A Canadian woman originally from Somalia is suing the Canadian government for the lack of support during her 86-day struggle to prove her identity so she could leave Kenya after visiting her mother and go home!

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/685003

Horrifying for anybody with family living in another country...

She is sueing Government of Canada for $2.5 million so all will be made right.

This like other cases though suggests caution is one is not Canadian born and one returns to an area in conflict. Kenya has had a real problem with Citizen's of Conveniance from Somalia transiting through Kenya for terrorist activities so perhaps they got a tad scared and suspicious.

She hasn't won yet.

The saddest part is that, unless she can sponsor her mother to move to Canada, I doubt she'll ever see her again.

This article scares me more:

http://www.thestar.com/article/684984

Especially this part:



My heart is in my mouth.

But CW - that is the problem. And it is more widespread that officially acknowledged.

When one gets Citizenship - then the whole family starts arriving and is entitled to all the benefits and privledges they never paid a $ to. Look at the problem this has caused in the UK and it is the same = at the EXPENSE of the taxpayer.

As in the case of 1 notorious TO terrorist family - the kid got a free ambulance flight home from Afghanistan and jumped the queue for Surgery and benefits? HUH?

Oooh, scary!!

It's NOT a problem. And that's how Canada was built. That poor, put-upon taxpayer is probably the child or grandchild of an immigrant. Their family got the benefits when they first arrived...and in turn they provide the benefits to others.

The only "put-upon" people are the Inuit and Aboriginals that were pushed aside to make room for us.

And "queue jumping" is the big fat myth all anti-immigration scare mongers use.

She's a Canadian citizen with the same rights as me to bring over family. Which is what I might do one day, bring over my scary Dutch husband. If you DARE tell me that's "different", this conversation is over.

Not different as he is YOUR husband.

You arrive and bring the whole damn family (s) that is another matter.

And NO, the people that arrived from Europe and so on before WWll received almost no benefits (there were none until after the CCF) under the "Homestead Act" - other than land if they worked hard.

"Queue jumping" is NOT a myth - read the UK papers. Citizenship shopping, Medical Tourism and Benefit Shopping are only too real.

The point though is that most countries that allow(ed) "Dual Citizenship" and extended family immigration are seriously rethinking their policies and entitlements. Germany is a good example.

In regards to the other case - one should be very vigalent about moves abroad as the citizenship policies of Canada, France, Germany and the NL vary differently and by Year. Canada did not allow dual citizenship up until around 1973. Germany still doesn't except under rare and unfathonable circumstances. Same with the Swiss!

Who cares?

This woman and the others in those articles are as much Canadians as I am and did not deserve this treatment. Period.

You are NOT hijacking this thread for an anti-immigrant rant. I will never agree with you so take it elsewhere.

DrKlaus simply expresses another opinion than YOU. He has the right to do so. It is your and my right not to agree completely or in part. However, he is NOT hijacking this thread and has not to take his opinion elsewhere because you happen to have a different one. You come close to dictatorship and that's not the intention of these forums.

Bollocks. He's changing the subject, which was about the bureaucratic nightmare innocent Canadian citizens are encountering overseas with no help from our government. NOT why immigration rules should be tightened for families.

Imho, if the title of this thread had been "Jane Smith's Nightmare" he wouldn't have bothered.

Nonsense CW. You assume too much.

Though to be anti-immigrant when I am an immigrant 2x over.

Emilio's point was well taken.

My point was really rather simple, not racist nor anything else but a view of where immigration policies have gone horribly wrong. Basically - people who willingly go into conflict zones (despite the warnings on the Travel advisory site of DFAID) should expect little protection and intervention. Those who really have never lived nor contributed to the tax base of the host country (read Lebanon) should not expect repatriation if they then return to the same dangerous conflict zone. There should be a User Fee!

As to the issue of families and extended familiies that too is a real issue and both Canada, France, Germany, the UK and the USA are quickly and quietly reviewing their "Guest Worker" programs.

Last week - a blind Polish woman was deported after having lived in Canada for over a decade. Little outrage there apparently.

Thank You Emilio.

Free Speech is just that.

Nonsense indeed. Your point may have been simple, but it had nothing to do with Ms. Mohamud's case.

- She was visiting her mother in Kenya, not Somalia. Kenya is not a conflict zone. The only current DFAIT warning for Kenya involves the border areas with Somalia and Sudan, but all of Ms. Mohamud's misfortunes occurred in Nairobi, dealing with Kenyan and Canadian officialdom.

- Ms. Mohamud has lived and worked in Canada for over a decade. She is apparently a valued employee: her employer held her job open for 3 months while her fiasco was straightened out.

- She was not merely underserved by the Canadian High Commission in Nairobi. They actively aided her prosecution, disavowing her identity and cancelling her passport after a purportedly "conclusive" investigation. Then, when confronted with their error, they stonewalled for 3 months until the Red Star turned it into a serious political embarrassment for the Harper government back home.

The USA, NZ, AU and Canada do have Travel Warnings about all of Kenya for various issues - including crime and the border areas.

