apply for visas. Carter explained that CIC is experimenting with a drop-box system in which smaller regional centers collect applications and forward them on, without interviewing, to a hub-center for adjudication. To illustrate, someone in El Salvador (a regional center) can currently drop off his/her application in El Salvador and it will be sent via the Computer Assisted Immigration Processing System (CAIPS) to Guatemala (a hub center) where an officer can decide to either accept, reject, or call the applicant to Guatemala for a personal interview. 5. (U) Carter explained that CIC staffs its posts with both Canadian Foreign Service Officers and Locally Engaged Staff (LES). The local hires are given a great deal of responsibility. Most significantly, CIC allows them to adjudicate both immigrant and non-immigrant visas. Because they are given such a high degree of responsibility, these local hires are usually either Canadian expatriates or trusted Embassy employees who have served in the Embassy for several years. While the Canadian Foreign Service Officers are technically the supervisors of the locally hired staff, the two groups, in fact, work side-by-side and perform many of the same duties. This sharing of duties occurs even though the local hires receive both less training and a significantly less comprehensive security check than their commissioned colleagues. It should be noted, however, that only Canadian Foreign Service Officers have access to the actual visa foils, which are kept locked away, and the locally hired staff is also denied access to all classified information. 6. (U) Carter could not remember any recent occasions when locally hired staff abused their right to adjudicate visas. He said that when scandals occur, they usually arise as money is moved back-and-forth during the accounting part of the process, not from malfeasance in the visa issuing process. Carter did admit, however, that there are some regions where CIC feels that local staff could be easily compromised. Therefore, in these areas, CIC does not allow local staff to adjudicate visas. There are, for example, no local staff adjudicating visas in Moscow or the Middle East, and in Beijing only Canadian expatriates are used. The place where local staff adjudicators are most greatly utilized is in the United States. (Note: Despite Carter,s claims, there have been several incidents recently in which Canadian local hires have been found guilty of malfeasance. Two weeks ago, a Syrian Embassy worker (part of the PA office and not affiliated with CIC) was fired after allegedly taking a bribe to help someone illegally obtain a visa. In 2002, two locally hired CIC employees were fired in New Delhi after recommending favorable decisions for their relatives. End note). ----------------------------- Canada,s Visa Issuing Process ----------------------------- 7. (U) Canadian non-immigrant visas come in only three types: tourist, student, or worker visas. Canadian officers, however, have a wide variety of choices for rejecting these non-immigrant visa applicants. The most often cited reasons, according to Carter, for rejection are "insufficient funds" or "lack of bona fides;" however, there is no overarching reason for rejection equivalent to the United States, 214 (b). A Canadian officer writes notes on all of his/her refusals and these notes are stored in the CAIPS computer system for two years. During this time, all other adjudicating officers can view these notes. There is no time restraint on reapplying and an applicant has the right to reapply for a visa immediately if he/she desires. 8. (U) Canada,s process for immigrant visas differs from the non-immigrant visa process. The immigrant visa process involves a point system in which candidates receive points for meeting certain criteria (5 points for a high school diploma, 24 points for speaking both French and English, 10 points at the discretion of the interviewer, etc.). Once an applicant reaches the 75-point threshold, he/she qualifies for the immigrant visa. The rejection notes for immigrant visas are kept for five years, three years longer than non-immigrant visas. 9. (U) It is not unusual to have a high discrepancy between the visa rejection rate of an American mission and a Canadian mission located in the same country. In Albania, for example, the U.S. rejection rate is close to 70% while the Canadians reject only about 40%. This is most often the case, although not the rule: American visa rejection rates are usually higher than their Canadian counterparts. Carter theorized that this discrepancy might occur because, at many Canadian consulates, a secretary acts as an initial vetter for applications and tells those with no chance not to waste their money. This eliminates many potential rejections and deflates the Canadian rejection average as compared to the U.S. average. It should also be noted that Canada,s refusal rate has been consistently climbing over the last few years. Statistics furnished by CIC show that the refusal rate for visitor visas to Canada this year are 3.5% higher than last year and student visa rejection rates are up 4.2 % over 2002 numbers. ----------------- Security Measures ----------------- 10. (U) According to Carter, the Computer Assisted Immigration Processing System (CAIPS) is not directly connected to any type of security lookout list. There is, however, a domestic lookout system called the Field Operation System (FOS) that is maintained by CIC. Adjudicating officers can perform security name checks using this FOS system. Carter said that there are plans to integrate FOS into CAIPS by 2005 so that the two will no longer be separate systems. Since FOS is not integrated with the databases of either the Canadian Security and Intelligence Services (CSIS) or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), its usefulness as a security mechanism is not fully developed. Carter was not aware of any plans to consolidate these agencies, databases in the way that databases were combined in the U.S. after September 11th. 11. (SBU) One of the larger security changes that CIC adopted following September 11th was reducing the number of countries that qualify for the Canadian visa waiver program. A few years ago, Canada allowed a great many more countries to travel visa free than did the United States. The differences between the two countries have narrowed over the past few years; however, many of the countries that Canada has removed are considered by the U.S. to be relatively insignificant security threats. After significant U.S. pressure, Canada did recently remove Saudi Arabia and Malaysia from its visa waiver program; however, there still remain some significant differences between the U.S. and Canadian visa waiver programs. Most significantly, citizens of Greece, Mexico, and Korea are allowed to travel to Canada without a visa. Carter said that Canada realizes how concerned the U.S. is about these three countries being on the visa waiver program. He said that there have been some discussions about removing these three from the program, but he did not have any information regarding their imminent removal. Carter was able to report that Costa Rica, the last country in Latin America able to travel visa free, would be removed from the visa waiver program shortly. 12. (U) Comment: Communication and cooperation between the United States and Canada on visa procedures have improved over the last few years. The Canadians appear to be sensitive to U.S. concerns and are beginning to take steps to alleviate them. The increase in Canada,s visa rejection rate and the decrease in the number of countries on the visa waiver list are steps in the right direction. Canada, however, still has much left to do to reassure U.S. authorities that the country is not being used as a Trojan horse by aliens whose ultimate goal is to bypass U.S. visa requirements on their way into the United States. Three significant actions that Canada should undertake are: 1) to reduce the level of responsibility currently enjoyed by its locally hired staff; 2) to create a consolidated database system that allows its Foreign Service Officers to do thorough security name check searches on applicants; and, 3) to remove Greece, Korea, and Mexico from its visa waiver program. Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa KELLY
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04