There is something about this case that desn't click. The investigation is underway and they have asked her to sign away her privacy rights = Odd.

Then this:

"A valid Canadian Passport is required for Canadians intending to visit Kenya. The passport must be valid for at least six months beyond the date of your expected departure from the country. Visitors to Kenya require visas. It is recommended that visas be obtained prior to departure to avoid delays and difficulties on arrival. Visas are valid for up to three months but may be extended.

Tourist Visa: Required
Business Visa: Required
Student Visa: Required
Transit Visa: Required
Employment/Volunteer Permit: Required"

If She had the required Visa then there should not have been a problem. If She entered on another country passport (dual citizens do this sometime) and then tried to leave with her Canadian one - the authorities might have become suspicious.

There has been no allegation of a missing visa in the mainstream press coverage. The purported issue raised by Kenyan airport officials was that her appearance didn't match her passport photo (and there are strong hints that this allegation was made in the context of soliciting a bribe from Ms. Mohamud).

But whether or not there were visa or corruption issues with the Kenyans is beside the point. The Canadian High Commission did not simply fail to help. They revoked her passport and handed it to the Kenyans to assist in her prosecution. In effect, they were as serious a hazard to Ms. Mohamud as the Kenyans were, despite Ms. Mohamud's offer to provide a huge amount of secondary identification, biometric data, and 3rd-party witness validation (corroboration from her employer).

Notoriously, this is just the latest in a string of disastrous consular service failures involving Muslim Canadians. I don't think that institutional bigotry has been proven, but I certainly understand the questions being asked about it. But leave that aside for a moment. As a non-Muslim with extensive Canadian family, I am just as concerned with the professional competence and accountability issues that have surfaced.

Some of my Canadian relatives proudly served in External Affairs during its postwar glory years, and I suspect they are turning in their graves right now. A career with the department used to attract the cream of Canadian university grads. But now we seem to have replaced Mike Pearson and Ken Taylor as the exemplars of the Canadian diplomatic service, with Lilian Khadour (Ms. Mohamed's nemesis) and Franco Pilarella (from the Arar case).

And the country is much the worse for it.

No Abner or is it Dr. Dawg? Not on Khadr now?

There is no profile of a VISA - missing or otherwise. WHY? It is NOT besides the point - it is central to perhaps why border officials got suspicious. It is illegal in some countries to travel/enter via one passsport and try and exit with another = entrance/exit stamps.

To accuse Kenya of institutional racism is hilarious! Canadian officials got involved after the arrest I believe. I travelled extensively in Africa and yes Bribes/tips are part of the routine. If one travels with a RED passport - then there is not a problem. If one uses other passports into that area = BEWARE.

Sorry Abner,

There is a Canadian blogger - a U of C/ or O student that blogs under the name of Dr. Dawg.

He seems to have some of the same issues. Every bad action in the world has to do with the colour of the victim's skin.

I just say withold judgement as clearly a lawsuit will expose everything.

The diplomatic service has long been a political one - especially at the very top. Ambassadors and representatives come and go at the whim of the governing party. You cannot tell me that any of the Canadian representatives to the UN or it's related agencies have any particular developed or experience based talent.

Yes, in the last decade - they too, like all departments and services have been downsized. I feel for their cars, cooks, cleaners and drivers.

It may be a sign of the times but if one reads the services provided by the French or German governments abroad - much of consular has really been reduced to telephone answering machines.

Canada, in France particular, has more consultates than Canadians. The reductions to level of service relates, I think to our (or lack of them) military missions abroad. Francaphonie has allowed them to remain at least stable.

This Woman really may have been treated poorly but much of the expensive infrastructure (people and buildings) really has to be rethought

People do get born in the conflict areas in the world. Sometimes these conflicts are permanent. Now, many of these people decide to immigrate and some of them end up in Canada, where they become citizens eventually. However they usually have parents/brothers/sisters/relatives in the area where they were born and if they follow the reccomendations of the travel advisories, they were never see their dear one again (who often depend on the aid from abroad). That means they have to use their own judgement when they travel. Does that mean they should be denied help of the Canadian officials? I hope not.

On the side note, immigrants who came as independents (like myself), never receive any financial support from the government. Most of us managed on our own for everything (from job, to finding a place to live and everyting else).
And the other thing is that immigrants do contribute to the economy and society, by working, paying taxes and spending money. Without immigration Canada wouldn't have become what it is now.

BUT today, a much hated section of the Canadian Human Rights ACt, their 7 Neo-Nazi dwarfs and a "Special intervenor" and special interest groups were given a bit of a body blow.

Well today, no thanks to any Canadian embassy or Ambassador(advised by me in 2007) nor the well paid UN rep., the HATE LAW provision of the Canadian Human Rights Act and it's "special" intervenors was called into question:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1954734

The days of over paid and under challenged bureaucrats is coming to an end. Abner your response?

Response to what, exactly? The murky waters of Canadian hate speech jurisprudence are pretty far off topic for this thread.